I would have thought that, in principle, this was
an easy question to resolve - it must be clear
what are the facilities being provided FOR?
Assuming that the library provides computer
facilities to support the students' studies, then
they are for academic use, and non-academic use
can legitimately be barred (though most places
would not do so lightly). It's really a matter of
levels of use/abuse. If there is plenty of
resource, I'd have thought almost anyone would
say some personal use is acceptable, and a good
thing to draw people in. If the workstations are
clogged with people doing personal stuff rather
than academic stuff to the exclusion of those who
want and need to work it would seem perfectly
reasonable to impose blanket bans if self-discipline was insuffficient.
It also depends, of course, on the mechanisms the
tutors are using for courses, but alternatives to
facebook are certainly available for group communication!
I worry that perhaps we may be sometimes too slow
to take appropriate action for fear of appearing
"user-unfriendly". Everything should ultimately
always go back to the mission, aims and
objectives (if you'll forgive the management-speak, but it's true).
At 13:03 01/10/2007, you wrote:
>I agree that this is great to air this
>issue. As a library in FE we have encouraged
>use of web 2.0. We have fora; downloads;
>virtual cafes and use athens DA to ensure equal
>access to all users part time or otherwise
>etc. We have never blocked social sites as we
>call them and teachers use them for lessons
>etc. However we are now in the middle of a
>debate about what to do next. The students
>would spend all day on facebook etc and access
>them in the middle of lessons and stop
>concentrating to update . The library PCs
>could be fully occupied with students "clicking"
>as we call it. Do you say well that is their
>right or do you stop them? We discuss
>appropriate times for different things etc but
>we are ignored. I would be grateful for
>opinions. As for staff they behave responsibly
>as they have work to do and there is peer
>pressure to pull your weight. I can see though
>that it can be abused but it goes down to firm
>management . The issue can be if you have
>analogue leaders who don't know what any of it is
>
>Janet
>Angela Nicholls wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>This is an interesting debate and I am so sorry
>>if my question seems terribly naïve, but how
>>would accessing facebook and other similar
>>sites compromise security more than say,
>>surfing the internet for holidays and registering with such sites?
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> Angela Nicholls
>> Audience Research Executive
>> Teachers TV
>> Direct Line: +44 (0)20 7182 7446
>> Fax: +44 (0)20 7580 3656
>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>>
>> 16-18 Berners Street
>> London W1T 3LN
>> www.teachers.tv
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: UKEIG: the UK eInformation Group
>>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wendy Warr
>>Sent: 01 October 2007 12:41
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: To Every Technology There Is A Season ...[!] [?]
>>
>>Phil,
>>
>>Bandwidth and security are two of the "obvious reasons" that closed
>>organizations such as pharmaceutical companies tend to use for avoiding
>>various Web 2.0 technologies.
>>
>>Wendy
>>Dr. Wendy A. Warr
>>Wendy Warr & Associates
>>6 Berwick Court, Holmes Chapel
>>Cheshire, CW4 7HZ, England
>>Tel./fax +44 (0)1477 533837
>>[log in to unmask] http://www.warr.com
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: UKEIG: the UK eInformation Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>On Behalf Of Phil Bradley
>>Sent: 01 October 2007 12:25
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: To Every Technology There Is A Season ...[!] [?]
>>
>>I'm not really sure what the 'obvious reasons' are, you know. I've just
>>spent a few minutes looking through Facebook groups for this subject
>>area,
>>and found some interesting stuff.
>>
>>Firstly there IS a Facebook group for English Heritage members of staff,
>>which currently only has 14 people in it, but that's a start I suppose.
>>So
>>clearly there's some interest that staff have in being able to talk to
>>each
>>other outside the confines of the EH intranet (presuming you have one).
>>Perhaps one of the 'obvious reasons' is that the EH doesn't want this to
>>happen?
>>
>>Anyway, let's continue... there are groups that cover English history,
>>and
>>there are also local/regional groups. Presumably EH doesn't want staff
>>getting involved in discussions on subjects like this? Presumably they
>>feel
>>that it's better that their staff expertise isn't shared in a way that's
>>helpful to people? Perhaps they want to try and control the
>>conversations?
>>
>>How about the National Trust - not exactly the same type of organization
>>I'll agree, but a close enough match. There's the group "I'm a proud
>>member
>>of the National Trust and I don't yet draw a pension" which currently
>>has
>>over 200 members, 161 photographs, discussions and 50+ wall postings.
>>Seems
>>to be quite lively, and a really good way to share information back and
>>forth. Wouldn't it be nice if there was such a group for English
>>Heritage,
>>where staff could get involved, show their interest, enthusiasm and
>>knowledge for their subject, and help their members? Apparently not.
>>
>>There's a "National Trust working holidays" group with 94 members,
>>photographs and discussions. Not forgetting the "I work for the National
>>Trust" group with 50+ members, with some interesting conversations
>>taking
>>place. There's a small student study group about the NT as well. Then we
>>have the "National Trust staff past and present" group, and the
>>"National Trust Working Holiday - Brecon 2007" group. In fact, I found
>>another 4 groups before I got bored.
>>Clearly there is a real interest - both in the organization itself and
>>its
>>subject coverage, and I can't believe that there isn't for the English
>>Heritage. I'm not convinced the "obvious reasons" actually exist - what
>>I
>>see is that English Heritage isn't interested in having conversations
>>with
>>members outside of their website, that they're not encouraging their
>>staff
>>to get involved with subjects of interest where they could really make a
>>difference.
>>I assume what you might mean by "obvious reasons" are that staff might
>>spend
>>time using Facebook, when they should be doing other things. If that's
>>the
>>case, the obvious way of looking at that is to assume that the
>>organization
>>don't actually trust their staff to use such resources sensibly. Perhaps
>>they ought not allow them access to computers at all in that case?
>>Moreover,
>>surely it's the job of everyone in an organization to get involved, to
>>learn
>>and develop? Apparently not, if you're in English Heritage. Surely as an
>>organization it should want to foster interest in the organisation
>>itself,
>>and for it's subject coverage? But if your organization prevents you
>>doing
>>that, clearly that isn't actually the case. Surely an organization
>>should
>>want to help educate, inform, entertain and involve members of the
>>public?
>>In the case of English Heritage, apparently not.
>>
>>And that's really sad. Because the "obvious reasons" actually aren't
>>obvious
>>reasons at all. What a ban like this is actually saying is that English
>>Heritage doesn't trust its staff, isn't interested in getting involved
>>in
>>conversations with the very people it needs to engage with, and quite
>>simply
>>just doesn't care.
>>Suddenly those "obvious reasons" seem a bit silly to me.
>>Phil.
>>
>>Internet Trainer, Web designer, SEO, Speaker, Author
>>Visit http://www.philb.com for free articles on many aspects of the
>>Internet.
>>My weblogs: http://www.philbradley.typepad.com/
>>*** How to use Web 2.0 in your library is now available ***
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: UKEIG: the UK eInformation Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>On
>>Behalf Of SIMS, Diana
>>Some employers prevent their staff from accessing Facebook, as ours does
>>and for obvious reasons!
>>
>>Diana Sims
>>Librarian
>>English Heritage
>>National Monuments Record
>>Kemble Drive
>>Swindon
>>SN2 2GZ
>>
>>01793 414632
>>[log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>>Ever been inspired by a great book? Get
>>involved in our Great Books survey and let us
>>know your favourite: visit www.teachers.tv/greatbooks
>>
>>Think before you print. Consider the
>>environment and only print emails when really necessary.
>>
>>This email and any attached files may contain
>>views or opinions which, unless specifically
>>stated, do not necessarily represent those of
>>Teachers TV, Educational Digital Management
>>Ltd, or EducationDigital Ltd. This email and
>>any attached files are confidential and
>>intended solely for the use of the individual
>>or entity to which they are addressed. If you
>>have received this email in error, please notify us immediately.
>>
>
>
>--
>Janet Waters
>Library Manager
>Totton College
>023 80 874 862
Andy Dawson
MSc Programme Director, Director of International Relations and Projects
School of Library, Archive & Information Studies
University College London,Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT
0207-679-2396 (direct), 0207-679-7204 (dept), 0207-383-0557 (fax)
[log in to unmask] - http://www.ucl.ac.uk/slais/andy-dawson/
|