Public Libraries Seminar Discussion #10: Technology & Digital Literacy
19 November 2024
“Library workers make technology more accessible for every person of every age in our communities, including students, jobseekers, and the millions of Americans who still lack broadband access and skills,” said PLA President Melanie Huggins. “The new survey report details how our nation’s public libraries serve as critical infrastructure for bridging digital divides, empowering lifelong learning, and advancing economic recovery” (PLA, 2021).
This week's readings discuss technology and artificial intelligence in the library as our new topics. Present technology use in the library can be further broken down into the technology librarians use to do their job and the technology we offer to our patrons to search for their goals- information and/or reading material. Librarians use much technology to do their jobs including:
• the present-day cataloging of resources
• communication with others- emailing and video conferencing
• library website presentation and development
• bookkeeping all materials- books, DVDs, CDs, games, etc.
• programs for reviewing new book and material purchases.
Patrons use technology as:
• the present-day card catalog
• to explore for information- internet access
• to read, and/or view library materials
• to improve technology abilities for job performance- Microsoft Word, Excel, Power Point, and Access and GED preparation.
“Machine learning and AI techniques have already replaced deterministic programs: Search, music, fitness, cruise control” (Lankes, 2024). Internet searching (Google) is already using artificial intelligence (AI). Udell in “The World of AI” American Libraries (2024) interviews five technology experts, including librarians, who are beginning to use generative AI at their institutions. It is a very comprehensive article that you need to read. The five interviewees discuss “how AI is being used in libraries, what ethical concerns have emerged, and how libraries can educate their communities on navigating these powerful technologies” (Udell, 2024, March 1). Does your library use AI in any ways? Do any patrons come in and ask for access to or want instruction on ChatGPT? Has your library downloaded the free version of ChatGPT to any of your libraries’ computers so it is available to your patrons?
This week’s two questions are as follows:
1) For each of these questions, choose a library- one that you work at or one that you frequent. Review the librarian’s job using technology and note how your librarian uses technology for her/him to do his job and all aspects of the job. What tasks do they use technology for and what technology programs do they use?
2) What is your library’s present use of AI? If they don’t have present usage of AI what is their current philosophy on presenting/using AI in their library today and in the future?
Honestly, I would be more surprised if there was any modern library position, capital-L Librarian or no, that didn't hinge upon some sort of digital software to perform their job. As far as I know, quite literally the only formal, paid position in a public library that has no exposure to technology are pages—even then, they still need a computer to access their email and administrative information. Outside of volunteers, the penetration of digital technology into every aspect of library operations is total and likely impossible to fully reverse.
At CRRL, there are two big software platforms serving as the arbiters of productivity: Google's Workspace suite of office software, and SirsiDynix's Horizon 7.5.6 integrated library system. Google's enterprise is the backbone of operations in the exact ways one would expect—creating documents and presentations that don't require specialized software, storing files, facilitating communication through email and teleconferencing, etc.—so there's nothing notable to really elaborate on. Horizon, meanwhile, is on the opposite end of the spectrum, not least in part due to its age, having been used in the system since 2001. The Windows 95-looking design, the organization resembling a computer with its own suite of software, the strict and obtuse separation between finding items and checking things in and out and other functions—using Horizon well demands a literacy and continued precision that would make modern UX designers recoil in disgust. I have zero familiarity with any other ILSes to compare how much disgust would be exhibited, but if things go to plan I probably will have at least one new point of comparison shortly after this semester is over.
As for AI... the only official mention of AI that I've seen is a short snippet in the current strategic plan's executive summary. It posits "the capture of 'big data' supported by artificial intelligence" as one of the possible avenues to improve the efficiency of CRRL's digital platforms—within a larger goal of preemptively moving towards envisioning itself as a "library of the future" (2022, p. 7). I'm hoping the radio silence means admin have found evidence disabusing them of this notion, because if ChatGPT or any other generative AI software gets plopped into on our plates for whatever reason, I will try my best to never use it.
Even disregarding the many, many harmful effects generative AI has had on education (Bastani et al., 2024) and energy overconsumption (Crawford, 2024) and who knows how many different topics, its effects are going to grow from the trickle it might have been on the wider book industry to a stream. During my internship this semester, I had the opportunity to sit in on a meeting of head collections librarians around the DMV, where many grievances at hoopla owner Midwest were aired for allowing AI-generated content on its platform that was checked out by patrons. Standards for physically published books have always maintained reliable guardrails, at least for fiction, but these are likely breaking down as well: a few weeks back, the adult collection development manager noticed a thriller that was AI-generated and spit-shined by its author had made it into the system—which had been selected from an Ingram release calendar, no less. If some of our most "trusted" (that meeting really put some air quotes around the notion of vendor trust, lol) platforms are lowering their standards ways that will reflect on our libraries, I am very doubtful that our own usage of generative AI will have more benefit than harm.
References
Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2024). Generative AI can harm learning (SSRN Scholarly Paper 4895486). Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4895486
Central Rappahannock Regional Library. (2022). Strategic plan 2022-2027. https://www.librarypoint.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/60/2023/03/Strategic-Plan-1.pdf
Crawford, K. (2024). Generative AI’s environmental costs are soaring—And mostly secret. Nature, 626(8000), 693–693. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00478-x
Wilson, C. (2024, September 3). AI worse than humans in every way at summarising information, government trial finds. Crikey. https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/09/03/ai-worse-summarising-information-humans-government-trial/