Abstract:
The topic of Web 2.0 has been studied several times within the field of library science, but there are several areas that warrant additional research: (a) examining definition of Web 2.0; and (b) providing baseline descriptive data for Web 2.0 usage; and (c) addressing psychometric concerns with measures of self-efficacy of Web 2.0; and (d) investigating the predictive quality of Web 2.0 self-efficacy towards Web 2.0 use within the aforementioned parameters for both Academic Library Association Accredited graduate library school students (students) and academic librarians (librarians) at institutions with Academic Library Association Accredited graduate library schools. These concerns formed the basis of this dissertation research. Data were collected from two populations: ALA accredited graduate library school students at all the ALA accredited graduate library school students (N = 6232), and academic librarians from institutions with ALA accredited graduate library schools (N = 2601). This research resulted in the creation of a Web 2.0 definition instrument, a Web 2.0 usage instrument, and 7 Web 2.0 self-efficacy tool instruments. Each instrument extracts information about Web 2.0 as it pertains to library science. Since Web 2.0 is such a broad topic, seven of the Web 2.0 tools were chosen for concentration within this research. Overall results from definition indicate that the strongest agreement toward definition of Web 2.0 was the term "information sharing", whereas librarians felt that "user-centered-web" was a more suitable definition, and students felt that "information sharing" was a more suitable definition for Web 2.0. Overall Web 2.0 was being used among the library science population (at least 1 hour per week for social networking). With regard to self-efficacy toward Web 2.0, students mean self-efficacy items ranged from 2.35 (understanding of rss validation), to 4.49 (understanding why people use social networking sites), whereas librarians mean self-efficacy items ranged from 2.47 (ability to validate rss) to 4.35 (understanding of why people use wikis). Results showed that Web 2.0 self efficacy was not a predictor of Web 2.0 usage. Finally, this research provided baseline data for future research in Web 2.0 for library science. The results suggest that library science educators and library science practitioners may want to consider how Web 2.0 can be incorporated into library science.
