How technology is affecting the real patrons....

So, there has been all this talk about how Google is taking over the library reference departments and the changes that libraries are going through because of technology, but there is another side to this.
We arent looking at is the populace who need us still and are being overlooked, as they usually are by the rest of society...the homeless, the new immigrants, the poor, and the handicapped. Why is it that we are worried that now "everyone" had an iPod and a laptop that they won't be using the library as a resource? Are we not seeing the change in our patron base? Here technology can help us like no other tool in history. We have Babelfish.com and internet library resources for the deaf, but we are very far away from the ideal melting pot/salad bowl that the library should be. ESL classes across this nation are filled to capacity, people from other lands are settling here and keeping thier own languages and cultures while learning ours....are our libraries doing the same? Why did Seattle Public Library revamp their dowtown branch and sucessfully keep out a lot of the homeless people who relied upon the place as a safe haven. Did children start hopping into downtown? Were soccer moms drawn from their Barnes and Nobles? Why werent the homeless catered to? How could we do more? My father brings old computers that have been discarded or cheap from the US to India to revamp and give to children who can use these machines to learn how to use them, making them marketable. Why cant we do this for some of the people here that need help? Please don't misunderstand me....EVERYONE IS IMPORTANT....everyone. Seattle did what they thought was right for the common good. I know alot of my fellow collegues who have dealt with poor unfortunate "forgotten" people with emotional turmoils and had to make the decision to keep them out for the safety of thier other patrons. My question is more towards how there needs to be a shift in the focus of how we see success in public libraries. Technology was thought to be the great leveler. Its open source dynamics hold to that. We should learn more from technology than what Google can spit out in .076 seconds.

Gaming in Libraries?

I recently came across the PLA blog and was really blown away about a presentation that was talked about there by John Beck about games and libraries. Some of the things that really got me going was the statistics that he quoted...It was really presented as a great way for librarians, who are more and more looked at as teachers of some sort, to figure out a new way to help people learn. One of the most amazing things was when Migell Acosta presented his LAN Party success story from the Santa Monica Public Library. They had an interactive gaming day, and kids lined up for over an hour to wait to use the computers. Could you imagine the circulation stats that day? Im thinking, give the kids what they want...John Beck talked about the fact that gamers have certain distinct personality facets such as a disrespect for authority, a need of society, are risk takers, are "selfish", multi-task and learn in an entirely different way. I should think it is more of a doer type of learning profile than watching. I was really taken by the whole thing, about how we can integrate this technology and use it to make libraries a more pleasurable and dynamic place to be. He talks about some of the things libraries can create the space that would attract this huge populace. Some of them include looking past the superficial parts of gaming and realise the superfantastic things that games can do for youngsters and in turn, for us as librarians. These games can map out a plan that we have to create interest in libraries and then a tangible strategy to teach them/lead them to the information that they mkight want or need. I just hope the IRS doesnt really get a laugh when I deduct a PSP unit for my library's "research". Here is a great blog about gaming in libraries and also has a pretty informative piece about the process of "convincing" a library to carry games.

Movers and Shakers...

Let me tell ya people, we got a Dominican Grad on the list! Soooo..when are we going to go en masse and bug her?

Congratulations to all the Movers (and some of the Shakers too)!

CPL hits the 21st century...ish

Well, it seems that downloadable audiobooks are finally available from the Chicago Public Library! There are a bunch of awesome titles there (including a few Terry Pratchetts, my personal fav) and it is quite easy to understand how to get the software and download the goods.

As with CPL, there is always bad news....

This is NOT available for Macs..."Say What?" you say?

Ahh, it seems the charitable Mr Gates is taking over again...and CPL is following....making iPods pretty much out of the running as well. Awesome.

The titles are also not burnable, which makes sense, but further kicks out the iPod and the Mac out in the cold for good for now.

Well, we can always hope for change. Heck, the ALA has a new web portal site...thats something!

For the newly released spawn....

In my avid desperate search over the web for meaning in Library School, I have come across a few well intentioned shockers...

First up-Meredith Farkas (yeah, another Vermonter) in her great blog Information wants to be Free mentioned about the NON shortage of librarians out there in one of her blogs, getting me all in a ruckus about my life plans. I have two (count em) bachelors degrees....in art history and English....

You guess what I'm scared about...being another educated nonhirable.

But there is Hope!

Here is a new book to help all of us there in MLIS land...

And another little resource to see another viewpoint on our journey through school.

What I am starting to realize through my blog surfing is that there is a serious neglect of technology in library school, no matter how the tag Information Science is used in the degree. I like the fact that we are learning HTML in our class, I like the fact that we wont need to use the little buttons on Blogger.com if they don't show up. I also realize the need for more instruction in our curriculum.

Lately I have been looking at changing my plans from archives to public. I have this vision of bringing podcasting and wikis to some rural town and watching it explode. I realize that I will forever be learning. I'm kinda excited, but I'm also scared that I will get out there and some 10 year old boy will be giving that look (you know, that look) and thinking, "Duh! I learnt that on LeapFrog!" My other colleagues (bless em) are now making me relent a bit on my ranting about the History of Libraries being a necessary part of the curriculum. History is great, but I don't want to be it!

Here is a little crib sheet I have been using to help me bone up...at least to an eight grade level.

My thoughts on Wikipedia....

A friend and fellow student of mine, Andrew Steadman, did a fascinating presentation on Wikipedia asking the question about its status as a "unstable" source. I started thinking about the unstableness of many former texts and wondered at the fact that Wikipedia might be thought of the way it is, might stem from other things than its actual components. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. It isn't in print (yet). It is at the mercy of the emotions and biases of the writers. When calling it these things, it seems strange that other texts aren't called into question as well. I was taught that the English Oxford dictionary used to have biases towards different races that were under the umbrella of the English rule. I know that some of the other editors have had emotional responses to subjects in their publications. I know that Encyclopedias, dictionaries and many other publications that span a length of information definitely are a collaborative effort. Also, most of these publications are now going online, some are contemplating doing away with print indefinitely.

Are we just biased towards Wikipedia because of the fact that these writers are not "professionals"? Do we usually check the credentials of all our reference books? Or do we leave it up to the publishers? The whole thing starts to take on to me layers of emotions/fear/prejudice and reasoning.

I know that Wikipedia is a wonderful invention, but it needs to find credibility in order not to remain a sidenote to research done on Google by the average user. One example I have of its amazing qualities, is the uses that reference librarians in my library (art library) use Wikipedia for, because of its many unique properties, not in spite of them. Artists that are usually under the radar, are usually pretty frustrating to find. There arent many actual research sources for many of these artists, and the reference librarians really rely on Wikipedia to give even cursory information about these people. Im not saying it is always correct, but in the day and age of fast information for the patron, it is a viable source!

Thoughts would be great!