Scholarly write-up
Library 2.0: Beyond the Usual Business in Nigerian Academic Libraries
ABSTRACT
The possibility of finding solutions to an individual’s academic problems and needs usually prompts library patrons to visit the library however; the ancient long unidirectional mode of interaction gives little or no feedback about the various services that an academic library offers making the library to be unsatisfactorily underutilized. This paper will present an overview of ‘Library 2.0’ as an alternative approach to contemporary mode of rendering services in Nigerian academic libraries as well as examples of social media that could be integrated into ‘Library 2.0’.
Keywords: Library 2.0, Library services, Social Media, Net Generation
Introduction
Academic library is an important component that cannot be overlooked in any higher institutions of learning if they want to lay claim of academic excellence. An academic library is thus the ‘heart’ of the learning community providing a place for students and faculty to do their research and advance their knowledge (Simmonds & Andaleeb, 2001). Academic library can also be described as the most ‘knowledgeable’ building due to its supposed role as a resource as well as the opportunity to have new updates of learning resources which includes books, maps, photographs, projector, slides and many others.
There are numerous benefits that are offered by academic libraries which are not limited to: (i) awakening students’ love for book and inculcation of healthy reading habit (ii) meeting students widening interest and deepening studies (iii) a basis for self-education (iv) as well as affording students opportunities of finding information. As the benefits of an academic library is limitless, it is rather still bewildering that the percentage of many higher institutions’ budget for learning resources is considered derisory when compare with the allocation of funds to other services of comparable scale and significance (Adefiya, 1975; Agboola, 2000).
From observation, libraries in Nigerian higher institution of learning are still practicing the age long unidirectional mode of communicating that do not allow their patrons to give them feedback on the services rendered to them. Solarin-Lawal (2013) affirmed the low utilisation of electronic databases subscribed to by the university due to lack of awareness by both the faculty members and the students. The students might have taken a library related course to introduce them to the library; it is the duty of the library to reinforce instruction with effective practical application of the instructions. The internet might have opened windows of opportunity to the world of academia and the library should not be left behind. Recently, the library has been threatened with greater competition from the internet, bookstores, publishers and vendors who try to provide services that libraries provide (Simmonds & Andaleeb, 2001) and since the intention of the library user is to access the resource the library can offer and not to own them which easily stray them away from the library if the desired services are not available.
Isn’t it the time for our librarians to think for a better and efficient way of rendering innovative and interactive services to their patrons?. Simmonds & Andaleeb, citing Jennifer Wells (1995) opined that the effectiveness of libraries have often been measured by the volume of library materials available to clients, the amount of use of services and resources, and the apparent and quantified satisfaction of clients. It is not in the scope of this study to discuss the resources in Nigerian academic libraries but rather the services that would meet the needs and expectations of library users as well as to encourage interactive feedback. This study will discuss the rationale behind visiting the library; contemporary library services offered by Nigerian academic libraries; meaning of Library 2.0; the need to integrate Library 2.0, examples of social media that could be integrated into Library 2.0; challenges of integrating Library 2.0 as well as appropriate recommendations.
Literature Review
2.1Rationale Behind Patron’s Visit to Library
The internet might have opened the resources of libraries to students and academic staffs worldwide to study at their own chosen time pace and space. Should one then consider library to be a dinosaur? No!. Patrons of library visit the library to access the resources the library can offer them rather than to own them which might be quite expensive (Adefiya, 1975). Some also use the library because they are familiar with the resources they enjoy using (Simmonds & Andaleeb, 2001). The possibility of finding solution to one’s academic problems and needs may instigate patrons to visit the library (Simmonds & Andaleeb, 2001) for instance, academic staff usually use the library to update knowledge while the students complete their assignments or research works (Simmonds & Andaleeb, 2001).
The use of library can also be influenced due to its quietness and neatness which might be difficult to have elsewhere in the academic environment where everybody will have an their right to say and listen to all sorts of sound especially in the hall of residents where students resides. Academic staffs easily find solace in the library away from the busy lives in the work place, family life and other non-academic obligations. As the saying, ‘all work and no play makes jack a dull boy’; Some visit the library to relax and socialise. The presence of newspapers or magazine stand, educational games, TV set as well as internet facility avails the library users the opportunity to relax, interact and meet new people.
2.2Contemporary library services in Nigerian Academic Libraries
A university library should be able to render effective information services such as lending, referral, microfilming, indexing, abstracting, current awareness, document delivery, photocopying, e-mail, facsimile, bindery, translation consultancy, online database searching, user education, current content listing, technical writing, selective dissemination of information and data processing (Popoola, 2008). Most faculty members in the South-West Nigerian Universities do not have sufficient knowledge of library information products and services that are pertinent to their teaching and research activities (popoola, 2008). Photocopying had the highest patronage by the students with little or no information about the internet services offered by the library which makes them to patronise the cyber cafe (Okeke et al., 2013; Onuoha & Omokoje, 2013).
As reference section bridges the information need of the patrons, it is however discovered that students have poor attitude towards the use of reference section coupled with uncooperative attitude of the staffs there (Okeke et al., 2013; Popoola, 2008). Onuoha & Omokoje (2013) concluded that students are not aware of binding and audiovisual services. Most academic library patrons are not satisfied with the library services (Ogbuiyi & Okpe, 2013; Onuoha & Omokoja, 2013; Okeke et al., 2013; Popoola, 2008).
2.3Meaning of Library 2.0
Social media has been used in the corporate world to strategise and market their brands and to receive feedback from their users and customers. The term “Library 2.0” was coined by Michael Casey on his blog Librarycruch as a direct spin-off of the terms Business 2.0 and Web 2.0 (Maness, 2006). Library 2.0 is a modernized from of library service that reflects a transition within the library world in the way that services are delivered to users. Library 2.0 can also be described as the application of interactive collaborative and multimedia web-based technologies to web-based library services and collections (Maness, 2006).
If the integration of social media and library services due to its interactive nature leads to Library 2.0, then it is worth noting that Social networks are web-based services allowing individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system (boyd & Ellison, 2007). Web 2.0 is both a platform on which innovative technologies have been built and a space where users are as important as the content they upload and share with others (Cormode & Krishnamurthy, 2008). Examples of social media includes wikis, blogs, micro-blogging sites, media sharing sites, social bookmarking sites, as well as social friendship sites.
The essence of library 2.0 is to offer feedback and participation which could easily replace the unidirectional service of the operation of the libraries (Maness, 2006). The librarian use social media in order to be where the users are thereby they can market new services to them (Zoohoorian-Fooladi & Abrizah, 2013). Chu & Nalani-Meulemans (2008) affirmed that by displaying the librarian’s status which could be either online/offline, patron can easily channel their queries through the use of Facebook and MySpace. In a study conducted by Zoohoorian-Fooladi & Abrizah (2013), they discovered that Facebook could be a very good portal for social interaction with library users.
The social media could be used in broadcasting services such as pushing out information, promoting library events or highlighting library resources such as new books, interesting item in existing collection or expertise of library staff and many others Choi (2011). In addition, social media can also be used in engaging dialogue with users such as responding to queries or complaints, providing reference services or readers’ advisory services Choi (2011). It could also offer online resources which include vendors the school has subscribed to.
2.4Why the need to integrate Library 2.0?
The integration of Library 2.0 can never be better than now when we have crop of Net Generation students on our campuses. They are children born in the 1980s and 1990s who spends most of their time devouring entertainment and communication on any mobile devices they can lay their hands on ( Rosen, 2009). Prensky (2001) acknowledged that children and young adults today due to their relationship with technology from birth have an inmate technological competence that can be characterized as multitasking. This might be a reason why most of them are displaying their faces on more than one social medium. The librarian should therefore find means of engaging and educating these kind of children who are full of themselves of finding anything using the search engine but lack the skills in discerning the relevance of truth of what they have found.
2.5 Examples of Social medium that could be integrated into Library 2.0
(a) Social bookmarking tool is a web-based means of storing and organising Universal Resourse Locator (URL). Once a user save a resource, he/she can see the popularity of the source by viewing who else have saved the same link. This affords the user to follow the bookmarks of publicly like-minded users and possibly find additional resources that others do not know about. To librarian, it is an efficient way of organising and sharing web-based material with specific audience. Social bookmarking is a research tool for adding to users’ collection of resources and literature (Manning & Johnson, 2011). For instance, past questions can be bookmarked for patrons. An example of social bookmarking site include delicious
(b) Microblogs are sometimes called abbreviated blogs because it requires user to convey message in fewer characters (100-140) to an established networks of followers and to follow others so that one’s post will reach the ‘subscribed’ audience. For a librarian, the tag feature of microblogs allows content to be searchable and retrievable (Manning & Johnson, 2011). Tagging could act as a repository of ideas on a common theme. An example of microblog is Twitter.
(c) Social Friendship Networks allows users to connect with friends through an account created. An example of this site is Facebook. For a librarian, tools on Facebook which include newsfeed and events make it a promising librarian tool. A page could be created where with the click of ‘like’, information will get to the audience in no time. Tagging of pictures the latest book stock and other resources can be made available to library patrons (Miller & Jensen, 2007). Library staffs can also be tagged with area of expertise so that the patrons can get the right information from them. In addition the event feature can aid the planning of library events.
2.6 Challenges of integrating Library 2.0
Although Library 2.0 came with opportunities for both the librarian and the patrons, there are tints of challenges there in. One of the major challenges of Library 2.0 is the limited time to learn, plan, create (Zoohoorian-Fooladi & Abrizah, 2013; Chu & Du, 2012). Maintenance of any social media platform is in its ability to be updated so as to keep up with time which might be cumbersome (Chu & Du, 2012). Most librarian regard professional and library functions as separate from social media which is why they might not be serious about updating their social presence (Zoohoorian-Fooladi & Abrizah, 2013).However, the findings of Choi (2011) revealed that librarian would feel more comfortable doing work-related social media work if it is officially recognised in their duties.
Another challenge to utilisation of Library 2.0 is the problem of determining which social media platform library patrons might welcome due to continuous evolution of social media (Chu & Du, 2012). Institutional barrier may not allow smooth running of Library 2.0 due to existing technology in the library (Zoohoorian-Fooladi & Abrizah, 2013). The running of Library 2.0 requires constant electricity which might not be available in developing part of the world unless there is a generator. The good news to is that Library 2.0 can be managed on smart phones as most of them come with social media as default.
Conclusion
Dwindling funding, poor attendance and web sites that threatens the role of the library is fast emerging. An innovative way to save the once upon a time magnificent building (library) is when the librarian is interested in the feedback of the services it renders to the clients. This will position the academic library for a change and a better tomorrow. We now live in a world where we ‘port’ to other alternative that have our interest at heart. Social media has been used in the corporate world although tagged Business 2.0 as a veritable means to strategise and market their brands as well as to receive feedback from their clients. Library 2.0 might be cheap but the little wonders it could transform in the world of library might be great.
Recommendations
When humans interact, there will be good thinking and good product would be gotten. Library 2.0 is an innovative way of getting the actors in the library to have bi-directional mode of communication. Hence, the researcher recommends more funding for the academic library in Nigeria as well as to conduct a survey on the major social media platform most of their patrons use in order to know which one that would be integrated into their Library 2.0. In addition, the paper also recommends training of library staff so as to position them as a service provider. In addition, librarians should integrate Library 2.0 as a professional duty for library staffs.
References
Adefidiya, A. (1975). The Library as a Resource. An abridged version of a lecture delivered to a group of teachers of secondary schools and teacher training colleges at the Adeyemi College Campus, Ondo
Agboola, A.T. (2000). Five Decades of Nigerian University Libraries: A Review. Libri, Vol. 50, pp. 280 - 289
boyd, D.M & Ellison, N.B. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History and Scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. Vol. 13(1), 210-230
Choic, C. Is your Library Ready for Social Media Librarian?. Faculty Liaison Librarian. The University of Sydney Library
Chu,Skw and Du, H.S. (2012). Social networking tools for academic libraries. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 45(1).
Cormode, G., & Krishnamurthy, B. (2008). Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. First Monday, 13(6). Retrieved August 5, 2014, from http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2125/1972
Manes, J.M (2006). Library 2.0 Theory: Web 2.0 and its Implications for Libraries. Webology, 3(2)
Manning, S.& Johnson, K.E (2011). The Technology Toolbelt for Teaching. Jossey-Bass
Simmonds, P.L and Andaleeb, S.S. (2001). Usage of Academic Libraries. The role of Service, Quality, Resources and User Chracteristics. Library Trends, Vol. 49(4), pp. 626-634
Solarin-Lawal Esther Opeoluwa (2013). The usage of ICT in Academic Libraries in Nigeria. A case study of Covenant University Library, Ota, Nigeria. Retrieved from http://eprints.covenantuniversity.edu.ng/id/eprints/1654
Okeke, I.E; Lucky, U; Oghenetga; & Nwabu, E.C. (2013). Students’ Attitude towards the use of Reference and Information Service (RIS) in academic Libraries in Nigeria. International Journal of Library and Information Science. Vol. 5(10), pp. 335-341
Popoola, S.O. (2008). Faculty Awareness and use of Library Information Products and Services in Nigerian University. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science. Vol.13(1), pp. 91-102
Wells, J. (1995). The influence of library usage on undergraduate academic success. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 26(2), 121-138
Zoohoorian-Fooladi Niusha and Abrizah, A. (2013). Academic Librarians and their social media presence: a story of motivation and deterrents. Information Development, Vol. 30(2), pp. 159-171