Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
These are the slides of a presentation given at the Online International 2008 conference in London December 2-4. The presentation reviews the types of Library 2.0 technologies available and how these are being implemented within the higher education sector, examines their potential barriers, and describes a small scale research project undertaken to investigate student use and perceptions of Library 2.0 services at Loughborough University.
Citation preview
Library 2.0 technologies in academic libraries, a case study of student use and
perceptions
Anne Morris and Katie AllenLoughborough University
Contents
Introduction Library 2 technologies & examples of use Methodology of case study Results Conclusions
Introduction - Web 2.0
Web as platformHarnesses collective intelligence Facilitates knowledge sharingPromotes high levels of engagement and user loyaltiesConstantly changing
A second generation of services available on the web that lets people collaborate and share information online
The more the services are used the better they get
RSS feeds
Podcasts
Blogs
Content tagging
Image sites
Mash ups
Vidcasts
Social networking
Introduction – Library 2.0
“the application of interactive, collaborative, and multimedia web-based technologies to web-based library services and collections” Maness 2006
Four essential elements: user-centred provides a multi-media experience socially rich communally innovative
Many sites provide free Library 2.0 Webinars and tutorials, for example, see College@Home
Library application - Weblogs
Individual or a group of individuals Personal content organised in reverse chronological order Most permit visitors to post comments
promote the aim of library
bringing news to users
facilitating communication amongst librarians
providing links to recommended sources
listing book reviews
initiating book discussions
promoting entertainment
encouraging the development of a community
Library applications - Wikis
A Web site that allows users to add and update content on the site which is mainly created by collaborative effort of site visitors
More interactivity than blogs
creating resource lists
tips for resource finding
comment on library services
Issues
• Trust
• Security
• Ease of installation and use
• Cost
Library applications– instant messaging
Enables a real time communication between students and librarians
Chat services
Reference management
Training
Online seeking assistance
Issues:• Lack of non- Lack of non- verbal cues verbal cues • Time pressuresTime pressures• Several stagesSeveral stages
Library applications - Podcasts
“a series of digital-media files which are distributed over the Internet using syndication feeds for playback on portable media players and computers” - Wikipedia
weekly updates
book reviews
lectures
tutorials
events
conferences
library guides
tours
interviews
Library application – social networking
Range of web-based software programs that allows users to interact and share data with other users
Examples: Facebook and MySpace, Flickr, YouTube, Slideshare
profiling preferred searches
distributing search alerts
providing recommendations
creating lists of popular books
tagging items
aiding group learning
staff collaboration
enabling peer editing
promoting library events or servicesstudent collaboration
Methods
The Pilkington Library Web 2.0 applications
Podcast introducing the library SCI News Blog Automatic updates on courses Automatic updates of new material
Facebook presence Other podcasts
Methods
Web-based questionnaire was sent out to all 484 students in the Department of Information Science four sections:
information about the respondent their library use their library 2.0 use their perceptions on Library 2.0 technologies
Five semi-structured interviews
Results
82 students responded Five interviewees included research student,
taught masters’ student, and three undergraduates
Library 2.0 use
Heard of concept? Less than half of questionnaire respondents
(41%) None of the interviewees
Use of Library 2.0 tools
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
% of respondents
Used, found useful
Used, not founduseful
Wanted to use,didn't know how
Didn't use, of nobenefit
Didn't know itexisted Automatic new
material updates
Automatic courseupdates
SCI New s blog
Podcastintroducing library
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%%
of
res
po
ns
en
ts Once or tw ice aw eek
Once or tw ice amonth
Less than once amonth
Never
Use of Library 2.0 technologies if implemented
Usefulness of applications
Likert score (Max 5)
% useful or very useful
Viewing virtual tours of library 2.9 28
Receiving updates of library news and announcements
3.4 47
Receiving updates of new material in library
3.5 53
Receiving updates of all new material related to my course
4.0 73
“I would find it extremely useful to receive updates which were specific to my needs, such as that relating to my module and year of study. However anything broader than this and I wouldn’t even open the e-mail”.
Attitudes towards Library 2.0 technologies
0 1 2 3 4 5
Help create friendships
Increase my motivation
Intererested in receiving new updates
Increase my enjoyment
Increase my confidence
Increase quality of group w ork
Increase quality of individual w ork
Help me to use the library
Strongly disagree
Strongly agree
Attitudes towards Library 2.0 technologies
0 1 2 3 4 5
Help settle new students into university life
Help me locate good quality resources
I would benefit in using Library 2.0
Facilitate knowledge sharing
Help me locate resources
Increase satisfaction with library
Help learning
Help users with less accessiblity use library
Library 2.0 wouldn't be a waste of time
Strongly disagree
Strongly agree
Conclusions 1
Students hold mildly positive views about Library 2.0
Most welcomed are: RSS feeds Podcasting Instant Messaging Professional reviews of books
Social networking not thought particularly useful
Conclusions 2
Benefits: Improve quality of group and individual work Help locate resources Help promote knowledge sharing
Barriers: Lack of privacy and identity theft Low perception & confidence in own knowledge (fear
of ridicule) Not wanting to share if others didn’t Not knowing what is available
Future of Library 2.0
“I think to a degree they should invest as it is important for the library to change …. I don’t think they should invest too much as it’s more important to have access to more journals and books, as that’s what’s giving you information…but if they don’t invest I think they will get left behind”
“Social networking brings work and play too much together. There needs to be a line where the two are separate”.
‘There is a time to let things happen and a time to make things happen’
Hugh Prather
The key is to be user driven
