Thing # 15

Embracing constant change in technology … is this true or what? I do find myself feeling a bit of frustration in doing and mastering all these activities and knowing that it will all be outdated in a year or so …

Reworking library services to meet the needs of users in their space … I know there are bunches of libraries out who cry for users. I do not. I am overwhelmed with them, but I am still striving to rework the library to prepare them as best as I can for technology.

Away from the icebergs … the title sounded intriguing, so I chose it. Rick Anderson begins by questioning the need for print collections. I have heard this line of reasoning for over 30 years. Yes, we are moving towards a cyber environment, but I don’t think we can toss the books for at least 50-100 years. The clientele at my school don’t even have computers in every home, and if they do, they can’t afford an internet connection. Food stamps just don’t pay for that. Talking about a totally cyber environment for them is laughable.

“No profession can survive if it throws its core principles and values overboard in response to every shift in the zeitgeist. However, it can be equally disastrous when a profession fails to acknowledge and adapt to radical, fundamental change in the marketplace it serves. At this point in time, our profession is far closer to the latter type of disaster than it is to the former.”

This is the gist of it, but why does he think we are failing to acknowledge? Every librarian I know is racing to keep up with their market. It was interesting to learn from the Wikipedia article that Library 2.0 descends from Business 2.0. Educators would do well to model more of their practices on the business world. We differ in that education is not truly a market driven field. We always have our clients and always will, but we can still employ the business world's goal setting and evaluation strategies to the world of education. The school is not going to fold if administrators use bad practices, and we always have the opportunity to regroup and try again. Our “stock” is only symbolic.