August 8, 2007
A List Without Libraries
The Centre for Learning & Performance Technologies’ list of Top 100 Tools for Learning — culled from top-10 charts created by e-learning experts — names a wide array of tech tools that professors have come to love. Among the items that made the cut are Web browsers, e-mail clients, RSS feeders, blogging programs, and, of course, Microsoft’s evergreen PowerPoint presentation software.
But online library resources, which would seem like a good fit for e-learners, are notably absent from the master list. What gives? “It’s not as if the responding experts ignored information-retrieval tools,” writes Steven Bell at ACRLog. “Both Google and Google Scholar are on the top-100 list. And it’s not as if these experts wouldn’t know something about library databases.”
Mr. Bell, the associate university librarian for research and instructional services at Temple University, argues that librarians just haven’t done a good job of advertising their online databases and e-journal collections as instructional tools.
But Stephen Downes, the author of OLDaily, says the lack of library services on the list could be evidence of bad tools, not a lack of publicity. Mr. Downes, a senior researcher for Canada’s National Research Council, says he has access to a major online library portal, but that he has used the services only twice in six years. “The reason,” he writes, “is that it is not convenient, not even remotely, especially with the layers of security involved in protecting publisher’s intellectual property.”
If digital library resources should, in fact, be thought of as instructional technologies, are they actually meeting the needs of e-learners and other scholars? —Brock Read
Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: Anthropologist: Deep Bonds Forged in Second Life
Next: Government Grant to Preserve Virtual Worlds
Ah, but libraries often use or extend many of these tools, notably del.icio,us, Google Scholar, Moodle, Audacity, etc. In addition, libraries often provide access to or support of many of these tools, like Google Scholar, Wikipedia, even some blogging systems.
Finally, with the exception of Wikipedia and Google Scholar, these are not resources, but rather, as the title clearly indicates, tools. Libraries traditionally provide access to the primary and secondary resources, and have only just recently started providing the tools.
What “tools” do libraries provide that you think should be included? Catalogs and indexes are not so much learning tools, but finding aids. Rather than be resentful of exclusion from this list, librarians should consider the tools on this list for their own services.
— Karen R. Harker, MLS, MPH Aug 8, 04:06 PM #
I think we start getting into semantics when we ask if the list is about tools or resources. What’s clear is that the list is about “e-learning” not “productivity”. Many of the tools listed by the experts strike me as things you use to save time on task and achieve greater productivity. A library database, I would argure, promotes learning because it leads to the discovery of information that a student can build into new knowledge. Yes, a library database can improve your productivity as well – when you choose the right one and use it effectively – it can get you to the information you need much faster than other resources/tools. Yes, it depends on the type of information and the planned use. That’s where user education is most valuable in helping e-learners to determine how to match resources to information needs. That’s when you really start being a more efficient e-learner.
— stevenb Aug 9, 08:51 AM #
The “tools” here are just that. Very few of them provide content and many of them are tools we librarians are already using. I noted that the list is a UK product. Perhaps a survey of US academic institutions would provide a different perspective.
— Christine Godin Aug 9, 09:17 AM #
It’s no real surprise that people who focus on tracking the latest learning technology trends and are themselves bloggers don’t have much use for libraries. Nothing against blogging…or libraries.
Note also that the list is drawn from “e-learning experts”, likely without including a large number of academics. If you’re an academic, libraries matter, though not as much, nor as exclusively, as they used to. If you’re not an academic, academic libraries matter even less than they used to.
— Mark Aug 9, 09:29 AM #
And it’s also worth noting that tools such as Google Scholar are most useful when I’ve authenticated and have access to an academic library’s full-text subscriptions. Otherwise I just get frustrated that publishers expect me to pay $50 for an article.
— Mark Aug 9, 09:38 AM #
Online library resources help many aspiring scholars to locate useful information.
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
— William Allan Kritsonis, PhD Aug 9, 10:32 AM #
Mark makes the point that immediately occurred to me — how useful is Google Scholar if you are unable to actually read the text of the articles it retrieves citations for? Online journal access via libraries doesn’t just magically appear. It actually involves more work than just paying a bill, too.
Also, briefly looking at the contributors, it looks like there’s heavy corporate representation. There are two librarians on the list and one of them, Nancy Luikart, acutally DOES list library resources: CountryWatch, Britannica Online, EBSCO, and NetLibrary, all as part of the “counted” resource, her library’s website, which is ALSO a library resource!
But since she’s the only one to mention these tools/resources, they didn’t make it to the top 100.
— INTPLibrarian Aug 9, 10:57 AM #
What libraries provide are the paid resources: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, the Grove Dictionaries of Art and Music, and the like.
There are some free resources of equal quality, such as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and the Library of Congress American Memory, but they too are subsidized by libraries. Most free resources are still much inferior—perhaps Wikipedia and Citizendium will change that, but they haven’t done so yet.
(That’s all in addition to the indexes and the primary journals. Again, there are excellent free ones, such as PubMed and PLoS, but they are unfortunately still a small percentage of what is available for money.)
— David Goodman, formerly Princeton University Library Aug 9, 05:22 PM #
Although the article listed below was focused on public libraries, the reaction I received from this article on News.com was very strong. People have/had/don’t know what they have available to them.
http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-6197993.html
So, students, faculty, your neighbor don’t know what’s available and what it can do for them THEY have no chance of using it. If they do use it, that can also help make the product better in future releases.
Of course, databases, books, and other tools are just that, tools. What is equally, if not more important is the ability people have (but often forget about) to interact (via one of many methods) with a professional librarian who can help them find what they need with the tools that are available.
Finally, librarians can work with people to explain and then teach (just saying we have this or that database doesn’t mean anything anymore) what they can do on their own.
In terms of depth it’s not going to explain how to take your car apart, fix the brakes, and fluids but it will give you an idea of how to get the car moving, being safe, etc. Sort of a research drivers education class.
Librarians of all types have many essential skills in this day and age. One of them, that in my view can help them get their foot in the door (that’s the first step), is to show people how they can save them time, effort, and aggravation. Once that happens, the door is open to talk about many other essential issues like information quality, source, scope, etc.
— gary price Aug 9, 05:45 PM #
This whole debate is caused by sloppy journalism by the Chronicle! A tiny proportion of the respondents to Jane Hart’s original survey work in academia; so describing the tools as “tech tools that professors have come to love” and then questioning why these professors did not cite library resources, got the discussion off on the wrong foot. Which is not to say that the general inaccessibility of on-line library resources outside academia, and the large corporates is not an issue.
— Seb Schmoller Aug 10, 05:08 PM #
On one hand I absolutely agree with Seb; “e-learning experts” does not translate into academics. I think academic librarians and these “e-learning experts” serve very different populations. There is no denying that for publishing-oriented research, traditional library resources remain at the top. On the other hand, I absolutely agree with the implications of this article; librarians are losing touch with the non-publishing oriented information seekers…that is, your typical undergrad. The internet generation expects an immediacy that libraries are struggling to keep up with. I think the only way to keep the attentions of this population is to move more full-text access online. Inexperienced researchers just looking for some information (not understanding how to obtain the best information) will just get whatever is quickest. Unfortunately, this quick information tends to not be as challenging to the reader and promote a simple black and white/question and answer approach to research. Libraries need to continue the push to move online.
— Aaron Lohmeyer Aug 16, 08:59 AM #
Libraries & librarians have a number of challenges in promoting library resources and their tools/strategies for finding “quality information.” Obviously, it is important to bring value to what libraries do, but users & potential users need to see this value. There are several points which I think are significant.
First, Looking at the “top 100” list makes it clear that these tools are not all the same. Some are finding aids (i.e., search tools), some are information repositories (databases of a specific type of information), some are communications tools (information sharing) and some are productivity tools. A list which lumps them all together without a more in-depth analysis of them (or only does a cursory categorization) is not all that useful.
In thinking about what users prefer in their searching habits & strategies, I find it useful to look at library services from a marketplace perspective. There are two important considerations with which to make a distinction between online library access to databases/collections and the prevailing internet tools. These factors tend to make the latter paramount for most information seekers.
1. Free and easy access. The internet tools are more familiar to the user, often free, and are easy to learn on one’s own. Access and/or authentication are easy processes as well. This does not mean the user learns how to use the tool effectively, but good enough for his/her perceived needs.
2. Global reach. Related to the first factor, the reason people go to Google, Wikipedia & etc. is that they are global brands. Accessing information through one’s library is a parochial brand.
There are times when local is better, just as there are times when having a book in hand is better. However, maybe libraries could have a shared, global portal with local authentication processes? Maybe the email & password that an user makes use of to register & login to numerous online resources could be used to authenticate against the local database? Just wonderin’ out loud.
— James E. Sep 11, 10:30 AM #