I
agree with Professor Adams that “the lack of familiarity with the broad
spectrum of video games may…present a problem…” for some libraries, but I give credit
to the libraries that explore the possibilities and potential of gaming by offering
video games as part of their collection or programming, or even using them to
assist in IL programs. The article describing the Champlain College
Library’s IL project was a great example of including users in library
services, as well as demonstrating the efforts of librarians to think
creatively. Just discovering that the
students did not understand what the librarians meant by “information literacy”
should be seen as a huge lesson in itself.
The idea that “video games have the
potential to change the landscape of education as we know it” seems inevitable
because once gamers become more ubiquitous and start developing such programs
and applications, then gaming is sure to become more mainstream in curricula (Shaffer
et al.). I suspect many, many students visit Howard
Rheingold’s Second Life Office!
In short, I have to be in favor of any library
service that supports the purposes of education, socialization, and
democratization —as Professor Adams suggests.
I am not a gamer—although I spent hours babysitting my nephew while he
played Super Mario Bros. (love the music), but I have to say that virtual
worlds intrigue me, especially the potential for creating one’s own story. And there is certainly nothing more hysterical
than watching middle-aged librarians play Wii in Meeting Two before we open!
Adams, Suellen. “The Case for
Video Games in Libraries.”
Cohen, Sarah Faye, et al.
“Percolating the Power of Play.”
Rheingold, Howard. “A (Re)slice of Life Online, Part Four:
Howard’s Second Life Office.”
Shaffer, David Williamson, et al.
“Video Games and the Future of Learning.”
