International Journal of Library Science
Volume 04; Issue A11; Year 2011
ISSN 0975-7546; Int. j. lib. sci.
Copyright © 2011 by IJLS, CESER Publications
Library 2.0 Technology in Academic Libraries, a Case
Study of Librarian use and perception: Pakistan
Perspective
Sameem Kardar
NED University of Engineering and Technology, Pakistan
sameemkardar@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
At a time the term “Library 2.0” has attracted an attention in the professionals and academic
Library. This study proposes a new vision of Academic Library 2.0 based on Web 2.0
applications. In this paper the knowledge creation for Academic Librarians will be highlighted. It
needs to understand how librarians in the Pakistan region have implemented Web 2.0
technologies – blogs, RSS feeds, wikis, or the use of services like Flickr, YouTube, de.lici.ous.
Key Words: Web 2.0, Emerging Technology, Library 2.0, Librarian 2.0, Social Network, Open
Source, Academic Libraries, Information Technology
Library Science Classification Number: T58.5
INTRODUCTION
The internet and its most common manifestation in the form of World Wide Web have made a
profound contribution to modern life. Increase in web usage continue to be dramatic with, today, more
than 900 million users of a tool that has really only existed for a decade.
Web 2.0
The term web 2.0 has been in use since the late 90s. The current concepts of Web 2.0 were adopted
at an O’Reilly/Media Live Conference. Dale Dougherty proposed the name to represent the things that
typified post dot-com web companies as compared to companies that did not survive the bursting of
the dot-com bubble.
Definitions of Web 2.0:
Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are
those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a
continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data
www.ceserp.com/cp-jour/
www.ceser.in/ceserp/
www.ceserpublications.com
International Journal of Library Science
from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a
form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an "architecture of
participation," and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences.
Ref: www.radar.oreilly.com
Web 2.0, refers to a supposed second generation of Internet-based services that emphasize online
collaboration and sharing among users.
Web 2.0 Services includes:
i-
Social Networks (Flickers, YouTube, 43things, Slideshare)
ii-
Web-based Applications (Google Docs, Time Tracker)
iii-
Wikis (Wikipedia)
iv-
Blogs, Photo logs or Podcasts (Blogger)
v-
Subscription Systems (Bloglines)
vi-
Searchers Based on tags (Flicker, Technorati)
Library 2.0:
Library 2.0, in its most practical and focused expression, is about using new web technologies to
connect and establish relationships with patrons. Web 2.0 is a term coined to describe the emerging
Internet technologies. Hence the birth of the phrase “Library 2.0 to describe use of these new web
applications within library systems.
Definition of Library 2.0:
Library 2.0 is all about library users -- keeping those we have while actively seeking those who do
not currently use our services. It's about embracing those ideas and technologies that can assist
libraries in delivering services to these groups, and it's about participation -- involving users in
service creation and evaluation. Library 2.0 is an operating model that allows libraries to respond
rapidly to market needs. This does not mean that we abandon our current users or our mission. It
is a philosophy of rapid change, flexible organizational structures, new Web 2.0 tools and user
participation that will put the library in a much stronger position, ready to efficiently and effectively
meet
the
needs
of
a
(Michael Casey) Ref: www.squidoo.com
40
larger
user
population.
International Journal of Library Science
Library 2.0 Applications:
i- Wikis:
x
A website that allows users to add update content on the site which is mainly created
by collaborative effort of site visitors.
ii- Instant Messaging:
x
Enables a real time Communication between students and Librarians
x
Reference Management Training
x
Online Seeking Assistance
iii- Podcasts:
x
“A series of digital media files which are distributed over the internet using syndication
feeds for playback on portable media players and computers” (Wikipedia)
x
Library Guides
x
Conferences
x
Lectures
x
Book Reviews
iv- Social Networking:
x
Range of Web-based software programs that allows users to interact and share data
with other users
x
Staff Collaboration
x
Student Collaboration
x
Creating lists of Popular Books
x
Promoting Library Events or Services
1- Background of the Study:
There has been considerable excitement and speculation about the emergence of a global
‘participatory culture’ facilitated by so called Web 2.0 technologies. The Web 2.0 and social software
explosion has the capability to transform the online profile of libraries and help reach out to tech-savvy
young users to whom the library may otherwise be invisible. Libraries can now easily collaborate and
create online communities, as well as explore new ways in which to communicate with, educate and
41
International Journal of Library Science
attract new users - and also to market themselves. As students, staff and faculty move their lives
online, university libraries must choose whether to move with them or get left behind. By using social
networks and other web-based technologies, libraries can become a value-added member of their
community— both online and in person. By using these new tools, librarians can once again hover by
their reference stacks with an offer to help that's just a click away.
2- Purpose of Study:
This study is conducted to evaluate the Expertise and Skills of Academic Librarians towards
Web 2.0 Technology: Pakistan Perspective.
3- Problem Statement:
“Are the academic librarians well known about Library 2.0 based on Web 2.0 Technology?”
4- Scope of Study:
To assess the Knowledge of Academic Librarians about the Library 2.0 based on Web 2.0
Technology.
ii- To Evaluate the Services related to Library 2.0 used by Academic Librarians.
i-
5- Research Design and Methodology:
The Library 2.0 Survey targeted librarians and information professionals that work in Academic
Libraries of Pakistan and use Web 2.0 tools and applications in their professional duties and personal
lives. It aimed to obtain some snapshots of how Academic librarians use Web 2.0 tools and
applications, to identify their values and impact, and to detect various issues associated with the
implementation of Web 2.0 applications in Academic libraries.
The survey was originally designed in English and mounted at Survey Monkey. The survey
was distributed in various online library forums and groups. Individual email addresses from library
web sites were gathered and the survey was distributed via email to many librarians in the hope that
more would participate in the survey. Thirty people responded to the survey. However, three of these
were either library school students or graduate student that used an academic library. So those
responses were ignored and remained twenty seven were taken as valid responses. Whenever a
response was not clear, the surveyor went to the library's Web site to double-check if the library's
name was given in the survey.
6-Findings:
6.1 Librarians Response:
An on-line Questionnaire developed on “Survey Monkey” was sent to the Academic
Libraries through their individual E-Mail address and also distributed the web link of On
line survey Form through Yahoo Groups.
The author also contacted the librarians personally distributed the questionnaire in printed
form. Librarians were also personally contacted and distributed the questionnaire in
Printed Form. Responses from different Institutes were also received as per following
detail:
42
International Journal of Library Science
Universities
15
Institutes
12
6.2 Social Networks:
x
x
In technology, the next big thing after Google is Social Networking.
Social networking could enable librarians and patrons not only to interact, but to
share and change resources dynamically in an electronic medium.
According to data collection the surveyor found the interest of Librarians in different Social
Networks. The interest of the librarians is indicated in the following table:
6.3 Web 2.0 Services using by Librarians:
According to the data collection this researcher found that a large no. of the Academic
Librarians are using YouTube and Blogger for sharing information. They are 40.74% out of
the total participants. Only one user is the daily user of Del.icuo.us.
6.4 Librarians expertise to use the Web 2.0 Tools
According to the data collection Maximum no. of Librarians found to use the Wikipedia for
reading. They are 48.14% out of the total participants.
Very few no. of participants use the Wikipedia to add entries. Same no. of librarians are using
the Flicker to add and sharing pictures. They are 11.11% out of total participants.
The detail is given below.
6.5 Purpose of using Social Software
According to the Data Collection most of the Librarians are using Social Software for sharing
information. They are 48.14% of the total participants.
Less no of librarians are using Distributing Search Alerts, Staff Collaboration and Creating
Lists of Popular Books. They are 11.11% of total participants.
6.6 How the librarians are benefited for Library 2.0
Most of the librarians found these social networks beneficial for receiving news updates. They
are 44.44% of total participants.
Some of them found it helpful to locate Information Resources. They are 18.51% of total
participants.
6.7 Role of Library Professionals in the age of Web 2.0 as Librarian 2.0: Suggestion of Librarians.
Some of the Librarians have given their valuable comments about the Role of Library
Professionals in the age of Web 2.0. Most of them suggest to be aware of the emerging
trends in modern Libraries.
43
International Journal of Library Science
6.8 Vision of Librarians about future aspects of Web 2.0 Technology
In the reply of Question about future aspects of Web 2.0 Technology this researcher found
very clear distribution of the views of the participants. Equal no. of Librarians showed their
views and securities about the Confrontation between Technological Group and about the
Corporate and government restrictions on open source sites. They are 33.33% of total
participants. Some of them showed their views and securities about the Confrontations
between social groups. They are 18.51% of total participants.
6.9 Open Source effect in Computer Environment: Future Challenges for Librarians.
In the reply of the question about the impact of open source software and subsequent
technologies and the changes occur in the way people interact in computer environments.
Different visionary responses were received.
This researcher found maximum and equal distribution of the participants voted for the
Innovative and Creative environment, Social Networking and Lifelong learning. They are
37.03% out of total participants.
DISCUSSION:
Web 2.0 Technology is now a necessary part of Librarianship in this age. Library
Professionals are not well aware about this technology in Pakistan. They should seriously
think about the challenges of new era and must overcome their weaknesses related to the
Web 2.0 Technology.
CONCLUSION:
The study reveals that in the Pakistan, academic Librarians have taken applications of Web
2.0 Tools and Techniques in their Personal Use.
From the responses received to the surveys, it appears that Web 2.0 tools are slowly being
introduced among the Academic Librarians for a variety of uses. However, given the small
sample size, it is difficult to predict whether the use of Web 2.0 tools portends a growing trend
in Academic Libraries or merely represents a passing fad.
The responses received from a few Academic Librarians it shows that most of the librarians
are not well informed about this Technology or not aware by the importance of the Web 2.0
Technology.
Not every Web 2.0 Technology has been embraced: Blogs (40.74%), Wikipedia (37.03%) and
YouTube (40.74) are most popular to date.
Facebook (40.74%) is the most popular Social Networking Software to date.
It is emphasized in these research results that librarians do not perceive Library 2.0 to be
presenting new paradigm.
44
International Journal of Library Science
Acknowledgement:
All Survey Participants
Relevant Literature:
Noa Aharony: "Web 2.0 use by librarians". In: Library & Information Science Research 31 (2009) 1,
pp. 29 – 37
Phil Bradley: How to Use Web 2.0 in Your Library. Facet Publ. 2007
Nancy Courtney (ed): Library 2.0 and beyond. Innovative technologies and tomorrow's user.
Westport: Libraries Unlimited 2007
Paul Miller: "Web 2.0: Building the New Library". In: Ariadne 45 (2005)
David Parkes / Liz Hart: Web 2.0 and Libraries. Impacts, technologies and trends. Oxford: Chandos
2007
Patrick Danowski: "Library 2.0 and User-Generated Content. What can the users do for us?". World
library and information congress: 73rd IFLA general conference and council, 19 - 23 August 2007,
Durban, South Africa
45
International Journal of Library Science
APPENDIX
i- Social Network Usage Ratio of Academic Librarians.
S. No.
Social Network
Registered Member
01
02
03
04
My Space
Facebook
Friendster
Others
Yes
01
11
03
02
Ratio
3.7 %
40.74 %
11.11%
7.40%
ii- Web 2.0 Services using by Librarians.
S.
No
Web 2.0 Service
Period of Use
Daily
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
15
16
18
Flicker
You Tube
Slideshow
Google Docs
Time Tracker
Wikipedia
Bloggers
Digg
Meneame
Fresqui
Del.icuo.us
Meebo
Bloglines
RSS Feeds
1
4
3
4
5
2
1
1
-
After 2/3
days
1
3
2
Nil
2
5
2
Ratio
Weekly
Monthly
Total
1
2
1
2
2
3
1
1
-
Nil
2
Nil
1
1
1
1
-
03
11
6
6
10
11
1
3
2
2
11.11
40.74
22.22
22.22
37.03
40.74
3.7
11.11
7.40
7.40
iii- Librarians Expertise to use the Web 2.0 Tools
S. No.
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
Questions
Do you read blogs?
Do you add posts to blogs?
Do you read entries in Wikipedia?
Do you add entries to Wikipedia?
Do you edit entries in Wikipedia?
Do you take pictures from Flickr™?
Do you add pictures to Flickr?
Do you use RSS?
Do you participate in a social network?
Do you think that you will use Web 2.0 applications in the days to
come
46
Yes
13
05
12
02
01
03
03
5
10
Ratio
48.14
18.51
44.44
7.40
3.70
11.11
11.11
18.51
37.03
13
48.14
International Journal of Library Science
iv- Purpose of using Social Networks:
S. No.
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
Social Networking
Promoting Library Event Services
Contacts with Friends
Student Collaboration
Profiling Preferred Searches
Distributing Search Alerts
Staff Collaboration
Creating Lists of Popular Books
Sharing Information
Transferring Data
Saving Data Online
Yes
08
09
07
06
03
03
03
13
06
06
Ratio
29.62
33.33
25.92
22.22
11.11
11.11
11.11
48.14
22.22
22.22
v- How the librarians are benefited for Library 2.0:
S. No.
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
Questions
Help to Create Friendships
Increase my motivation
Interested in receiving new updates
Increase my enjoyments
Increase my confidence
Increase quality of Group works
Increase quality of Independent work
Help me to communicate my colleagues (Other Professionals)
I would benefit using Library 2.0
Help me locate Resources
Help Learning
Agree
11
09
12
07
08
07
10
08
11
05
11
Ratio
40.74
33.33
44.44
25.92
29.62
25.92
37.03
29.62
40.74
18.51
40.74
vi- Vision of Librarians about future aspects of Web 2.0 Technology
S. No
01
02
03
04
05
06
vii-
Questions
Virtual reality addictions
Confrontations between social groups
Confrontations between technological groups
Corporate and government restrictions on open source sites
Digital divide (information and technology available to some,
not all)
Loss of individual privacy
Agree
06
05
09
09
Disagree
22.22
18.51
33.33
33.33
08
29.62
08
29.62
Open Source effect in Computer Environment: Future Challenges for Librarians.
S. No
Questions
Agree
01
Innovative, Creative environment
10
02
Social Networking
10
03
Participate in an open and shared environment; users
08
provide content and value
04
Same information several ways (different multimedia
07
formats)
05
Instant access
08
06
Lifelong learning
10
07
Other Specify ------------------------------------------
47
Ratio
37.03
37.03
29.62
25.92
29.62
37.03
Nil