This blog bears the mark of someone trying to blog their way through their dissertation. Slowly but surely the blogposts are posted at longer intervals, and then even longer longer intervals. I can't see, at least anywhere in the near future that I will be setting my foot formally within an educational institution ever again!
What now bears only a sligth resemblance to a working brain is relentlessy put to the test of making sense. Every day. Yes, I moan and groan. You have to let the steam out...
Dissertation depression, Postgraduate depression, self-doubt, anxiety, anxiety attacks, ... why did I ever put myself up for this?
It's certainly not for the self esteem, librarians seem to suffer similar identity/image problems as dentists. It's not the money, I'd probably earn more by selling stuff on ebay.
Oh, the pain! The agony! Oh, being an unemployed wanna-be librarian is oh, so hard!
There! Done my whinging...for now...
Tuesday, 25 September 2007
Saturday, 15 September 2007
Run for your life...?
The AL makes me worried sometimes. What was I thinking wanting to get into this field! I don't think there is a profession so obsessed with itself. Or wait. How would I know. I want to be a librarian. I hardly ever look at other professionally driven blogs. Some comments on her last post made me cringe with regret:
"People in this field tend to meld the personal and professional. By the way, this could probably be the cause of why about 50% of libraries are toxic work environments."
"And what about the library field itself? The whole thing is falling apart faster than anyone wants to admit; although to be honest if the Gubberment said tomorrow they'd be taking all the funding out of libraries and putting it into Wikipedia I'd fall over laughing with schadenfreude."
"While management is management in any profession, somehow librarianship attracts that certain "je ne sais quoi" when it comes to management dysfunction."
"Actually, reading this blog has made me realize that I need to get out of librarianship. "
Oh, dear. What's a wannabe librarian to do?
"People in this field tend to meld the personal and professional. By the way, this could probably be the cause of why about 50% of libraries are toxic work environments."
"And what about the library field itself? The whole thing is falling apart faster than anyone wants to admit; although to be honest if the Gubberment said tomorrow they'd be taking all the funding out of libraries and putting it into Wikipedia I'd fall over laughing with schadenfreude."
"While management is management in any profession, somehow librarianship attracts that certain "je ne sais quoi" when it comes to management dysfunction."
"Actually, reading this blog has made me realize that I need to get out of librarianship. "
Oh, dear. What's a wannabe librarian to do?
Wednesday, 5 September 2007
Defining Library 2.0
The term, Library 2.0, is most certainly a contested one. Just have a look at the opposing views of The Annoyed Librarian and Meredith's blog to compare - although AL can be seen as a "tongue-in-cheek" protester, those views are critical to the way we think about the evolving library service.
The definition, as well as implementation of these evolving technologies, are at the heart of what constitutes librarianship today. I would say.
I won't be going into the definition debate in too much detail in my research - the definition dialogue warrants a research paper in itself.
I will however include it in my literature review as it has everything to do with how and what people think about the Library 2.0
Maness (2006) has attempted to define what we actually mean by Library 2.0 and more recently, Habib (2006, pdf) proposed a definition, based upon Maness' and others work, but in that proposal Habib readily acknowledged that the term was contested and is under constant criticism.
Habib's definition is based upon the coined concept of ‘Web‘ and '2.0' which he points out is preceded by the concept of 'Business 2.0'. The synchronising technology, marked by the 2.0, and points to the radical changes that have occurred in the past 2-3 years as people attempt to utilize it for whatever purposes, be it businesses, web commerce and communication and, as I'm attempting to explore, in libraries.
O'Reilly's definition first set out to disseminate the chaos of the web in terms of how changing technologies defined those that survived the first internet crash. In essence that explains what 2.0 stands for. It's a generational mark, for technological innovation.
Habib's definition is very diplomatic - it's levelled, in a sense. It disregards the hype surrounding the term and manages to imply the impact the new technologies can have on a library service without excluding more traditional services.
This defintion debate seems to be going on strong. For now, at least. Which is good.
The definition, as well as implementation of these evolving technologies, are at the heart of what constitutes librarianship today. I would say.
I won't be going into the definition debate in too much detail in my research - the definition dialogue warrants a research paper in itself.
I will however include it in my literature review as it has everything to do with how and what people think about the Library 2.0
Maness (2006) has attempted to define what we actually mean by Library 2.0 and more recently, Habib (2006, pdf) proposed a definition, based upon Maness' and others work, but in that proposal Habib readily acknowledged that the term was contested and is under constant criticism.
Habib's definition is based upon the coined concept of ‘Web‘ and '2.0' which he points out is preceded by the concept of 'Business 2.0'. The synchronising technology, marked by the 2.0, and points to the radical changes that have occurred in the past 2-3 years as people attempt to utilize it for whatever purposes, be it businesses, web commerce and communication and, as I'm attempting to explore, in libraries.
O'Reilly's definition first set out to disseminate the chaos of the web in terms of how changing technologies defined those that survived the first internet crash. In essence that explains what 2.0 stands for. It's a generational mark, for technological innovation.
Habib's definition is very diplomatic - it's levelled, in a sense. It disregards the hype surrounding the term and manages to imply the impact the new technologies can have on a library service without excluding more traditional services.
This defintion debate seems to be going on strong. For now, at least. Which is good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
