Service Response Discussion: Do we need a Technology Service Response?
September 12th, 2006 by Andrea MercadoThis post is part of a series designed to further discussion of the PLA Results service responses, designed in 1998 to describe “what a library does for, or offers to, the public in an effort to meet a set of well-defined community needs.”
The bulleted comments below were gathered in conference sessions by the PLA Results team, in an effort to update the current service responses, which were originally written almost ten years ago. The PLA Results group is looking to the community for feedback on how to update these service responses to better reflect current public library methods and standards.
Currently, there is no formal Technology service response. The discussion points below are seeds for discussion, and your added commentary can help to develop the new Technology service response (for examples of service responses, see the Library Service Responses page.)
Technology Discussion Group Comments
Do we need a service response related to technology?
- Technology is a part of everything and it doesn’t seem to be here anywhere in the service responses.
- The library serves as Public Utility to provide Internet access, as an end in itself.
- We could have a service response called Computer Commons.
- Libraries are creating virtual branches and they need to be included here.
- Train public to use technology.
Go back to the Service Response Discussion Index.
Tags: PLA, PLA Blog, service responses
|
Print this post
September 26th, 2006 at 3:35 pm
Wouldnt’ technology fall into Information Literacy? Couldn’t we just rename the category Information & Technology Literacy and be sure to include the more current and advanced aspects of technology?
September 30th, 2006 at 11:39 am
There is a new study on the use of public library computers to access the Internet that seems to support the idea of a service response that focuses Internet Access: http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/contactwo/oitp/2006_plinternet.pdf.
October 10th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
I agree that technology and information literacy are related, but I think there are two roles that public libraries play.
The first is to provide access to the Internet (or just to a computer) for those who don’t have it elsewhere or don’t have it conveniently right now.
The second is the information literacy role, i.e., helping people learn to use computers and to find, use, analyze, synthesize, and (I would add) create information.
October 11th, 2006 at 9:22 am
I agree with Sara. Our library currently invests heavily in providing enough public access computers–simply as an access point. We also do classes etc; but consider both roles as rather independent of each other. I do see access to technology as a service response on its own. And I also see technology literacy as part of information literacy.
October 11th, 2006 at 9:50 am
I would agree with the above comments but want to add something. Technology often is a component of lifelong learning as well. Many libraries offer technology learning opportunities that are of a literacy, i.e., educational, bent, but they might also offer technology learning opportunities that are recreational in nature. I tend to think of the literacy component of our work geared toward those that come to us for educational purposes. Although lifelong learning can be both educational and recreational, it seems to me to be more recreational in nature.
October 11th, 2006 at 10:49 am
I believe that a separate service response is needed. Information literacy is one piece and technology is another. Technology is such a big part of our life nowadays and we would be remiss if we didn’t include them.
I also wanted to say that I like the term Computer Commons.
October 11th, 2006 at 12:54 pm
I believe that something needs to be created to address technology needs, but a category simply titled “Technology” will not fit the bill, I’m afraid. Technology, in its most basic definition, affects each and every one of the service responses that already exist. It affects information literacy (computer literacy), it’s a piece of genealogy (online databases and websites), a piece of everything we do. You can no longer separate out technology as an “extra” from the rest of what we do. It touches it all. So…I would propose that each of the other service responses begin to include the technological elements that affect it, and that the new service response be entitled something like “Emerging Technology,” encouraging libraries to stay on the cutting edge of what’s new and out there for our users, both in and outside of the library world. Keeping on top of things is what keeps us relevant.
October 12th, 2006 at 10:22 am
I think there’s a huge difference between “Technology literacy” and “Technology Access” and I agree that Information/Technology literacy are becoming parrallel ideals, but I also agree with Sarah Houghton that technology supports all areas of the library and therefore should not be treated like a silo. Technology is not a “core service” by itself, but rather like “funding” it is a fundamental that all our core services rely on.
So while I think it may be important to acknowledge “computer access” as a separate area, I think “technology” supports everything.
October 12th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
I think there may be a new generation of technology applications that could impact heavily on libraries. From what I gather, these applications can be grouped under the broad label “Web 2.0.” My very rudimentary understanding of the uses of technology implied by that phrase argues for some form of technology service response that goes beyond access to the Internet, or even information literacy. Should we as librarians be looking at the Web 2.0 ideas more closely?
October 17th, 2006 at 10:51 pm
I concur with those that have suggested Technology be folded as needed into other service responses. Having it as a separate service response would seem to me like having “Library Buildings” as a service response. Not sure where “serving the underserved” by providing access at the library would elsewhere fit, however.
October 19th, 2006 at 2:53 am
Technology for the sake of technology is not going to be long-lasting since it solves no real-life problems. I’d like to start by asking what problem this response can solve. Two things come to mind – findability and accessibility of library resources and services. Many library users are already using technology to find and access what they need and want from home and 24×7 with ease. Do we have a response addressing these two issues?
Technology probably is not a service response, however, I would like to see technology as a possible solution to problems in every response. For example, access to technology can be included in the response for “commons.” (We play an important role in closing the gap between technology haves and have-nots. In addition to access to basic computers and Internet, we can provide something like a high-tech study room or studio so those who can’t afford the expensive personal technology can, as an individual or as a group, create, publish and exchange their ideas as well.) The list can go on and on ….
October 21st, 2006 at 4:17 pm
Internet access makes sense as a service response. It reflects a current reality. One of the heaviest used areas of public libraries today is the Internet access computer area. The need for this is changing. The One Laptop Per Child project is accelerating the rate of change. At a cost of $140 in 2007, dropping to $50 in 2010, these computers will have built-in support for mesh wireless networking. Even when these laptops are not in use, they will continue to function as wireless routers with an energy demand of less than 1 watt. All a community of users will need is a high speed connection to the Internet because they will already be connected with each other. That kind of technology will not be limited to children in developing countries. We will all want it. Over the next five years, public libraries will need to be installing exterior wireless access points, higher speed connections to the Internet backbone, and caching servers to store locally the most popular digital audio, video, and other materials. Internet access will be core to this. So will functioning as collective bargaining agents to license the popular digital materials. We will want all of it.
October 23rd, 2006 at 9:13 am
Technology needs to be considered on its’ own merit and at the same time part of almost everything we do within our libraries. Yes, technology can be seen as, one said, “a library building is a service” but as a library without a building to house its’ “services” could not exist, the same can be said for a library without technology. Technology in libraries is like an engine in a car. You can’t see it behind the metal and chrome but once the key is turned in the ignition, it effects every aspect of that vehicle. No pun intended, but technology is becoming the driving force behind our libraries. From our ILSs to how we help our patrons download eBooks.
October 24th, 2006 at 4:16 pm
In my opinion technology is a means to an end, not an end, and isn’t a service response in and of itself. Yes it’s important, but so are shelves, audio books, and staff.
January 16th, 2007 at 3:53 am
I do see technology as a service response because it makes it possible for the public library to serve readers it could not serve before: blind and low-vision people and other users with disabilities. Assistive technology has opened up the world of library and electronic resources and provided access to information to this group which previously had been unserved and ignored. With the boomer generation turning sixty and the already significant increase in the aging population, librarians are now turning to assistive technology (large print software and speech) to aid senior adults in their use of the computer. Social networking with the community via computer technology will become an important element of library service as we seek the public’s input in shaping our services or in dealing with community issues. One salient point was made by a prior responder: namely, that we need to keep on the cutting edge of technology. I agree. I also think that librarians should foster the concept of universal design with vendors and with software designers. This concept is essential for users of assistive technology whose access to information is threatened by every technological advance. Because cyberspace impacts the other areas of service responses (where its role should be noted), I am the more convinced that whatever, we call it–Computer Technology, Cyberspace–it deserves a category of its own.