One of my discussion prompts this week for a class deals with the nature of “Libraries 2.0,” a topic I’ve been bludgeoned over the head with in many classes before. At least this time it’s a design research class, so we’ll actually get to approach the problem/solutions rather than just prattling on.
The materials for the new Philadelphia Free Library Parkway Central design are the best PR I’ve seen for libraries…maybe ever. We need more videos like this one to educate people about what libraries are (striving) to be, rather than the musty old stereotype most people have.
New design itself looks amazing, hopefully they can scrape up the donations to make it happen…though I have mixed feelings, given they almost closed a bunch of branches last year. Hopefully this spearheads a larger movement to improve the branch libraries, because they’re what’s more important to the neighborhoods across the city.
I think Casey & Savastinuk sum it up the best: “The heart of Library 2.0 is user-centered change” (2006). It’s not about digitization or web 2.0 itself — it’s about the paradigm shift we’ve experienced that has opened organizations and companies up and made them respect their customers’ opinions more than ever before. By getting direct input from library users and studying their needs and behaviors, we can design the best possible experience for a variety of patrons. A design research company called MAYA did this project for the Carnegie Library in Pittsburgh a couple years ago, which I think is a model example of the right way to approach modernizing libraries.
I agree with Michael Stephens general description of “Library 2.0” - “a meeting place, online or in the physical world, where [library users’] needs will be fulfilled through entertainment, information, and the ability to create [their] own stuff to contribute to the ocean of content out there” (Casey & Savastinuk, 2006).
So, from experience and discussing this in various other classes, I believe a library should be:
Above all, useful. Libraries’ content and services must keep up with the needs of modern patrons. Be ready for tech-savvy users, but mind the digital divide. Expect younger people to be comfortable with technology, and find ways to shape their research habits to value authoritative sources.
A beautiful public space. The architecture of modern libraries must attract and inspire patrons, seething with modernity while paying homage to the hallowed halls of knowledge of the past. The Seattle Central Library set the bar for modernity, but personally I think it’s a hideous structure, and agree with the Project for Public Spaces in that public library buildings must promote a sense of openness by allowing patrons to flow in and out at convenient points. Edgy architecture may look exciting, but if it’s not functional patrons will be frustrated.
A hub of activity. Maintaining quiet space, but opening areas up for energetic social exchange. The library should be a bastion of communication, creativity, and innovation for people of all walks of life — hosting public events, classes, and children’s programs. Fostering new business development. Connecting people to information, as well as people to people.
Seamlessly connected. High-speed wireless throughout. Interact with librarians through whatever your preferred channel — face-to-face, web, phone, text message, IM, Skype, Twitter, Facebook…you name it. Searching the web on Google brings up library-recommended sources. You can download content at home, have resources delivered to you, go pick them up when they’re available, or enjoy them while visiting the library.
Finally, libraries must continue to value the analog. My favorite “Library 2.0” thing about Hagerty at Drexel is the board where comments from the suggestion box are posted and feedback is provided. It’s not digital, but it’s all about “user-centered change.” There are plenty of old school solutions that are just as valuable as digital ones, especially if you want to maintain the library as a physical place.
