In sharp distinction to Thomas Mann’s “perfect brainstorm” reference transaction model I blogged about earlier, George Needham of OCLC compares initiating reference transactions in academic libraries to making the stations of the cross. So apparently today’s students view the steps of the reference interview as “question genuflection” instead of “question negotiation” in libraries as originally described by Bob Taylor? Read more…
Not as visuallly appealing as Shelfari and not as customizable as LibraryThing, but at least it’s a start at something social in WorldCat: so here’s my start at a list of 100 Best Readings in LIS using the new WorldCat “public lists” function. Suggestions entirely welcome. (About my list, obviously: not about WorldCat’s functionality, over which I have no control!)
Yesterday was that “Do Libraries Innovate” session at ALA (which I’m hoping to see blogged elsewhere soon by a participant), so in the meantime here’s some additional evidence from Emory that they darn well do.
Update: And this morning there’s a nice summary of the session from the Hidden Peanuts blog and (two days later) the LITA blog version. Read more…
Terrific piece by Thomas Mann of LOC describing his ideal reference world, which incorporates expert mediated guidance, extensive use of both physical and digital finding aids, outstanding collection resources, and a healthy dose of scholarly curiosity. However, I suspect that, unless you are Thomas Mann, this convergence of experienced librarian, emerging scholar, and engaging topic given by his Athenian tribute example doesn’t happen too often. (And, when it does, should we call it a “perfect brainstorm”?) Read more…
Such as librarian Meredith Farkas, with her response to Michael Gorman’s “The Sleep of Reason”, (which seems, ironically, to show that the blog people are indeed having their revenge, since Mr. Gorman himself is now apparently willing to share his ideas through blogging…. though, perhaps, as K.G. Schneider points out. a little too obviously encouraged by the Britannica marketing folks in a clever traffic-building ploy. (As a former electronic marketing manager at a scholarly press, however, I have to confess to admiring their attempt!) Read more…
Not specifically about Library School 2.0, but from the LITA-L listserv recently regarding the upcoming “ultimate debate” at this month’s ALA about whether or not libraries innovate. The next-to-last paragraph of this post from Fred Gertler, dean of the University of the Pacific library, ties the two discussions together in a way that I find very useful: Read more…
So far, the folks on Library 2.0 Ning appear to be having a much more interesting and in-depth discussion on the topic than is the JESSE thread. I especially like the part where they share strategies for bringing this up in various classes where it seems relevant. Read more…
So are those librarians who make their patrons’ circulation and access records unavailable for inspection by government agencies “ethical disinformationists”, similar in a sense to “ethical hackers”? “Gaming the system” through probing its weaknesses in order to protect and improve its overall structure? One of the things that I don’t recall as being mentioned in the debate about the rush to digitization is librarians’ role in protecting patrons’ privacy, which has become increasingly critical. When Google Books becomes the default, who will play the thankless role of “ethical disinformationists”?
Ah… I think this is what I’ve been waiting for to jump-start my SLISebration thinking:
the slow library movement
the transparent library meme
the storied library story
and the library as conversation metaphor
(or do I mean to “slow-start” my thinking?)
