Comments on: Seekin’ An Answer ‘Bout The Commons

By: Don Beagle

Don Beagle — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:11:32 +0000

Steven Bell seems a trifle annoyed by something here, but I’m not quite sure I see exactly what it is. When printed books appeared, the word “library” probably seemed more useful than “Warehouse for Books,” especially when “libraries” developed ancillary services and resources, and became more than book collections. Of course, we could have used instead: “Warehouse for Books that Have Been Catalogued and Classified and Equipped with Reference Desks,” or something of the sort. (Wow, what signage that would require!) “Information Commons” seems a more useful term than “Computer Lab With An Expanding Array of Ancillary Services and Resources, etc.” Because computer labs can exist without those ancillaries, and surveys show students don’t use them the way they use IC’s and LC’s. So why not have a name that distinguishes between that generic computer lab in the basement of the engineering bldg. and what libraries are increasingly providing? As to the difference between “Learning C.” and “Information C.,” Steven seems to have begun answering his own question here, but his concern seems to be that we should feel obliged to take his advice and settle on one or the other, or drop the terms altogether. But why should we, if the names reflect a valid underlying distinction? In the IC/LC user surveys I’ve seen, there’s no evidence of confusion or rejection on the part of students based on these terms, just extraordinary levels of interest and enthusiasm. The nomenclature is already streamlined a bit from early efforts like “Media Union,” etc. But the reality is that there are libraries right now still setting up library-centric IC’s that go beyond generic labs, but primarily help library users cope with the flood of digital resources, and those IC’s seem completely valid, to me at least. But they also seem quite different from collaborative learning centers reflecting multiple co-located services, and what is the problem with using terminology to differentiate them? I do agree that if someone out there is setting up a truly generic computer lab where there’s absolutely “no added value to facilitate learning,” then it would probably be better to simply call that a generic lab.

By: A Commons By Any Other Name … « @ the library

A Commons By Any Other Name … « @ the library — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:11:35 +0000

[...] Seekin’ An Answer ‘Bout The Commons “The learning commons on the other hand had grander visions. The big difference is in “co-located services”. The learning happens at the learning commons because multiple academic support services are located there; tutoring, the writing center, educational technology and others are invited to share space in the learning commons or they have scheduled hours there.” Posted by rhondagonzales Filed in Commons, Buildings, Serendipity, Libraries [...]

By: Open Work Library / The Name Game Continued...

Open Work Library / The Name Game Continued... — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:51:04 +0000

[...] There is a good post in the ACRL Blog: ”Seekin’ An Answer ‘Bout the Commons” concerning the confusion between what is an “Information Commons” vs. “Learning Commons”. If we librarians cannot articulate the difference, how can we expect patrons to comprehend these services. The first comment to the post sums it up for me: [...]

By: Lisa Hinchliffe

Lisa Hinchliffe — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:42:02 +0000

Personally, I wish we’d just call it a library. The tools have changed but – in my mind – the purpose has not.