“The Emerging Youth Literacy Landscape of Joy” -Dr. Anthony Bernier (San Jose State University)
New Youth Literacies
- state of current research
- research shifted from what young people knew to how they knew it
- young people learn bibliographic skills differently from adults
- as a result, pedagogy itself must become more flexible
- ethnographic research can help us
- gaps in research
- students are reduced to one-dimensional themes
- information seeking is individual
- games structure and play can inform us about youth information seeking
- young people are viewed only as information consumers
- libraries need to be asking why questions about young people information seeking choices
- new paths for research
- consider the daily life of young people
- email is now just a quaint way to communicate with old people
- New Youth Literacy – young people as literacy producers
- fugitive literacy produced in small lots, non-sequential, and non-serial; using all forms of media – ephemera
- Berkeley High School Slang Dictionary, 2002
- Information futures and young people
- emerging technologies for education – The Horizon Report 2006 Edition – collaboration and social computing needs to be embraced by university libraries – IM reference, Flickr, Skype, pod/webcasting, etc.
- future challenges
- intellectual property
- continuing information literacy skills
- technical support
“A Sensible Approach to New Technologies in Libraries: How do you work Library 2.0 into your 1.5 library with your 1.23 staff and your .98 patrons?” – Jessamyn West
- It isn’t about being expert on the latest and greatest, it’s about being flexible enough to learn the technologies you and your patrons use.
- Smart people read the manual – knowing how to use tools to solve your problems is almost the same as solving them on your own.
- In the end, it’s what you want out of your computer.
- Web 2.0: “Your cats have profiles on Catster.”
- Library 2.0 is a service philosophy: being willing to try new things and constantly evaluating your services – look outside the library world to find solutions to internal problems – the Read/Write Web
- Librarian 2.0: not being the bottleneck between patrons and the information they want
- Email is for talking to your colleagues.
- Technocracy lives in chat.
- “Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.” — so do our users
- “Blogs are like courseware, only easy to use.”
- “Pew reports are like crack to librarians.”
- It doesn’t matter if you think Wikipedia is good or bad. The reality is that’s where the eyeballs are.
- Open APIs allow people to do nerdy type of stuff – mashups turn nifty things into tools you use for work.
- People who have broadband connections are the ones interacting with the internet, and web-based tools are being created for them, not for dialup people.
I really liked this talk. Jessamyn is an engaging speaker.
- “born digital people”
- Match the tool to the job – you can learn how to use them, so the question is do you need it?
- How does Web 2.0 effect scholarship? Sort of is the original vision of what the web would be – everyone is a publisher and information is shared freely.
- What is 2.0 for librarians?
- web as platform
- radical openness: open source, open standards (API, etc.)
- flattened hierarchy
- user focused
- micro-content: blog post as unit of content; atomization of content
- Web 1.0 is a framework based on the print world – the NetGens don’t need them
Web 2.0 that enhances library stuff
- Social bookmarks can be constantly evolving bibliographies.
- Blogs are a platform for sharing scholarly ideas that are not developed as a part of complex papers or monographs, and they allow for more immediate discourse.
- Networked books (Library Journal article about the social book) – how do they effect our ideas of authorship when they can be created and contributed to by anonymous writers via wikis and other similar tools? See Lawrence Lessig’s book Code. Does canon mean anything anymore?
- Peer review – can it be replaced by real-time peer review through comments and/or wiki edits? “open peer review”
- Open data – using distributed computing networks to crunch numbers – more than just searching for aliens. Link to the raw data from the online journal article. Libraries could/should be the server repositories.
Maybe we should be listening to our patrons to find out where information is going. Maybe Wikipedia is the future. Instead of saying that our databases are like the Reader’s Guide, we should be saying they’re like Wikipedia, only created by known scholars and proven to be authoritative.
updated to fix the tweaky code — didn’t have time to do it until now — sorry!