Skip to content

Category: Libraries and Librarians

College Students’ Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources

OCLC has re-examined the famous perceptions report data in order to find out what college students think.

Overall, respondents have positive, if outdated, views of the ““Library.”” Younger respondents, teenagers and young adults, do not express positive associations as frequently. These findings, and more, are valuable insights for anyone seeking to know more about the library usage and perceptions of college students and young people.

You can download the 100-page PDF report here, or go to the information page for more access options.

Comments closed

Privacy Please?

Privacy. In theory, I’m all for it. In theory I would like to think that people shouldn’t be keeping tabs on me. In theory I would think I shouldn’t be keeping tabs on other people. And there are a lot of librarians who have adopted privacy as one of the primary concerns of their services. (There’s rather a thought-provoking piece over at Library Juice on the topic.) But please don’t lynch me when I confess that there are some aspects of privacy that I just can’t get worked up about.

For example, this morning I heard a piece on NPR that basically said that if you’re driving a car built in the last 5 years there’s a really good chance that it has a tracking device or an “event recorder” built into it. As I listened to the interviewer and interviewee discuss how this violates personal privacy, I found myself unable to care whether people knew what speed I’d been going when I crashed, or how many miles my average trip was. “But that’s just aggregate data,” I told myself, “What if I knew that they could plot my trips, or pinpoint my location at any time.” Just then, the reporter said that in some cases, this would be possible. And still, I had a hard time caring. I mean, I care. And I think people should know when they are transmitting this type of information. And I think they should be able to opt out. But in my head, those are slightly different issues.

Maybe it’s because I’ve gotten used to the idea that cookies, IP address tracking, and referrers online can pretty much guarantee that whoever wants to can figure out exactly what I do online at all times. Maybe it’s because I’m too young and naive to realize what evil could be done to me if people know where my car has gone, or (to bring this to the library) what books I check out, or articles I read.

But with all this privacy talk circulating, it was really good to read Paul Miller’s take on it. Up until that point, I’d thought I really must be stupid because everybody else knew privacy was the most important thing about libraries.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think that privacy isn’t important. I think it’s very important. But I think that we need to stop assuming that our users would run screaming from the idea that we could track how often they stop in to the library, or log in to our databases from off campus, or search for books rather than articles, or anything like that. Some of them, many perhaps, wouldn’t care. And we could learn a lot from them. What if we had varying levels of privacy and let the users choose? What if we could use this type of tracking to build recommender systems into our databases? The possibilities are endless. And as long as we provided an easy opt-out option, I don’t see the harm.

But then, I don’t see the harm of a transmitter in my car (if I ever buy a new enough one). So maybe I’m not a good judge.

1 Comment

Radical Trust


Ever since Computers in Libraries this spring, people have been talking a lot about Darlene Fitcher’s “Radical Trust” concept. Stephen asks questions like

Are we comfortable with users tagging our MARC records? Can they add post-it note and comments to MARC? Are comments and user recommendations OK with us? Moderated or unmoderated? (Don’t be so fast – Are Amazon, Borders and B&N moderated?)

and

Why does Amazon work as an experience? Can libraries trust their users enough to safely share personal information to create a user recommendation experience like Amazon?

to get us thinking about radical trust. These questions and their kin are exactly the kind of questions we should be answering for ourselves. The answer doesn’t always have to be change. But if we don’t ask the questions and experiment with the ideas they present, how will we ever know if they were the right questions? And the best part is, exploring these questions can never hurt anybody. We aren’t committing to anything or throwing out millions of hours of work. We’re asking questions and thinking about the answers and maybe piloting and experimenting a little. But just because we don’t like one idea or care for one of the questions doesn’t mean that we’re exempt from asking them. That’ll never get us anywhere.

And in the midst of a very busy blog weekend (Wow, bibliobloggers were prolific this weekend!), John Blyberg wrote a fabulous essay called “More Than Just Faith: Radical Trust.” I highly recommend reading it and considering its implications. Two key points emerge from his essay: experimentation is necessary and good, but indiscriminate experimentation isn’t. He says:

What about the risk that your department could turn into a lunatic’s workshop? That’s not a bad concern. Innovation has always been about harnessing creativity to address a need or desire. By brainstorming effectively as a group, you can be selective about what you pursue so that energy is directed properly. What you want, what you should be striving for is focused creativity. This means using planning, communication, and agreement as the perimeter of your experimentation. Inter-organizational collaboration is a useful tact here as well.

But I think that part of radical trust is trusting ourselves. We need to understand that we can ask “crazy” or “out there” questions without ruining our credibility as librarians within our institutions. Too many people worry that if you ask questions about tagging MARC records, you actually want to implement it NOW and label all detractors as luddites and control-freaks. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. We are perfectly within our rights to ask questions and then not end up implementing those ideas. We are NOT within our rights to shut up and not ask the questions in the first place.

Comments closed