After the post, Fiona Bradley wrote a related one saying rather wisely that there is no way that we can learn everything in library school, and that it doesn’t matter because “librarianship is the ultimate extensible profession.” We have the skills for lifelong learning. She says in her post to go out and “make your own learning.” I love this sentiment, and it is getting easier all the time.

Education is noticeably changing. It is becoming less centralized. People with initiative can gain new skills or get a very good (though perhaps not credentialed) education for free or cheap. People who want to improve their skills can brush up or take a class any number of ways online or in person. There are a wide variety of tools available to get those skills in things like event planning or graphic design.

You can learn about entrepreneurship and innovation by watching lectures (like the one above about change and fear) from Stanford’s eCorner. You can learn how to code the fun and easy way with CodeAcademy or learn Python at the Kahn Academy. You can learn how to host a conference or basic graphic design from SkillShare.

With the vast amount of content available, instead of finding a teacher you could create a learning community on a service like Google+ and design lessons that center around shared readings and videos and host discussions via text or video chat.

Anne Murphy Paul at a Time Magazine blog says that projects like these are “ushering in a new golden age of the autodidact: the self-taught man or woman.” I tend to agree with her. Learning is not merely going to be students passively receiving knowledge from teachers. It will be a proactive pursuit for people who are curious and want knowledge that will benefit them either for personal growth or additional job skills. As librarians we are the “ultimate extensible profession.” We can learn graphic design if we want to. But are there also ways for us to help our students and users learn outside of the classroom? Can we somehow connect them with resources like those mentioned above? Can we facilitate peer to peer learning among students and community members who want to share their expertise? How can we create more opportunities for our community members to make their own learning?

image from Ars Electronica on Flickr

A study was recently published in Science Magazine called Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips. It concluded that because of the ever present access to information via the web people are remembering less. The Ars Technica summary says “experiments suggest that people expect computerized information to be continuously available, and actually remember less when they know they’ll have access to it later. We also seem to remember where we can find information instead of the information itself.”

I have heard students say things like “I don’t have to know that, Google knows it for me.” It seems that we are increasingly outsourcing parts of memory to Google and the web. This is definitely a shift in how our minds work and how we think about information. What then, are the implications for information literacy and how we talk about accessing and recalling information?

For one thing our thinking about information is becoming increasingly meta. Instead of remembering actual information we remember where it was located. We no longer need to know as many facts since connectivity is seemingly ubiquitous now and we can access collective knowledge via the web with devices that are in our pocket. We now just remember bits and pieces of an article that we read, but we can remember who tweeted it or which email account it was sent to, and then access it again when we need it.

Is depending on the web for our memories a bad thing then? People have made arguments in the past against technologies ruining our memories. In Plato’s Phaedrus, Socrates depicts the new technology of writing as a device that will ruin the memories of it’s users:

“ this discovery of yours [writing] will create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves. The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, and you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth; they will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be tiresome company, having the show of wisdom without the reality.”

It seems that this did not happen, in fact writing was a great technology for spreading ideas across time and great distances. But what are some of the possible implications of outsourcing our memories to the web, and how can we talk with students about them?

Vermont landscape as opposed to information landscape (photo by Barb and Dean on Flickr)

The library doesn’t have everything. I know that for some things the web is way better. Like current information for example. While I was riding the bus the other day, I saw a number of police cars and flares out on the road near the Montpelier exit. I immediately searched “Montpelier” on Twitter and found out within a matter of seconds that a tractor/trailer had jackknifed and had the freeway closed. The web does current information very well. And the web has very different places to go. Twitter does some things best. Google does search pretty well. Yelp is great for recommendations of businesses.

The library does scholarly, reliable information well. You can get millions of hits on the web. With libraries you surely get less, but sometimes less is more. The resources within a library are often tailored to a community’s needs. The resources are curated and vetted for a specific group of people and often it is stuff you cannot freely get on the web. And in this age of information overload, sometimes a smaller pool of really quality information is just what we need.

When talking to students I don’t tell them that the library is the only place they should go for information. I’d be doing them a disservice. I talk instead about the idea of an information landscape. The library is just one piece of that landscape that also includes the web, and TV and newspapers and their friends and a lot of other stuff. The library can be a really useful piece of that landscape though, especially for the academic work they’re doing. As information users we need to choose the places we go for information based on their strengths and weaknesses. And the library does quality like few others.

I have been in my apartment for almost two months now, but have just not pulled the trigger on getting the internets. Mainly because the reasonable fiber connection I wanted did not yet run to my part of town. This angered me a bit so I have been using the web at coffee shops, the laundromat and at work to get my fix.

I can’t say I do not miss it at home, but I do think that it has been good for me not having the web around all the time. I have had more time to concentrate on some book reading. Moreover, I have been able to do more reflection and writing (not blogging though). I get time to slow down and think instead of watching TV on hulu or tripping from link to link on blog posts.

That being said, I need to get my home wired soon. I am starting to go through withdrawals.

There has been a lot of discussion lately about the effects of the interweb on reading.  Nicholas Carr and his fascinating article, “Is Google Making us Stoopid?,” brought up the idea that Google and the nature of the internet in general is making it more and more difficult to thoughtfully read books and longer texts.  The typical internet experience is made up of little kernels of information plucked from different locations, allowing you to create your own whole.  This is in opposition to the previous model where an expert writes his own coherent view of a certain topic and you get one view in its entirety.  These are two very different ways of thinking, as well as two very different ways of reading.

Another article, “Literacy Debate – Online, R U Really Reading?” by Mokoto Rich asks us if this new type of internet reading is an enemy of traditional reading or if it too should be respected as another type of literacy.  It is fascinating to hear how one of the children in the article, Nadia, does read, but instead of books it is fan fiction. These are stories produced by regular people who can have the story go whatever direction they want.  Nadia even writes her own story about a person who dies and is reincarnated as a half cat half human.  It is instances like this in which the internet really amazes me.

I am of the opinion that this sort of literacy is equally as valid as traditional book literacy.  In Nadia’s case, she is reading other people’s work, engaging with the material, and inspired to create her own.  This is literacy at its finest.  But what I have come to realize is there are all different sorts of literacy.  There is the basic literacy level where you gain knowledge of reading, grammar, spelling and can understand sentences.  But from there there are countless types of specialized literacies.  Being able to read a legal brief, a medical chart, or a philosophical tome aren’t things that many of us have to do unless we work in one of those professions, but they still all constitute different modes of literacy.  My point is that you can be literate in only the things that are necessary for you, your career and your interests.

I would argue, though, that in order to be a well rounded individual in this day and age one needs to have in some measure the two diametrically opposed types of literacy: web reading and book reading.  The web is so ubiquitous that there is no escaping it.  Even print newspapers refer you to their online content.  This is not anything groundbreaking but, the internet is shaping our culture, and if people want to be a part of that culture they need to know how to get information from the web and understand it.  A person is not engaged in society if they shun the web.

On the other hand, those who spend all their time on the internet reading blogs and social networking are missing out on a big part of humanity as well.  No matter how many wikipedia articles, blog posts, or sparknotes, you read about The Odyssey you will still never capture the same feeling as actually reading it.  You will not be able to understand Odysseus’ unbounded joy when he again sees his beloved Ithaca.  So much of our culture and knowledge is contained in books.  You can get much of this knowledge from the web, but it will be very superficial.  You will not have the same depth of understanding you would get from reading a book.  Thus, being able to sit down, concentrate, and read in depth books will continue to be a desirable skill.

Therefore, some degree of literacy is necessary to succeed in life, such as the ability to read and write.  It is not necessary though to be able to sort through web pages (John McCain has his wife do it).  It also isn’t necessary to read books or even long articles.  Even though neither of these things is necessary, I believe that they are still both essential to live a full and flourishing human life.

My last post was about how much I enjoy having online tools to further my education. I do not believe though, that these tools could take the place of the learning I do in real life. The students in this article simply did not want to get up for an 8am class (I remember how hard it was), but learning in the physical classroom cannot easily replace learning on the web.

With the web you can either watch the lecture or not. Being in the classroom is much more engaging. You can react, ask questions, and take personal notes (less likely if you can just refer back to the video lecture). Notes make the experience more personal. You make the material your own when you put it in words you can understand. And if there is any discussion portion to the class, then you are missing a lot of valuable interactions.

Web-learning and distance education are great. I think they partner well with the classroom, but it seems to me that it is difficult to completely replace classroom learning. I could be wrong. Can students thrive in an online only environment?

If you want to learn a new skill, the web could be an invaluable tool. I found the tutorial for this button at Free Adobe Photoshop Tutorials. But you can learn lots of other DIY stuff as well. The web as learning tool…I really like that.