[ABSTRAK Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis tingkat keterlibatan(Engagement Rate) perpustakaan perguruan tinggi dan menganalisis strategiperpustakaan perguruan tinggi dalam menerapkan Library 2.0 serta untukmengidentifikasi hambatan perpustakaan perguruan tinggi dalammenerapkan Library 2.0. Pendekatan dalam tesis ini menggunakanpendekatan kualitatif dengan metode studi kasus komparatif. Hasilperhitungan tingkat keterlibatan didapatkan Perpustakaan UniversitasIndonesia menempati urutan pertama, Perpustakaan Universitas GadjahMada pada urutan kedua serta Perpustakaan Universitas Airlangga padaurutan ketiga. Penelitian ini memilih Perpustakaan Universitas Indonesiadan Perpustakaan Universitas Airlangga menjadi lokasi penelitian, dimanamenghasilkan penelitian bahwa kedua perpustakaan telah memiliki strategidalam penerapan Library 2.0 yang diurai menurut komponen pembentukLibrary 2.0 yaitu partisipasi pengguna, web 2.0, perpustakaan dan layanan,evaluasi dan kerjasama. Temuan yang lain kedua perpustakaan memilikistrategi yang sama, di sisi lain ada juga strategi yang berbeda. Ketika salahsatu komponen lemah maka komponen lain lebih diperkuat. ABSTRACT This study aimed to analyze the Engagement Rate academic library and toanalyze strategies in implementing Library 2.0 as well as to identify barriersin applying Library 2.0. The approach in this research uses a qualitative with acomparative case study method. The Engagement Rate results University ofIndonesia Library ranks first, Gadjah Mada University Library in the secondand Airlangga University Library on the third. This research were conductedin University of Indonesia Library and the Airlangga University Library,which resulted that both libraries have had strategies in the implementing ofLibrary 2.0 which is parsed by forming components Library 2.0 are userparticipation, Web 2.0, library and services, evaluation and cooperation.Another finding is that both libraries have the same strategy, on the other handthere are also different strategies. When one component is weak then the othercomponents further strengthened.;This study aimed to analyze the Engagement Rate academic library and toanalyze strategies in implementing Library 2.0 as well as to identify barriersin applying Library 2.0. The approach in this research uses a qualitative with acomparative case study method. The Engagement Rate results University ofIndonesia Library ranks first, Gadjah Mada University Library in the secondand Airlangga University Library on the third. This research were conductedin University of Indonesia Library and the Airlangga University Library,which resulted that both libraries have had strategies in the implementing ofLibrary 2.0 which is parsed by forming components Library 2.0 are userparticipation, Web 2.0, library and services, evaluation and cooperation.Another finding is that both libraries have the same strategy, on the other handthere are also different strategies. When one component is weak then the othercomponents further strengthened., This study aimed to analyze the Engagement Rate academic library and toanalyze strategies in implementing Library 2.0 as well as to identify barriersin applying Library 2.0. The approach in this research uses a qualitative with acomparative case study method. The Engagement Rate results University ofIndonesia Library ranks first, Gadjah Mada University Library in the secondand Airlangga University Library on the third. This research were conductedin University of Indonesia Library and the Airlangga University Library,which resulted that both libraries have had strategies in the implementing ofLibrary 2.0 which is parsed by forming components Library 2.0 are userparticipation, Web 2.0, library and services, evaluation and cooperation.Another finding is that both libraries have the same strategy, on the other handthere are also different strategies. When one component is weak then the othercomponents further strengthened.] |