I heart 2.0. Most of what I did in my classroom for my entire teaching career has been considered to be 2.0 mentality of teaching. Now, as I transition into a library, I can't wait to apply technology and a 2.0 mentality to my new library as a way to introduce students to library and information skills.
A public school library is different than a university library or a public library. 2.0 means different things at each of these places. For a higher institution, a library is generally a place for research. My university library for my BA didn't contain fiction at all. That was all housed in the city's public library, for which your student ID was your library card. And the public library didn't contain any research material. So obviously, circulation at the university library was low, VERY low. Nobody wants to haul home reference books that weigh a million pounds. In an elementary library, the books are mainly fiction or even nonfiction for enjoyment. So, library 2.0 is easier to introduce on the basic understanding at the university or secondary education level, with librarian chatting, online sharing of resources, etc. At the elementary level, most of the online chatting would be between the librarian and teachers, and perhaps the older students, but for library 2.0's sake, the students could participate through webcams for morning announcements, and pre-selected sites for the students.
Question: Is searching for a book from home on the school's library site considered to be 2.0?
Idea to ponder:
I think this whole library 2.0 thing is actually library 3.0. Wasn't 2.0 when they let patrons begin searching for their own books?