A very interesting dilemma for sure is explained over at The Fish Wrapper. On a much smaller scale I felt a similar clash/disconnect between my preferred writing format blog/html and the universally accepted format of paper in completing my annual performance review this year.
I formed my ideas for what I would submit using my blog and quite naturally(or absent-mindedly) included links to many of the completed projects. As I moved from blog entry(ies) to a more print friendly media I came to a rather annoying realization that a flat piece of paper is not nearly as communicative as my entries. Not to mention the loss of context when the summary post was read without the supporting posts written throughout the year.
After reading this post I wonder if our students have similar reactions when moving between courses that are rich in Web 2.0 tools/practices and ones that require more traditional approach?
Would it make sense for the university archivists and historians to have a dedicated web server that could store such works publicly but not provide write access thus having a true archive of the work as it was conceived and orginially shared. As Martha says “I am not a librarian”, archivist, etc.. but that on the surface that makes sense to me.
I think I will bring this up at our RefIT group (a weekly meeting of Reference Librarians and Instructional Technologists) to see what ideas come from it. Hopefully our Learning Web 2.0 project will also benefit from this example as it is a concrete example of how Web 2.0 and user created content impacts both of our worlds.
This is a problem that more will face as the educational trend seems to be one that includes more user created content. Particularly in mediums that do not seem to be easily ’shelfable’ as is paper, video tape or dvd, photograph, or work of art.
