Search results

The main purpose of this paper is to explore telepresence robots are being used in libraries to facilitate library services and also to explain the future trend in the application of robots in libraries.

Through a review of the literature, this paper analyzes various library websites and consults literature relating to the use of telepresence robots in libraries; the current application of robots in libraries has been highlighted along with case studies of libraries currently adopting telepresence robots.

The uses of telepresence technology in libraries help to enhance library services, reach new users and provide a more inclusive and accessible library experience. Telepresence robots enhance the quality and accessibility of library services, expand library outreach and provide new opportunities for virtual engagement and programming. The application of telepresence robots in libraries can offer many benefits, but there are also several challenges that libraries must address to ensure successful implementation.

This paper highlights how the application of telepresence robots in libraries improves service productivity in libraries and creates a more engaging environment for the user group. The benefits and challenges of using robots in the library and the future trend in the application of telepresence robots in libraries are also discussed.

In Virginia, former Gov. L. Douglas Wilder accused the state’s library agency of racism for “its slow pace in processing and publicly presenting records from his tenure as the nation’s first elected Black governor” (Associated Press, 2020). The State Librarian responded that this was just a lapse in protocols and framed it as a budget issue and staff turnover. However, “Library of Virginia has been processing papers from his gubernatorial successors before finishing work on his” (Associated Press, 2020). Recently, the Alabama State Department of Archives and History acknowledged their participation in systemic racism, epistemicide, and their history of privileging White voices over those of Alabama African-Americans.

Epistemicide is the killing, silencing, annihilation, or devaluing of a way of knowing (Patin, Sebastian, Yeon, & Bertolini, 2020). Conceptualization and analytic application of epistemicide has an established tradition in a number of social science fields, but information scientists have only recently acknowledged epistemicide (Oliphant, 2021; Patin et al., 2020; Patin, Sebastian, Yeon, Bertolini, & Grimm, 2021). Building from our recent identification of the existence of epistemicide within the IS field (Patin et al., 2020), this work challenges the information field to become an epistemologically just space working to correct the systemic silencing of certain ways of knowing.

This chapter examines the four types of epistemic injustices—testimonial, hermeneutical, participatory, and curricular—occurring within libraries and archives and argues for a path forward to address these injustices within our programs, services, and curricula. It looks to digital humanities and to reevaluations of professional standards and LIS education to stop epistemicide and its harms. This chapter demonstrates how to affirm the power and experience of Black lives and highlight their experiences through the careful acquisition, collection, documentation, and publishing of relevant historical materials. Addressing epistemicide is critical for information professionals because we task ourselves with handling knowledge from every field. There has to be a reckoning before the paradigm can truly shift; if there is no acknowledgment of injustice, there is no room for justice.