I chose the Art and Architecture Library, which seems to be scarcely used even though it's so close to the quad and the Green Library.
What kinds of learning go on here? I can think of a few:
1. "Directed scholarly learning" is likely the key use for which this library was designed. That is, if you need to find out about an artist, a arts movement, a style, or an approach, this is the place to look. As its name implies, the stacks here are dedicated to books and periodicals about art and architecture. There's far more here, for instance, about Art Nouveau painter Alphonse Mucha than at Green, let alone at the local municipal library.
What does this kind of learning look like? By and large, the assumptions seem to be that this learning is solitary work, and revolves around materials in print (including microfilm and color 35mm slides). There are a few paintings and illustrations on the walls, but this is a library, not a museum. There doesn't seem to be an emphasis on electronic learning tools. Perhaps the tools aren't out there in doing art historical research. Of course, I am sure there are scholarly journals available electronically, but this hasn't impacted the library much. There is one video viewing station on the main floor, and some stations to view microfilm.
There are some nice tables that you can use to read or write, and these are labled "study tables" on the floor plan. Of course, they offer other affordances, as will be mentioned below.
It's worth thinking about the role of technology. Why aren't all the slides just scanned in to a database? Not only could it allow more people to see them, it would also remove concerns about their degredation during use. More than that, one can think outside the box a little and imagine that scholars could annotate slides with their own notes and tags, which could help others make sense of them and make connections among works of art. Searching for images could also be enhanced.
On the other hand, as resources become digitized, the need for a physical space called a "library" actually seems to diminish. There's a great benefit with digital assets that they can be simultaneously viewed all over the world. But the flip side is that it matters less where the physical assets are. Then there's the whole issue of rights-- if something can be copied widely, or viewed widely, should it be?
Is a library just a collection of assets? Or is it also the finding guides and the librarian as well?
One reason to argue for a blended mode (lots of resources available online/electronically but also a real physical space) is to give scholars a chance to talk to the people who know the assets well, and know how cataloguing works. From what I've seen, the growth in electronic resources has underscored the importance of good librarianship, not undermined it.
2. "Serendipitous learning"
Every good library (to me) allows serendipitous learning. That is, gives me treasures I haven't asked for. At the art library I picked up a copy of the journal "The Japan Architect". Thumbing through it, I found a great spread on a new kindergarten in Tokyo (Minato-ku). Look:
"Architectural elements such as walls, floors and ceilings gradually become more furniture-like, and built-in furniture gradually becomes more architectonic. As a result, the scale of the environment is friendlier and children unconscioulsy begin to use all their senses in physical encournters with the archtectre. The floor becomes stepped; the wall becomes a bleackboard, or a place with nooks and crannies in which to hide; columns and frames become benches, shelves and platforms."
3. Affordances for other learning.
If there is a fairly narrow view of what kind of learning should happen here, it doesn't preclude a lot of other types that probably do. Thanks to the wireless network (and a scattering of outlets), this isn't a bad place to come with your laptop for just about any learning you can do with a laptop. (As long as it is quiet- I don't think the'd appreciate a video iChat, or you Skyping an expert etc).
4. The space as a statement.
Finally, the space itself seems to make some attempt at a statement about art and learning. (It is an *art* library after all.) The building is nondescript from the outside. Inside, its elements are massive, and rugged. At first glance, you might call it ugly. The stacks are really cramped and not a place to linger. But up on the main floor, and on the balcony above, you can let the architecture fade into the background to get your work done or to explore some new fancy.