‘Bottom-Up Digitalisation’ of Cultural Resources – The Example of the Silesian Digital Library and Social Digitalisation Workshops.
Organisational, Educational and Integration Aspects
Michał SZYSZKA
WSB University, Dąbrowa Górnicza, Poland mszyszka@wsb.edu.pl
Abstract
Nowadays, in the era of electronic communication, digitalisation and making resources available online are one of the key challenges for cultural institutions. Meeting the changing expectations and needs of readers is another important task for libraries. The aim of the article is to present and critically analyse one of the successful strategies pursued by traditional cultural institutions in order to adapt to the changing reality: the operation of the Silesian Digital Library and social digitalisation workshops on gathering and sharing resources – books, magazines, maps, documents, etc. – online. The article is a case study. The discussion covers the organisational aspects of the library as a self-organising and educational cluster organisation (from its inception in 2007 until 2019), as well as integration aspects of bottom-up digitalisation activity, which creates new opportunities in the form of a volunteer initiative and activation of the elderly and people with disabilities. The article shows that the model of operation of the Silesian Digital Library and social digitalisation workshops is in line with contemporary trends of participatory culture, open culture, and the paradigm of social inclusion and empowerment. A digital medium, which the library is, together with the infrastructure created, enables networking and the nurturing of partnerships between institutions, building resources, sharing the cultural heritage of the region and strengthening activity and promoting participation in social life through the implementation of new strategies of management.
Keywords:
Silesian Digital Library, social digitalisation workshops, bottom-up digitalisation, bibliotherapy, volunteering of elderly people, adult education, cluster organisationIntroduction
The digital revolution exerted a significant influence on the context of operations, goals and models of activity of cultural institutions: libraries, museums and archives, which face the challenge of digitalising their collections and sharing them in accordance with new standards, among others. In these circumstances, it was necessary to develop and conceive services and related management, sharing and presentation models that are able to meet the ever-changing expectations of the contemporary audience – attract the attention of users, effectively compete with the commercial offer, and present the heritage in a new form digestible to all parties involved – participants and co-creators of culture (Tarkowski, Hofmokl and Wilkowski 2012).
This article features a discussion of one of the forms of acquiring, aggregating and sharing resources on the Internet, which is implemented by means of a network of regional digital libraries (illustrated with the example of the Silesian Library), within the framework of operation of social workshops for digitalisation of collections; it is an innovative solution with no previous equivalent in the national efforts to popularise cultural resources.
The main objective of the study is to present the phenomenon of digital libraries, the structure based on cluster solutions, and the model of developing cooperation in the environment of surrounding institutions, including the acquisition of collections through the inclusion of groups of volunteers. The organisational, educational and integration aspects as well as the cultural context of bottom-up digitalisation illustrated with the example of the ŚBC and the SPD have been stressed. Due to the descriptive and monographic character of this study, the method of secondary data analysis has been used; the text is based on substantive data contained in the documents issued by the ŚBC (reports on the institution’s activity from the years 2007–2018, as well as other reports and procedures). A significant part of the source material obtained comes from a free interview with Remigiusz Lis, the co-founder of the ŚBC and the SPD, as well as from publications by and statements of the coordinators of the activities in question. In numerous publications on contemporary libraries, the authors point out that the role of ‘libraries’ in the 21st century – the era driven by information and communication technologies – as they maintain the still valid principles of institutions providing access to cultural goods, is designed to suit the requirements of sharing resources in a modern (including digital) way (Mainka et al. 2013). In the era of the network society, where many new threats arise (e.g. digital exclusion), the functions of libraries focused around education, social and cultural animation and supporting the activity of people and institutions (Jaguszewski and Williams 2013) become particularly important. Currently libraries perform numerous tasks such as running educational programmes, organising training in programming, social and integration activities as well as organising training and specialist workshops, supporting users in research, organising additional activities for children, youth and elderly people, as well as organising events and cultural activities (Fourie 2004). The concept of operation of digital libraries and social digitalisation workshops is inscribed in these principles.
The very concept of a digital library, referred to as Library 2.0, is not a new or original phenomenon (Maness 2006). There are numerous sources related to this subject matter, which determine its definition framework (Seadle and Greifeneder 2007), as well as present various organisational and social aspects of its operation (Ross 2008). Most attention was paid by researchers to the phenomenon in question in the period when the first solutions of that kind were developed and standards for the dissemination of collections were created, i.e. in the years 2006–2008 – when controversies as to its merit were associated with the new phenomenon (Miller 2005).
As the very definition of this term can be contradictory, the author recalls the useful definition by J.M.
Maness (2006), who points to the assumptions of these institutions as places 'where multimedia, jointly created, interactive and global network-based technological solutions are used, proving to be an excellent complement to library services'. More specifically, the tools that constitute Libraries 2.0 include a web platform, communicators, streaming media, blogs, Wiki-type services, support for social networks, joint tagging, RSS readers and mashups (websites that combine ready-made services and solutions available on other websites) (Gmiterek 2008: 130).
According to the above understanding, a digital library is not only a place for developing and sharing collections in electronic form, but covers a wide range of activities and functions. Indeed, according to the assumptions of the creators of the Silesian Digital Library – the e-library (digital library), apart from sharing the available publications on-line, actively seeks new users, constantly changing and adjusting its services to the needs of different groups of recipients; it encourages users to participate (participation in the creation and development of library resources and services); uses tools and technologies of Web 2.0;
and establishes and nurtures long-lasting relationships with users and the environment, creating around itself a community of active users (Koszowska and Lis 2007). In line with the participatory model of culture, contemporary challenges design the digital library as a place where the user plays a special role in the organisational structure. Openness, innovation and creativity in offering information services are equivalent to the desiderata of this concept (Gmiterek 2012). At the same time, it is necessary to indicate various formal and organisational aspects, such as making a wide range of multimedia available: not only
publications, but also films, video recordings, memories, music, podcasts, archival materials, maps, iconography, etc.
The use of digital media in contemporary libraries opens up new opportunities, both in the area of presentation and distribution of content which is more efficient and consistent with the expectations of recipients, as well as creating the opportunity for them to exist in a wider cultural and social context. The functionality of network systems also facilitates the implementation of such models of cooperation between institutions in the field of digitalisation of cultural heritage that are conducive to the effective acquisition of resources – content worthy of global presentation – and at the same time provide important opportunities for the participation of recipients, education and social integration. It should be stressed, however, that while digital libraries are now part of one of the global and universal standards for making collections available, the bottom-up digitalisation and operation of social digitalisation workshops is still a novelty – an innovative solution implemented occasionally, complementing other system solutions at local levels.
Digitalisation of Collections as a Challenge for Contemporary Libraries and Cultural Institutions
So far, Poland has not fully developed uniform models for the presentation of cultural content on-line, such as the European platform Europeana (Tarkowski, Hofmokl and Jędralska 2009), which is effective and has proved to be worthy of being incorporated into official cultural policy at the national level, and integrate all (regional, local and environmental) digitalisation initiatives. Although selected resources of regional digital libraries are made available globally (including as part of Europeana), the mechanics of making them available has not yet been sufficiently automated. Particularly challenging is the development of models and tools to promote dispersed items of heritage, including regional artefacts, with specialised themes, and to ensure that it is accessible to a wide range of interested users, using content for non-commercial but educational, leisure, scientific or artistic purposes. At present, both the digitised cultural resources and the digitisation process itself are to a large extent fragmented and implemented by various entities within the framework of authorial programmes, including Free Readings (pol. Wolne Lektury), the Archive of Spoken History (pol. Archiwum Historii Mówionej), The National Film Archive – The Audiovisual Institute (pol. Filmoteka Narodowa – Instytut Audiowizualny), and digital projects of the Warsaw Uprising Museum (pol. Muzeum Powstania Warszawskiego). As already mentioned, an important challenge for the future is to develop a common platform enabling easy and convenient access to the content gathered in dispersed services; however, the current diversification of activities and projects has numerous advantages.
An example of one of the most interesting programmes of acquiring and sharing heritage in Poland is the activity of regional digital libraries, which are currently forming a cluster system. In the developing network of libraries in Poland, several models of accumulating digital resources can be distinguished.
There are institutional libraries (including university libraries and the libraries established by cultural institutions), based on the resources of the ‘real’, book collections and their own scientific background;
public local libraries (urban) and digital regional libraries (voivodeship), where the word ‘regional’ is only declaratively synonymous with the area (Lis 2009: 45), because their digital resources are available globally. The above models of creating digital resources share the following issues and challenges:
organisation of resource acquisition (digitalisation) stands, editing and technical processing of the acquired content, and maintenance of the digital platform of the e-library. An additional challenge is the coordination of cooperation between many dispersed institutions, which becomes even more complicated when the digital library is intended to be co-created by organisations operating in different areas of culture and education, representing different sectors, not only public ones.
Bottom-up Digitalisation
The key mechanism utilised by the network of digital libraries is the creation of such cooperation conditions in which independent, unrelated institutions from the first, second and third sectors supplement their basic forms of activity with an additional formula, which is the acquisition and transfer of digital content, while at the same time deriving measurable, non-financial benefits. This methodology is based on the idea of bottom-up digitalisation (the term coined by A. Tarkowski 2012), which means the involvement in the process of digitalisation of cultural heritage of people and institutions from outside the circle of entities traditionally involved in digitalisation: cultural institutions, such as libraries, archives and museums, or specialised commercial companies cooperating with them. Bottom-up digitalisation is related to a wider process of democratisation of the co-creation of culture; it is assumed that - just like other bottom-up activities - this process results in complementing institutionalised projects with complementary, less formal, sometimes spontaneous, activities based on a type of social movement for sharing and disseminating cultural goods. This process can also be described as civic digitisation – in relation to the concept of civic science (Delfanti 2010) and civic journalism (Goode 2009). This process can be referred to as participatory digitalisation, based on the concept of culture by Henry Jenkins. It is part of a cultural model in which there are relatively weak barriers to social involvement and artistic expression; however, there are mechanisms to support the process of sharing creativity; and in which participants feel that their contribution to culture is important, and are aware of the existence of social bonds resulting from cultural cooperation.
The process of bottom-up digitisation should be seen as inscribed in the context of contemporary social transformations, especially pluralisation and democratisation of participation in culture. Contemporary digitalisation projects are part of a broader process of strengthening social participation, governance and smart design, opening institutions to civic, amateur and scattered initiatives. It is worth noting that the process of bottom-up digitalisation directly translates into increasing the potential of public and non- public entities, establishing relations with the environment, attracting new stakeholders, increasing the diversity and accessibility of collections, as well as the interest and involvement of users themselves. It should also be emphasised that including the amateur-volunteer community in the process of digitisation and dissemination of collections does not mean that the platform will become a ‘digital rubbish dump’ in a chaotic and uncontrolled way. Practice shows that participation, if coordinated (planned and organised), results in a quality comparable to professional outcomes of institutionalised activities (Tarkowski, Hofmokl and Wilkowski 2012).
Bottom-up digitalisation exemplifies one of the significant changes in contemporary culture, conditioned explicitly by the development of new digital technologies: pluralisation and democratisation of participation, understood broadly as the ability not only to perceive content, but also to acquire, create and share it (Walotek-Ściańska, Szyszka et al. 2014). From the perspective of traditional cultural institutions, such as libraries in the 1990s, it is a process of opening up to new groups of stakeholders, co- creators and intermediaries – partners, who until now have been treated as largely passive subjects of institutionalised activities. This trend refers, among other things, to the idea of crowdsourcing; tasks that were traditionally performed by cultural institutions on their own or commissioned to other entities can now be openly performed in public (Estellés-Arolas et al. 2012). Digital technology acts as an intermediary, enabling the free selection from among the public of those individuals or groups interested in participating in a given action and having the appropriate resources for its implementation (Tarkowski, Hofmokl and Wilkowski 2012).
The Digital Library as a Cluster Organisation
Since its inception, the Silesian Digital Library has been an institution with the ambition to collect and present the cultural heritage of a vast region. Formally and legally, the e-Library is a separate
organisational unit of a regional public institution – a traditional cultural institution, namely the Silesian Library. The digital library was established on 20 July 2006 on the basis of an agreement between the University of Silesia and the Silesian Library, with the latter remaining the coordinator of activities related to the operation of this institution (which includes, among others, the maintenance of the hardware and software platform and activities aimed at obtaining e-publications). ‘The aim of the project is to present the cultural heritage of Silesia on the Internet, highlighting its historical and contemporary diversity, to publish the scientific achievements of the region and to support didactic and educational activities. (...) the resources published in the SBC are available to all non-commercial Internet users free of charge’. According to the assumptions of the SBC, it is an open institution, operated on the basis of the coordination (WB) and participation of external entities. Currently, the library is co-created by 63 institutions (which have applied for access and perform scanning or deliver publications in digital form directly, e.g. parallel to their own publishing activity; this number regularly increases).
The library, combining the features of a hybrid institution, has been designed to meet the criteria of a cluster, inter-institutional and cross-sectoral model. An important assumption of the creators, which has been achieved from the present perspective, is the fractal dynamics of operation, i.e. the jointly desired but decentralised development of the project (Lis 2009). The principle of synergy is used in this respect, which enables the joining of forces and resources of diversified institutions.
A cluster is defined as a loose form of organised cooperation of many institutions (and individuals), representing different areas of activity and different sectors, which uses formal and informal links between its participants, despite their potential competition, and is able to achieve jointly defined and intended objectives. Openness and mutual support among the cluster's participants are important conditions for the operation of the cluster, thanks to which its composition and scope of activity extends to new actors – institutions and people who mutually benefit from the achievement of the assumed objectives. The key motivator of effective operation of a cluster is also the prospect of multiplication of benefits resulting from cooperation, the facilitation of technology transfer, exchange of experiences, transfer of new competences between its participants, as well as access to new or additional services. The effectiveness of a cluster is based on broadening the basis of cooperation by granting the participants access to greater resources and means than those available to them acting independently. This process in effect multiplies the benefits resulting from cooperation, in comparison with independent activity, according to the synergy effect (mutual strengthening) of activities, thanks to sharing the possessed capabilities and resources (Szczepańska-Woszczyna 2014).
Dispersion of Content and Resources
Indeed, cultural content, literature and other objects potentially digitised and presented in the digital library are fragmented and held by various cultural institutions, not only libraries, museums and archives, but also offices, associations, educational establishments, local institutions, schools, religious associations and individuals. Some of them have an important cultural and historical value and represent unique content. They include not only traditional printed materials (literature), but also objects, records, memoirs, film and audio materials. These contents constitute a huge resource, which in fact remains beyond the reach of typical institutions that store them and share them with the general public.
Apart from the dispersion of content, the key problem and challenge faced by bottom-up digitalisation is the nature and, above all, dispersion of the institutional environment and insufficiency of resources.
Initiatives to create digital content require the necessary financing of equipment and staff. In the absence of such possibilities, the optimal solution is to use existing means (resources) possessed by potential participants (scanners, computers, appropriate social facilities, employee competences and existing models of operation in the local environment). Similarly, the competences required to create a digital library are primarily communicative and non-specialist; they primarily consist of the ability to operate a scanner, organise group work and basic graphic processing. The abovementioned elements constitute
capital sufficient to start the digitalisation programme, but an important condition is to ensure appropriate standards – a model, a plan of operation and specific tools.
The point is to indicate the possibility of using the equipment, organisational and human resources to show the possibility of using the digital content as a ready contribution of the institution, to organise an easily accessible electronic platform for publication on the Internet, to provide support for the efforts of potential participants in the project, and to establish and separate standards for e-publication (Lis 2008:
47). The mechanism of operation of the digital library, based on the cluster model, seems to be an optimal solution, allowing one to translate the abovementioned deficits (dispersion of content and dispersion of institutions) into significant potential for cooperation and creating a new quality in the inter-institutional space. A key ally in the implementation of the cluster model is inexpensive digital library technology, unlimited by access licenses, which allows for easy remote development and transfer of publications to the platform (server). Also, ensuring technical standards and maintaining the required cohesion of the dispersed structure of the digital library is made possible thanks to practically free communication tools, such as an Internet forum, communicators used by editors and tutorial packages available on-line (Lis 2012: 509). In conclusion, the operational and effective work of an organisation is possible thanks to the creation of a ‘horizontal’, distributed structure of cooperation between its cells and co-workers, self- organising teams and deliberate resignation from a centralised management system (Szczepańska- Woszczyna and Dacko-Pikiewicz 2014; Dacko-Pikiewicz, M Walancik, 2016).
Silesian Digital Library and Social Digitalisation Workshops – Integrative and Educational Dimension
Libraries, through their activities, projects and programmes, can significantly contribute to social inclusion and positively affect local communities, including those with noticeable deficits, problems and social issues (Szyszka et al. 2014). The role of social-integration initiatives in libraries increases in the case of the neighbourhood of institutions such as a senior citizens' club, social welfare home, occupational therapy workshop, community centre or community therapeutic centre. A positive tendency of complementary, intersectoral activities, also including support, equipping and granting the status of local social integration centres to libraries, is particularly noticeable where inter-institutional activities in favour of social changes are part of wider, systemic solutions, e.g. within the framework of a local activity programme or a revitalisation programme. In the context of the social role of public institutions, an important role of contemporary libraries is to strengthen access to substantive network resources, education, popularisation of media education, promotion of positive models and patterns of using new media, both by children, youth and elderly people, recognised as a group which is potentially threatened by digital exclusion (Tomczyk et al. 2019).
The response to the needs of building the Digital Library's resources, in particular the need to secure the
‘database’ – hardware and software facilities, allowing for efficient scanning and graphical processing of the resources to be published, has become – appropriately for the above-described cluster model – the creation of a network of social digitalisation workshops. The first workshop of this type was established in 2007 as an organisational unit of the library, where digitalisation and other works for the development of the Silesian Digital Library are regularly conducted under the supervision of experts. The workshop was created as part of a project subsidised by the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage, as part of the Patronage 2007 (pol. Mecenat) on the basis of an application submitted in December 2006.
An important inspiration for the creators of the workshop was the idea of Web 2.0, understood and promoted at the time as the prospect of inclusion of a wide community in the creation of the library. The workshop concept was studied and consulted within the framework of the nationwide forum of librarians (http://forum.biblioteka20.pl/), which is now inactive. importantly, it was a proprietary project by the creators of the ŚBC – an innovative project that had no equivalents in Poland or in Europe at the time; it resulted from a real understanding of the needs of the newly created library, the possibilities of action and
the existing resources (the cooperating third-age university – the workshop was created on the basis of cooperation between the Silesian Library and the Third-Age University operating at the University of Silesia).
From the technical point of view, the initiative is based on a simple but very important assumption that for the operation and development of the digital library it is necessary to maintain a stationary, modern infrastructure – a stable, ‘real’ background. Within the framework of the workshop, the digitalisation of collections, i.e. the creation of digital resources for publication in the SBC, functions and is shared with the users. The workstations (computer stations) are equipped with flat scanners and appropriate software (to process scans and convert them to the required format). However, the provision of hardware is only a starting point, creating wide areas of activity that perfectly match the idea of an open library or a Library 2.0. The workshop has been designed as a multifunctional project. Its main role is to substantively and technically support editors who are assisted by full-time employees of the workshop (learning how to handle the editorial application); in practical terms, the objectives and tasks are more extensive and limited to the broadly understood media education. The multi-faceted and ‘networked’ functions make it possible to balance, depending on demand, the types of work performed by the workshop, ensuring its constant use.
The operation of the workshop ensures the possibility of regular digitisation of the materials by institutions and people who co-created the Silesian Digital Library, even in the absence of hardware and command of the software used in processing the materials. On the other hand, the workshop enables the development of social, educational and animation activities supporting the development of the e-library.
This aspect deserves special attention, ‘opening up to the activity of the general public, from enthusiasts, historians, researchers, seniors, volunteers and students. The social digitalisation workshop has become (...) a kind of competence centre for bottom-up and social digitalisation’ (Tarkowski, Hofmokl and Jędralska 2009). In accordance with the assumptions of the creators of the project, the most important element constituting the studio (at the same authorising the use of the adjective ‘social’ in its name) is its openness: the principle of making digitalisation stands available to a wide range of users, who are also co-creators of the library, both individuals (volunteers, community workers, enthusiasts of Silesian culture, people who want to engage in the development of the initiative) and institutions. ‘The social aspect of the social digitalisation workshop means (...) broadening the circle of the creators of the Silesian Digital Library resources through the involvement and activation of communities which, due to organisational, technical and competence limitations, could not participate actively in this work before, despite the expressed intentions’ (Lis, Koszowska 2007).
In conclusion, the objectives of the social workshop operation – adequate in terms of the contemporary role of the library as a cultural institution - focus not only on the digitisation itself; they also include
‘continuous creation of publications by volunteers, employees of institutions and trainees’, ‘assistance to institutions co-creating the Silesian Digital Library and wishing to establish cooperation and making hardware and software available to the participants of the library’, and further ‘education, organising media activities for those interested in the subject of the Internet, new media, computer literacy and “e- inclusion”, ensuring access to hardware and software, and thus also education for seniors and volunteers’
(Lis 2009). The studio provides substantive and technical support for institutions that co-create the Digital Library, or intend to establish cooperation. Training sessions in the use of programmes, creation and processing of digital resources, publishing, etc. are organised.
The indicated levels of activity combine the interest of the library – which is primarily the acquisition of new resources (including documents owned by individuals and institutions that do not have adequate technical capabilities) – with the interests of environments: people and institutions, because there is an ever-growing potential of volunteering, including the elderly. The workshop prepares students and apprentices to perform professional roles; library lessons are conducted, educational activities are performed to the benefit of school youth, and workshops and other such events are also organised in the
field of modern techniques of protection and presentation of collections or the creation of digital resources. The workshop, which is a peculiar centre of innovation and media education, not only plays an important educational role, but also functions as an integrative body, especially in the context of developing IT skills of seniors and the ‘e-inclusion’ mentioned earlier .
The elderly, as a social group, deserve special attention in this context: its representatives actively, willingly and systematically participate in the activities of the workshop. Contemporary society is ageing at a very fast pace, and with our lives becoming much more dependent on technology, the barriers to participation are widening. Seniors rarely have the possibility of interacting with modern technologies, and due to the significant role played by computers and the Internet in the modern world, this often translates into a significant narrowing of opportunities for participation in socio-cultural activities (Tomczyk 2012). Meanwhile, mastering new media may not only make it easier for the elderly to function, but it also allows for broadening the platforms and opportunities for participation in accessible, organised and spontaneous forms of social life, such as volunteering, participation in various initiatives, events and meetings. It also facilitates communication with the environment, access to information, entertainment and dedicated on-line services (Sum et al. 2008). It should be remembered that it is not only modern technology which has much to offer the elderly, because a group of seniors is valued as social capital. In this context, the potential of senior volunteers to support the process of digitisation, among other things, due to the conscientiousness, responsibility and scrupulosity characteristic of this group was noticed and emphasised even at the stage of designing the activities of the workshop. Older people, apart from apprentices, enthusiasts (regionalists, collectors) and employees of cultural institutions, were indicated in the application form as the basic target group. The voluntary work undertaken yields, on the basis of a ‘tying agreement’, a two-dimensional benefit: the library gains the possibility to expand its collections in order to share them with users, while seniors have the opportunity to develop computer skills in a friendly atmosphere of media education and to interact with modern technologies; sometimes, especially initially, it is important to overcome barriers and acquire the basic computer skills. The social aspect of volunteering is also important, consisting of the possibility to perform important and necessary – from a broad perspective – useful work for the good of the general public, or to spend free time in a creative way. Equally significant are interpersonal relations and the bond established between volunteers. ‘Our goal was to create a workshop other than everything associated with traditional librarian activity. In short: new workshop, new people, new (individual) approach. It was necessary [for us] to realise that these people came of their own free will, so we had to treat them properly, carving a niche for them and allowing them to meet their expectations. By the way, we can without a doubt say that there is no one who cannot be taught how to use a computer. What matters the most is the right approach’ (Śpiechowicz and Strokosz 2008)
Conclusions and Recommendations
Finally, according to the annual report on the activity of the workshop, the author shall quote numbers representing the phenomenon of the participatory model of culture and the great potential lying in volunteering by elderly people and the active creation of cultural goods by various social groups.
Currently, 378,906 publications are available on-line in the repository of the Silesian Digital Library. In 2018 alone, in the social digitalisation workshop at the Silesian Digital Library a total of 623 hours of volunteering were recorded and 1908 documents were prepared consisting of 169,951 scans. The output of the social digitalisation workshop constitutes as much as 21% of all publications of the Silesian Digital Library, translating into a significant increase in the general resource of the library (Report of the SPDZ for 2018).
50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000
Total number of objects in SDL
Total number of objects in the Silesian Digital Library
Fig. 1: Growth rate of publications. Total number of objects made available in the Silesian Digital Library in chronological order. Source: https://www.sbc.org.pl/stats/index.html
It is also worth noting the mechanism of social operation of the workshop, as a model of good practice, integrating the potential for integration of different environments, also in the intergenerational dimension with great social benefits, with broad development prospects and opportunities for implementation in various institutions in a multisectoral dimension. Digitalisation based on the proven model can be performed in libraries, community centres, senior citizens' clubs, associations, social welfare homes, occupational therapy workshops, community self-help homes and many other facilities. Volunteering carried out in this dimension yields two-dimensional benefits: the library gains valuable resources and the possibility of sharing them with users, while the activities performed in the workshops involve significant benefits for volunteers, both educational, including overcoming barriers associated with exposure to new technologies, as well as a whole range of social values, and - in the case of people with disabilities – therapeutic properties. Currently, the Silesian Digital Library cooperates with several similar workshops launched on the basis of the cluster model, including local and municipal public libraries, universities of the third age and a workshop on occupational therapy, in which digitalisation is one of the forms of social rehabilitation (bibliotherapy) aimed at people with intellectual disabilities (www.arteria.edu.pl).
The operation of the network of digital libraries and social digitalisation workshops is part of the concept according to which one of the measures of the value of cultural heritage is its accessibility and utility.
This perspective, which is different from that of many traditional cultural institutions, according to which collections represent an autotelic value, focuses on users and their needs, who, thanks to digital technologies, become more active and creative. In 2007 in the UK, the JISC Digitisation Conference reached joint conclusions that exemplify the key digitisation challenges facing librarians worldwide (Report JISC DC 2007):
• Silo effect. Content digitalised through separate initiatives or programmes should be accessible by means of uniform access;
• Recognising the importance of end-users. Digitalisation projects should place emphasis on an appropriate information architecture: simple and convenient search, cataloguing, access to collections;
• Public services should compete with services such as YouTube and Google Books, while maintaining their own unique character and fulfilling their public mission;
• Project sustainability. It is necessary to develop such models of operation that will guarantee the durability of the implemented projects.
• Cooperation. Individuals and institutions involved in the process of digitalisation of cultural heritage must base their actions on the best possible models of inter-institutional and intersectoral cooperation.
It can be concluded that the operation of the Silesian Digital Library together with the network of social digitalisation workshops is a successful attempt at reference to desiderata, while its development dynamics and scope of activity allows one to determine that, from an innovative and low-budget activity, it stands a chance of becoming an activity inscribed in the mainstream of the national cultural policy.
While the operation and development of open repositories (including the network of digital libraries) is now standard worldwide, the social digitalisation workshop model, despite its enormous potential, has not been implemented on a larger scale yet (currently there are only a dozen or so such workshops in Poland) – so far, the model has no equivalents abroad that would be known to its creators or the author. This situation is a certain paradox, especially in the context of numerous awards and distinctions granted to the initiative in question (including: the ‘Example of Excellence’ at the European Congress of E-Inclusion in the field of media education; distinction in the ‘M@turity Online’ competition in the field of digital education of people aged 50+; and the first prize ‘Volunteer of the Year’ in the ‘Colours of Volunteering’
competition). It is worth noting that the social digitalisation workshop project is a proprietary model created by the Silesian Library employees – but it is open nevertheless. So far, it has been promoted by its creators in national publications on librarianship, as part of several conference events, but only twice in the international forum (Lis 2011; Koszowska 2009). The model in question, due to low implementation costs and inversely proportionally broad organisational and social benefits, definitely requires intensified dissemination activities, especially abroad.
References
Dacko-Pikiewicz, Z., Walancik, M. (2016). The economic or social dimension of lifelong learning, Forum Scientiae Oeconomia 4(2), 13-25
Delfanti, A. (2010) ‘Users and peers. From citizen science to P2P science’, Journal of Science Communication, 09 (01).
Estellés-Arolas, E. and González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F. (2012), ‘Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition’, Journal of Information Science, 38 (2), 189-200.
Fourie, I. (2004), ‘Librarians and the claiming of new roles’, Aslib Proceedings, 56 (1), 62-74.
Gmiterek, G. (2012), Biblioteka 2.0, SBP, Warszawa.
Gmiterek, G. (2008), ‘Czego potrzebują Bibliotekarze 2.0 i co mogą im dać informatycy. Nowe media a środowisko biblioteczne XXI wieku. W stronę społeczeństwa nadmiaru informacji, Proceedings of the conference Biblioteka 2.0 Zasoby cyfrowe w nauce, kulturze i administracji, 15 May 2018, BS,
Katowice, 130-150. [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019],
http://www.sbc.org.pl/dlibra/doccontent?id=10043&from=FBC
Goode, L. (2009), ‘Social news, citizen journalism and democracy’, New Media and Society, 11 (8), 1287-1305.
Jaguszewski, J. M. and Williams, K. (2013), New roles for new times: Transforming liaison roles in research libraries. Report, Association of Research Libraries, Washington.
Koszowska, A. (2009), ‘The Social Digitization Workshop - involving the community in the creation of a digital library’. [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], http://www.techsoupforlibraries.org/blog/the-social- digitization-workshop-involving-the-community-in-the-creation-of-a-digital-library
Koszowska, A. and Lis, R. (2007), ‘Społeczna pracownia digitalizacji ŚBC, [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], http://blog.biblioteka20.pl/?p=49
Lis, R. (2009), Tworzenie biblioteki w modelu klastrowym – doświadczenia ŚBC, Polskie Biblioteki Cyfrowe 2008, Mazurek C., Stroiński, M. and Węglarz, J. (ed.), OWN, Poznań, [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], http://lib.psnc.pl/Content/204/pbc-6-Lis.pdf
Lis, R. (2011), ‘Od cyfrowej technologii do społecznej innowacji’, [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], http://www.slideshare.net/SlaskaBC/spoeczna-pracownia-digitalizacji-bc
Lis, R. (2011), The Social Digitization Workshop, ECEI11: Transformative Impact of Libraries. [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], https://pt.slideshare.net/SlaskaBC/the-social-digitization-workshop-ecei11- transformative-impact-of-libraries?smtNoRedir=1
Lis, R. (2012), Śląska Biblioteka Cyfrowa – analiza przypadku, Biblioteki cyfrowe, Janiak, M., Krakowska, M. and Próchnicka, M. (eds.), SBP, Warszawa, 507-521.
Mainka, A., Hartmann, S., Orszullok, L., et al. (2013) ‘Public Libraries in the Knowledge Society: Core Services of Libraries in Informational World Cities’, Libri, 63(4), 295-319.
Maness, J. M. (2006), ‘Library 2.0 theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries’, Webology, 3 (2), Article 25.
Miller, P. (2005), ‘Web 2.0: building the new library’, Ariadne, (45).
Report JISC DC 2007 [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019],
https://issuu.com/xcia0069/docs/jisc_digitisation_conference
Report of the SPDZ for 2011-12 (2013) [Sprawozdanie Społecznej Pracowni Digitalizacji 2011–2012’], [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], http://www.slideshare.net/SlaskaBC/sprawozdanie-spoecznej-pracowni- digitalizacji-20112012#btnNext
Report of the SPDZ for 2017-18 (2019) [‘Sprawozdanie Społecznej Pracowni Digitalizacji 2017–2018’, [unpublished]
Ross, L. (2008), ‘The library is dead, long live the library! The practice of academic librarianship and the digital revolution’, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34 (2), 145-152.
Seadle, M. and Greifeneder, E. (2007), ‘Defining a digital library’, Library Hi Tech, 25 (2), 169-173.
Sum, S., Mathews, M. R., Pourghasem, M. and Hughes, I. (2008), ‘Internet technology and social capital:
How the Internet affects seniors. Social capital and wellbeing’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14 (1), 202–220.
Szczepańska-Woszczyna, K. and Dacko-Pikiewicz, Z. (2014), ‘Managerial competencies and innovations in the company–the case of enterprises in Poland’, Business, Management and Education, 12 (2), 266- 282.
Szczepańska-Woszczyna, K. (2014), ‘Determinants of innovation activities in small and medium-sized enterprises in Poland’, Journal of Advanced Research in Management (JARM), 65-73.
Szyszka, M. et al. (2014), Podręcznik wdrażania modelu współpracy instytucji z obszaru pomocy i integracji społecznej oraz rynku pracy, Bielsko-Biala.
Śpiechowicz, D., Strokosz, E., (2008), ‘Społeczna Pracownia Digitalizacji ŚBC po roku działalności’.
[online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], http://blog.biblioteka20.pl/?p=77
Tarkowski A., Hofmokl, J., Jędralska, (2009), Ekspertyza: Interfejs dziedzictwa. Przestrzeń udostępniania dziedzictwa cyfrowego, NIA, Warszawa. [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], http://www.nina.gov.pl Tarkowski, A., Hofmokl, J. and Wilkowski M. (2012), Ekspertyza: Digitalizacja oddolna. Partycypacyjny wymiar procesu digitalizacji dziedzictwa, NIA, Warszawa. [online], [Retrieved 15.10.2019], http://www.ocmdcjkmckij.pl
Tomczyk, Ł. (2012), ‘Education of Older People in the Field of Information Technology on the Example of Polish Universities of the Third Age’. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 55, 485–491.
Tomczyk, Ł., Eliseo, M. A., Costas, V., Sanchez, G., Silveira, I. F., Barros, M.-J. and Oyelere, S. (2019),
‘Digital Divide in Latin America and Europe: Main Characteristics in Selected Countries’, Proceedings of the 14th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), ISSN 2166-0727, 19-22 June 2019, Coimbra, Portugal.
Walotek-Ściańska, K., Szyszka, M., Wąsiński, A. and Smołucha D. (2014), New media in the social spaces. Strategies of influence, Verbum, Praque.
