LIBR 246-04/13 Web 2.0 (Spring 2010)

Before the beginning of the semester, I had some assumptions that I have since had to reevaluate, if not set aside completely. I assumed I knew quite a lot about social software and its potential in libraries. I spent a lot of 2009 researching the subject as I helped our library set up a Facebook page and then build its website using Wordpress. And, hey, I was already on Facebook, Twitter, and Flickr, and I had already subscribed to a ton of blog feeds through Google Reader. (I was only a few steps away from being able to label myself a "social media expert"!) Of course, as so many others in this class have already pointed out, just because you use social software personally does not mean you will be able to successfully utilize it professionally. Even though I knew better, I still assumed in the beginning that social software was easy.

But this class helped me understand the distinction between the tool itself and its use within the broad, complex range of library services. For many of us, setting up a Twitter account or subscribing to an RSS feed isn't that hard. The real challenge lies in discovering which of the myriad tools out there fit the library's needs and then developing the plan to use those tools to effectively improve information access and build community with our patrons. This distinction exists among many library services. For instance, scanning the barcode on a book, printing the receipt, and handing it to the patron is pretty easy. But there are extensive, ongoing discussions that go into that process: What kind of ILS will we use for that transaction? For how long will we loan the book? Should we use paper cards, barcodes, or RFID for circulating items? What kinds of patrons are eligible to check that book out? What class of employee will be responsible for carrying out those transactions? And on and on and on. Despite the tedium, despite the desire to accelerate progress before libraries fade into technological oblivion and social irrelevancy, we have to be ready and willing to have those kinds of discussions when it comes to social software.

I'm not the kind of person who likes those kinds of discussions; I get an idea, and I want to act on it. The tension between that kind of personality and the need to carefully plan, however, can be pretty productive, I think. I've learned a lot of things in this class, but the importance of deliberation and strategic planning when it comes to social software, and technology in general, was the most important lesson learned. And that understanding will help me in the future (and currently) when I encounter assumptions like the ones I held early on, that since Web 2.0 tools are easy to use on their own they don't require that much consideration when it comes to their use within an organization. I think that flippancy is dangerous and comes from all sides, from both those who unreasonably oppose and support implementing social software.

So what specific technology did I find most useful? Before the class, I was not at all familiar with most of the online reputation management tools out there, and I expect to be using those kinds of applications far into the future, both personally and professionally, and despite the trends and changes in social software. As I'm applying for more jobs, I'm realizing the importance of tracking my online identity. I can't corral it all, and I don't want to overgroom my online reputation to a point of disingenuity, but just being aware of who "PJ Bentley" is online will be helpful to me professionally. When it comes to libraries, I think reputation management tools are necessary, but for reasons not applicable for other kinds of organizations. As we've discussed, libraries usually do not need to worry about having a positive or negative reputation online; they need to worry about whether or not they have a reputation at all. Online social and identity tracking software can help libraries understand where they are and are not showing up and then work from there to begin inhabiting those online spaces that will make them findable and accessible--and hopefully emerge in conversations that were not being had before.

This has been the best class I've taken so far. Our instructor was more involved in class discussions than any I have had so far. My classmates were more engaged, and everyone's writing was thoughtful and thought-provoking. I loved the resource-sharing requirement, because I got just as much from that (our "hive mind") as from our assigned readings. And, of course, the "classroom" itself was very well-designed. I think the designers of learning management systems like ANGEL and Blackboard could really learn a lot from instructors designing their own class sites on platforms like Drupal. The tags and student profile links made peer content really easy to find. That simple sidebar really worked as a great portal to class content; I rarely felt lost trying to find assignments and instructions. And, of course, avatars made interactions more personable, even if one didn't happen to be a photo of the actual person. There really is not much I would suggest changing for the next semester. The only thing I thought of that might be interesting would be a requirement for the marketing critique project that the student actually contact the library she is critiquing, just to get more inside information on planning and decision-making. That would just be an add-on to an assignment that, like the final group project, is extremely useful because of its applicability and transferability to our current and future workplaces. This class accomplished a rare feat: it was both inspiring and practical. I'm bummed it's wrapping up, although I can't say I'm not excited about having a few weeks off to read comic books.

Anyway, it was a pleasure getting to work with and learn from you all.

Any plans for future classes, Meredith?