 |
 |
>The general consensus around here seems to be even the minimal records tend to have useful information, more so than if Google was just repeating the catalog entry. What bothers me here is that this isn't a "good enough" situation. This isn't so-so information in an information poor environment. The library has the book in all its glory, right there on the shelf ready for the deepest, truest engagement. As a former educator (okay, a TA, but I cared!), I believe that learning often requires some effort—not involves but requires. Engaging with something you don't know or understand is hard. Giving students tools is good. But if you give them a tool simultaneously super-easy and deeply deficient, too many will choose it over harder, better tools. (Of course, getting a book off a shelf didn't *used* to seem like hard work.) At some point, schools and libraries should promote tools that are "good for you" over ones that aren't. I don't want to overdo this. I built LibraryThing. I'm the farthest thing from anti-web. But I balk at pushing empty Google Book Search pages on students who could get off their rear ends and hold the book in their hands two minutes later. Tim