30 January 2004
An extract of some essentials from my "Thinking about the Information Commons" log file (http://home.wlu.edu/~blackmerh/meta/infocommons.html 16 September 2003-present), including both my own words and sentiments [rearranged from their chronological order], and some trenchant quotations from others' writings
From Larry Lessig's The Future of Ideas:
"Information Commons" is both a misnomer and a tarbaby. I find the term "digital scholarship" much more successful as a description of the objective of a reformulation of library space and services: the work of scholars (that is, teachers and learners) takes place in multiple media, which are now
what are peer institutions doing to support digital scholarship?and not ?how have peer institutions implemented Information Commonses?
===
Obviously, an "Information Commons" has to be more than a physical facility, and is not just a rearrangement of the library's floor plan; it has to fit into the needs and realities of the institution, and provide resources and services (infrastructure and technical support) that is both needed and wanted by professors and students alike. It's not physical facilities that should be our main concern, but information services. We're building an environment to support and facilitate what our users need and want.
An Information Commons model that thinks FIRST about space and SECOND about Information (what it is and does, who needs/uses what, how it's at the very core of teaching and learning) ...is fated to obsolescence.
To be a truly effective and synergetic use of resources, an Information Commons needs to be an integral part of a broader strategy to integrate electronic resources into teaching and learning --or else it will be just a collection of rapidly-obsolescing and little-used hardware and software, chosen to fill imagined needs.
Changing the library's role in teaching and learning is uphill all the way. Hardly anybody seems to want to entertain fundamental changes in functions or recognize that the tried-and-true territorial definitions of responsibility are dysfunctional in the face of digital proliferation and ubiquity.
It's not that traditional library or IT functions can be given up. Rather, we must find ways to add new services and create new synergies, building upon the existing organizations. Sometimes the outward appearances may change as responsibilities are redirected: just as reference desks sprouted computer monitors a decade ago, and help desks took on new duties as networks expanded, the demand for database support and multimedia integration requires that librarians and IT staff learn about each other's specialties and draw upon each other's strengths to create the environments --physical and virtual, centralized and distributed-- that users need.
===
I think it's clear that we-the-library need to develop and support some services that we don't presently do much with, and that the means to accomplish those augmentations of our role require that we have (hire, get, develop, etc.) expertise that we lack at present. Some of that expertise is available (or nascent) in the ITL; some requires training and skills not presently available at W&L; some may be a matter of reorganizing what we do as individuals and as an organization; and some will emerge as faculty are educated about the potentials of various digital technologies and start to develop their own projects.
We need to be able to create and manage Web services in the library --to direct the evolution of our digital resources. And we need to be able to offer support to faculty and students who are exploring and using those digital media for scholarly and pedagogical purposes.
===
I imagine that the library COULD become the center of extra-departmental learning and scholarship activities, by housing and hosting the services and resources that our users need OUTSIDE of (and in addition to) what their courses require. That's partly a matter of COLLECTION development (building and making accessible resources that aren't department/discipline-defined --and helping people develop the means to manage their own information universes is an obvious missing piece), partly a matter of devising and providing support for the broad spectrum of work people need and want to do with Information in many media, and partly a matter of creating a physical environment that people choose to be in for a broad variety of purposes --not just to "study" or "do research".
===