This study analysed the usage of Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 tools by librarians in Kwara State academic libraries. A sample of 40 librarians was surveyed through total enumeration sampling technique from four different tertiary education institutions libraries in Kwara State, Nigeria. Questionnaire was used for the collection of data. The collected data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The results demonstrate that Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 are widely used by the librarians with 80% of them currently using the tools. Various uses of Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 revealed by the study include information sharing, documents delivery, connection and networking. Major challenges to the use of Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 by the librarians are accessibility, technical-know-how and unstable power supply. Based on these findings, the study makes a number of recommendations for a more effective use of the new technology.
AbramS., Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and Librarian 2.0: Preparing for the 2.0 World, SirsiDynix OneSource2(1) (2005), Retrieved from: http://www.imakenews.com/sirsi/e_article000505688.cfm [May 16, 2010].
2.
AndersonD. and GesinJ., The evolving roles of information professionals in the digital age. (1997), Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/html/cnc9754/cnc9754.html.
3.
AharonyN., Web 2.0 use by librarians, Library and Information Science Research31(1) (2009), 29-37.
4.
AharonyN., Twitter use in libraries: An exploratory analysis, Journal of Web Librarianship4(4) (2010), 333-350.
5.
ALA, Library 2.0. Retrieved from: (2013), http://www.ala.org/tools/atoz/library-20.
6.
BarrettF., An analysis of reference services usage at a regional academic health sciences library, Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA98(4) (2010), 308.
7.
BaroE.E., AbiagbeE.J. and GodfreyV.Z., Web 2.0 tools usage: A comparative study of librarians in university libraries in Nigeria and South Africa, Library Hi Tech News30(5) (2013), 10-20.
8.
BarryE., BedoyaJ.K., GroomC. and PattersonL., Virtual reference in UK academic libraries: the virtual enquiry project 2008-2009, Library Review59(1) (2010), 40-55.
9.
BBC. Berners-Lee on the Read/Write Web. 2005. Accessed January 15, 2013. http://news.bbc.co. uk/2/hi/technology/4132752.stm.
10.
BestJ.W. and KhanJ.V., Research in education. Pearson, London, 2006.
11.
BirdsallW.F., Web 2.0 as a social movement, Webology4(2) (2007), Retrieved from: www.webo logy.ir/2007/v4n2/a40.html [accessed 29th Oct. 2014].
12.
BoatengR., MbarikaV. and ThomasC., When Web 2.0 becomes an organizational learning tool: evaluating Web 2.0 tools, Development and Learning in Organizations24(3) (2010), 17-20.
13.
CaseyM., LibraryCrunch: Bringing you a library 2.0 perspective. Retrieved from: http://www. librarycrunch.com/[accessed May 18, 2006] (2006).
14.
CaseyM. and SavastinukL., 2007. Library 2.0: A Guide to Participatory Library Service. Medford: Information Today.
15.
ChadK. and MillerP., Do Libraries Matter? The Rise of Library 2.0. 2005. Retrieved from: http://www.talis.com/downloads/white_ papers/DoLibrariesMatter.pdf. Accessed January 14, 2013.
16.
CharnigoL. and Barnett-EllisP., Checking out Facebook.com: the impact of a digital trend on academic libraries, Information Technology and Libraries26(1) (2007), 23-34.
17.
ChuaA.Y.K. and GohD.H., A study of Web 2.0 applications in library websites, Library & Information Science Research32(3) (2010), 203-211.
18.
CoombsK.A., Building a Library website on the pillars of Web 2.0, Computer in Libraries27(1) (2007), Retrieved from http:// www.infotodaycom/cilmag [12, December 2007].
19.
CourtneyN., Library 2.0 and Beyond: Innovative Technologies and Tomorrow's User. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2007.
20.
CreswellJ.W., Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications Inc. (2013).
21.
CreswellJ.W., Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th Edition)Thousands Oaks CA: Sage Publications Inc. (2014).
22.
DavisC., Web 2.0 definition, usage, and self-efficacy: A study of graduate library school students and academic librarians at colleges and universities with ALA accredited degree programs. A PhD Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School at The University of Alabama, Retrieved from: http: //acumen.lib.ua.edu/content/u0015/0000001/0000040/u0015_0000001_0000040.pdf[accesse]d 29 Oct, 2014 (2009).
23.
I. Davis, Library 2.0 - the next wave of the field. Retrieved from: http://internetalchemy.org/ 2005/07/talis-web-20-and-all-that [Accessed May 15, 2010] (2005).
24.
Del BosqueD.C., LeifS.A. and SkarlS., Libraries Atwitter: Trends in Academic Library Tweeting, Reference Services Review40(2) (2012), 199-213. Retrieved from: http://digitalscholarship. unlv.edu/lib_articles/430[accessed 11 Nov. 2014].
25.
DesaiC.M. and GravesS.J., Does Co-browsing Enhance Instruction in Virtual Reference?In VRD Conference 2005 e-Proceedings: Presentations from the 7th Annual VRD Conference, Hyatt Regency San Francisco Airport, November 14-15, 2005, San Francisco, 2006.
EppersonA. and LefflerJ.J., Social software programs: students Preferences of librarian use, New Library World110(7/8) (2009), 366.
28.
FarrellyM.G., Bother the librarians! [Feature], Public Libraries46(1) (2007), 36-38.
29.
HusseinR., N.S. Abdu-Karim, N. Mohamed and A.R. Ahlan, The influence of organizational factors on information system success in e-government agencies in Malaysia, Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries EJISDC29(1) (2007), 1-17.
30.
HvassA. and MyerS., Can I help you? Implementing an IM service, The Electronic Library26(4) (2008), 530-544.
31.
KellyB., Library 2.0 and information literacy: the tools in Godwin, P. and Parker, J.(Eds), Literacy Meets Library 2.0, Facet Publishing, London, 2008.
32.
KomondiE.F.O., The changing role of the library in the information age. Retrieved from: http://www.academia.edu/4834544/the_changing_role_of_librarians_in_the_internet_age (2014).
33.
KothariC.R., Research methodology: Methods and Techniques. Oxford Book Company, 2013.
34.
KumarS.K. and MaharanaR.K., Awareness of Web 2.0 among LIS Professionals of Engineering Colleges of Odisha, India, A Journal of Library and Information Science8(1) (2014), 1-8.
35.
LankesR.D., SilversteinJ. and NicholsonS., Participatory Networks: The Library as Conversation, Information Technology and Libraries26(4) (2007), 17-33. http://www.ala.org/lita/ital/sites/ala. org.lita.ital/files/content/26/4/lankes.pdf.
36.
LeeS., GrovesP., StephensC. and ArmitageS., A guide for online teaching: Existing tools and projects. Oxford: JISC JTAP project (1999).
37.
LuiS., Engaging Users: The Future of Academic Library Web Sites, College & Research Libraries69(1) (2008), 6-27.
38.
MacaskillW. and D. Owen, Web2.0 to go. Proceedings LIANZ Conference 2006, Wellington (2006).
39.
McManusB., The implications of web 2.0 for academic libraries, Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship10(3) (2009), 1-7.
40.
MulatiningsihB. and K. Johnson, Indonesian LIS professionals' understanding of Library 2.0: A pilot study, Journal of Web Librarianship8(3) (2014), 286-304.
41.
MurugesanS., Understanding Web 2.0, IT Professional9(4) (2007), 34-41. doi: 10.1109/MITP.2007.78.
42.
MillerP., Web 2.0: Building the New Library. Ariadne, 45. Retrieved from http://www.ariadne.ac. uk/issue45/miller/[6 December,2007], (2005).
43.
MulatiningsihB. and JohnsonK., Indonesian LIS Professionals' Understanding of Library 2.0: A Pilot Study, Journal of Web Librarianship8(3) (2014), 286-304, doi: 10.1080/19322909.2014.926785.
44.
NguyenL.C., PartridgeH. and EdwardsS.L., Towards an Understanding of the Participatory Library, Library Hi Tech30(2) (2012), 335-346. doi: 10.1108/07378831211239997.
45.
NUC, NUC Renews Commitment to NUS in 2014, NUC Newsletter9(1) (2014), 1-11.
46.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD. Participative Web and User-Created Content: Web 2.0, Wikis and Social Networking. Edited by Graham Vickery and Sascha Wunsch-Vincent. Paris: Author. (2007). http://browse.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/pdfs/free/ 9307031e.pdf.
47.
OlasinaG., The Use of Web 2.0 Tools and Social Networking Sites by Librarians, Information Professionals, and Other Professionals in Workplaces in Nigeria, PNLA Quarterly75(3) (2011), 10-15.
48.
O'ReillyT., What is Web 2.0: Design Pattern and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, (2005). http://www.oreillynet.com/lpt/a/6228. Accessed January 8, 2013.
49.
ParkJ., Differences among University Students and Faculties in Social Networking Site Perception and Use: Implications for academic library services, Electronic Library28(3) (2010), 417-431.
50.
ParameswaranM. and WhinstonA., Social Computing: An Overview, Communications of the Association for Information Systems19(1) (2007), http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol19/iss1/37.
51.
RehmanA. and ShafiqueF., Use of Web 2.0 and Its Implications for Libraries: Perceptions of Information Professionals in Pakistan. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). p. 623. Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/623 [accessed 11 Nov. 2014] (2011).
52.
ScaleM.S., Facebook as a social search engine and the implications for libraries in the twenty-first century, Library Hi Tech26(4) (2008), 540-556.
53.
SinghK.P. and GillM.S., Web 2.0 technologies in libraries: A survey of periodical literature published by Emerald, Library Review62(3) (2013), 177-198.
54.
SodtJ. and SummeyT., Beyond the Library's Walls: Using Library 2.0 Tools to Reach Out to All Users, Journal of Library Administration49(1-2) (2009), 97-109. doi: 10.1080/01930820802312854.
55.
SperringD., Libraries, the Internet, Web 2.0 and Library 2.0, One-Person Library25(2) (2008), 5-6.
56.
StephensM., Web 2.0 & Libraries: Best Practices for Social Software. Library Technology and Reports. from: http://www.alatechsource.org/ltr/web-20-and-libraries-best-practices-for-social -software (2006). Retrieved 04 August, 2015.
57.
Techsoup.bg. All you need to know about Web 2.0. from: https://www.techsoup.bg/node/ 751 (2015). Retrieved 06 September, 2015.
58.
ThomasL.C., Twitter at the office, Journal of Web Librarianship4(1) (2010), 79-82.
59.
TyagiS., Use of Web 2.0 Technology by Library Professionals: Study of Selected Engineering Colleges in Western Uttar Pradesh, ESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology32(5) (2012), 439-445.
60.
WilsonK., CooperH. and SouthwellD., World Wide Web Walkabout: A subject-oriented program for teaching and learning the Internet. Paper presented at The Second Australian Worldwide Web Conference, Gold Coast, 7-9 July, 1996. Retrieved from: http://elmo.scu.edu.au/sponsored /ausweb/ausweb96/educn/wilson/paper.html [accessed 29 Oct. 2014], (1996).
