My Thoughts On Learning 2.0

Here are a few things I like about Learning 2.0. The process acknowledges that "rigidity breeds failure" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_2.0#References). It has the right focus for success, being the patron. It is a monumental shift to know the techno-royalty are focusing on engaging users at their personal levels of knowledge and need. In reading about Technorati, I was amazed to realize the effort people are putting in behind the scenes to make their platforms come alive in the hands of the neo-techie. I appreciate that. It makes learning a lot more fun and accessible.

However, all of this fun is taking place on my side of the Digital Divide and I feel an appropriate amount of guilt about that. As a librarian, I really have to remember those who would enjoy the Flickr mashups and Technorati tags, but alas have minimal access to the internet, perhaps only at the library and at school.

Another caveat I have learned about in this whole process is the dissolution of organization I have come to know and rely upon. Having written term papers about Harriet Avram and her beloved system of MARC records, I flinch to see the dawn of tags with no authority. How in the world will I really be able to harness the power of these tools while I search for an answer for a patron. Are we really making the Web better, or simply wider, and therefore more shallow? I foresee a future encounter with a patron waiting patiently at the reference desk while I search through endless tags and search boxes grasping for an answer. The old system really is a thing of beauty. I am loathe to abandon it. Even if you say I mustn't abandon it, let's face facts. I have a certain amount of time with a patron. I have to choose a path when I start searching for an answer. And for now the tried and true path is the most reliable one, the path which will put the answer in the patron's hands in the least amount of time.