When libraries are facing the problem of limited funding for staff, resources acquisition and services models provided, there is a strong need for getting a more efficient way for utilizing it. However, according to the authors, no matter how hard they try, the services utilization rate is still far from satisfactory. It is hard to reach the service to the users physically, as its space, location and resources limit the library. Services are then constrained by the physical nature of the library itself, and users can’t receive their most desirable services.
The authors raised the idea of Library 2.0 for the possibility of getting a new road for library services, which lies on the idea that the services provided is changed to user-center base. It aims to bring a new way to reach users that are hard to reach before, as can improve the current services by a more user-oriented approach.
The basis of Library 2.0 model is thus to open the opportunity for library users to take part in reviewing, evaluating and commenting the library services. Users can turn, from a passive service-receiving role, into designing their library services they want. The library users can then actively tailors make the services that best suit them, or even let the users to decide the service they want, and this can be done via web. A possibility is using blogs and wikipedia in the library webpage, and more people are willing to input comment into the library. For example, Temple University Library in Philadelphia is using blog to provide a platform for sharing news and discussion. In the homepage of Ann Arbor District Library, it has turned itself into a blog that can allow quick respond and community building. In Saint Joseph County Public Library in South Bend, in order to facilitate user’s feedback, is now using open source wiki software.
Other approach for Library 2.0 model is personalization of library web pages, which can increase the appeal and value to users. Users can add the component of services they like from the library. For instance, services like on-line book talks and discussion groups are now possible within the website of library, which broaden the physical limits of the library. Also, users can review, comment and give rating for certain titles and services at anytime so that the standard of library servicing can keep improving. The service in Library 2.0 is then extended to user’s computers once they connect to the web. Librarians can then take part in responding, regularly updating and evaluating the services. By collecting more comments, tags, rating and feedbacks from users for their favorite books, authors or events, the library can know more what service that the user want and how they can improve for the existing services. From the comment collected, the even create a more interactive and informative services (like improved OPAC interface) to users, which result in a good supplement for both side.
So it turns out that Library 2.0 attempts to explore a new direction for the development of library. By sharing and user participation, library service not only can reach to the users physically, but also virtually without timeframe and land boundary.
With all the components (sharing, inviting user’s comment and rating) combined for building the framework of Library 2.0, the library can offer a continual and organic service model for the library users.
沒有留言:
發佈留言