With the digital age in full swing, it’s no surprise that library acquisitions are focusing on digital materials instead of physical ones. More and more, libraries are collecting e-books, online journals and databases, and subscriptions to websites. As Arthur Sale of the University of Tasmania points out, “the English meaning of "acquisition" is already corrupted: generally journal budgets are not expended to acquire materials but mostly to obtain a license to view.” (Sale, 2007) These days, digital acquisitions are moving past journals to include all kinds of materials in digital form, as well as unconventional “acquisitions” related to web 2.0.
What does this mean for librarians? Many librarians are probably a bit nervous that, for instance, patrons can access a plethora of information on the web without having to consult with a person at a reference desk. They also may be uncomfortable with the overwhelming thoughts of collection development in a digital world. How do you develop your collection with so much information available free and online through blogs, wikis, and web 2.0 in general? Roy Tennant of Library Journal advises us to embrace these challenges instead of fear them. For instance, he suggests we familiarize ourselves with something called metadata harvesting. (Tennant, 2005) This technique would use searching software to search materials inside databases, thus going beyond what Google or other common search engines can retrieve. Tennant also recommends that librarians become knowledgeable about the content of websites that are relevant to their specific patrons. That way, we can make personalized suggestions, provide links on our sites, and direct the patron to the information they need on the internet. It is not traditional, but these are some of the evolving new practices of collection development. Patrons can access whatever they want on the web, and we can help them discern between reliable scholarly sources and everything else.
In a report prepared for the Library of Congress, Karen Calhoun of Cornell University explores the future of collection development in regards to advancing technology, mostly for research libraries. She seems to have a bleaker take on the matter than Tennant does, and writes that “the catalog represents a shrinking proportion of the universe of scholarly information.” (Calhoun, 2006). This means that, increasingly, people are going about research themselves without ever looking for things in the library. Luckily she offers a lot of suggestions to prevent libraries from falling behind in providing information. Among her ideas are to link databases of scholarly materials between libraries and build discipline-based pools of information. Her biggest emphasis also seems to be on digitizing as many collections as possible. This may upset many of the “traditional” librarians, but it seems to be a necessary direction for collection development.
In our future careers as librarians, we will probably deal with a combination of digital and physical acquisitions, with an increasing inequality between the amounts of both. Here are some questions to consider:
Does free user access to information via web 2.0 compromise the integrity of the information? How can we as librarians ensure our patrons are receiving quality content?
Will e-books and digital downloads eventually take the place of the physical form of a book as we know it now?
WORKS CITED:
Calhoun, Karen. The Changing Nature of the Catalog and its Integration with Other Discovery Tools. Prepared for the Library of Congress. March 17, 2006. http://www.loc.gov/catdir/calhoun-report-final.pdf
Sale, Arthur. A Challenge for the Library Acquisition Budget. D-Lib Magazine May/June 2007 Volume 13 Number 5/6. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/may07/sale/05sale.html
Tennant, Roy. Digital Libraries: Collection Development Today. Library Journal, 5/15/2005. http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA601028.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Educating patrons will help libraries in the long run-if librarians help patrons discern what is "reliable" and "scholarly" on the web, they will be back for more because they will trust the library. At the high school where I volunteer, the Librarian gives classes to students on evaluating ther resources. Libraries could offer researching classes to patrons who are new to technology or at a loss of how to improve their skills. This would ultimately encourage them to seek out better resources which we, the librarians, will be waiting to help them with. With the digitization of materials, which will be hard to avoid with the problems of space in most libraries, research capabilty will become evermore important. Could libraries not concentrate on digitizing the less used and out of date materials first? Journals are always great online but full text books? Hard to imagine reading a whole book online. And with MelCat it is so easy to find any up to date book one wants.
Litwin, Rory. Annotated list of things not to forget (in the 2.0 craze). Retrieved on January 13, 2008, from http://libraryjuicepress.com/blog/?p=353.
It's funny to think that patrons used to visit libraries to search for information in books, and now they're referring to the Internet and online resources instead/in addition to. And it's funny because people needed librarians when looking for books, and the same principle can be applied to online resources. Books can be searched through just as easily as the Internet. There are differences, such as the pretty refined search engines that can scan information to better help the reader find keywords and subjects, or that the authority of books is much easier to assess; books can't always be available on the dot, and the Internet is only a button click away, etc. But simply speaking, people could search a card catalogue, find some relevant titles, and search for information themselves. But they chose to take advantage of the wisdom of the librarian. The Internet is a big pile of semi-sorted, credible here-and-there information. Sure it's available, and sure the patron can search and find all they want, but there are without a doubt countless ways librarians can take advantage of this opportunity and continue doing what they do best
: serve the public in a time of need - perhaps more need than they even realize.
Will e-books and digital downloads eventually take the place of the physical form of a book as we know it now?
You know, I have encountered this question on more than one occasion. When I tell people that I am in the Library and Information Science program, I get the quizzical response of, “aren’t libraries going to be obsolete in the future?” Along with, “why would I go to a library, when everything I need I can find on the internet?” The answer, of course, is absolutely NO! Libraries are relevant and so is the need to select, sort out, and critically evaluate information. The people who doubt the integrity and value of libraries are probably people who are not currently using their libraries. Also, these same people probably hold reading, research, and books, in general at a distance.
E-books and digital downloads may benefit those patrons who are house bound or can’t travel to their library. But I highly doubt that such media is ever going to replace the physical act of selecting and reading books. There are too bibliophiles in the world!
The book I chose for my book review delves precisely into this subject, Sacred Stacks by Nancy Kalikow Maxwell. She begins with, "Librarians serve a higher purpose that no amount of digitization or computerization can ever replace... Libraries have survived, and will continue to thrive in the future, because they fulfill eternal needs for people."
The biggest challenge, I think, is to redefine the roles of libraries and librarians in the minds of the general communities, and school and state officials. Those people who do not understand the value their libraries play in the community need to be reeducated and become participates rather than outside observers. Essentially, these non-believers, if I may call them that, need to be seduced by the library.
Marketing, education, classes, and community outreach are all ways to tempt potential patrons into the library. A sexy coed book sale couldn’t hurt either!
Work cited:
Maxwell, Nancy. Sacred Stacks: The Higher Purpose of Libraries and Librarianship.2006
Thanks for the comments. I'm feeling reassured that books will stick around and coexist with digital formats!
I'm sure a lot of us, like Jen mentioned, get those quizzical responses to our chosen profession. "What? You're going to get a master's degree to learn how to shelve books? really?" You are right though, that the people who say these kinds of things tend to have never set foot in a public library in a long long time and don't generally seem to be readers.
Libraries have changed over the years, but they will always have a purpose, to provide information to patrons. No matter if the information is found on the Internet or through the old fashion way of looking through books. Librarians are there to help people decipher between what is helpful information and what is unreliable. Librarians are also there to guide people to the right materials that are needed by the patron. Librarians also can assist patrons with computers and any other tehnical issues. the Internet is a useful piece of technology, if something is not available in physical form, then it is possible that one can find it online.
Libraries and librarians are always needed to evaluate information that is in the library. They need to determine if the information is reliable enough to place the material in the building. Many people believe that the Internet is the only source of information that is needed, much more information can be obtained within the building itself. Many people do not use the library anymore and probably do not know what goes on inside, what the library can offer to the public and many activities that are available to the public. Without the new technology, many of the events that occur within a library may not occur and without librarians, many of the events would not take place.
Even though many see technology taking over the role of librarian, the libraian will be needed to help access the information and those who are technically challenged.
I certainly hope e-books don't replace regular books completely. I spend a lot of time in front of a computer as it is, and believe me, it does a number on my eyes. I'm sure other people have that problem, and I can only imagine what reading a full-blown novel could do. (On the other hand, it would probably make opticians all over the world very happy and rich.)
I agree with Anne. Journals are one thing, but keep the transition from print books to e-books down to a dull roar on just about everything else.
You know, its interesting to me to see how many people actually do most, if not all, of their research online. Maybe I was just born in the wrong century, but (with occassional exceptions) the meat of my research comes from print materials. Don't get me wrong, there is a wealth of information online, but the sheer quantity makes it incredibly difficult for me to sift through before I've really shored up a specific focus for my research. The breadth of a library's physical collection may sometimes be less extensive than what you find online, but I find that helpful! If I can acquire one or two good books in my general subject, then that helps me to create a real core to focus on. I usually go to the online resources later, to flesh out what the books helped me to get started. I don't know, maybe I'm just an anachronism. Point is--as we all know--the Internet is full of lots of garbage as well as gold, and librarians are the perfect person to help one differentiate. The trick is getting the masses to believe that again. Sure, you can do your own research more easily these days, but what good is that if you don't really know how and end up with a sub-par paper?
It is accentually relatively easy to educate patrons on what are scholarly sources in relation to academic research; what is more difficult is transferring those lessons to general everyday information. Blogs, Wikis and message boards may appear to be scholarly but my not be. As an example, check out this popular article: http://www.reason.org/commentaries/
dalmia_20060719.shtml
Does it look OK to you by the standards of the average online news source? Well this article http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200711/
mrgreen_mailbag.asp (as well as several other sources) debunks it.
Now we obviously can't prevent patrons from looking up erroneous information like this, mostly because it is so ubiquitous. But it is our job to make sure that good sources of information are available. Librarians can do this by highlighting several sources that have well researched info (making sure that as many points of view are represented as possible).
Dalmia, S. (2006). Have You Hugged a Hummer Today? Retrieved April 10, 2008, from http://www.reason.org/commentaries/
dalmia_20060719.shtml
Schildgen, B. (2007). Hey Mr. Green. Retrieved April 10, 2008, from http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200711/
mrgreen_mailbag.asp
I agree with Anne J.- who can read a whole book on the computer? Who would want to? I don't care how convenient a desktop program is, it is still easier to have the volumes right infront of you, on the top of your desk!
Many people have responded to this post having encountered confused people that believe libraries have a finite usefulness in the future. May I suggest that many people do not have the same understanding or respect for information as do librarians. As LIS students, we are preparing to become sifters, evaluators, and cross-refencers. Our job is not tied to either paper books or disk space; it is tied to the information therein.
In the same stroke, these nonbelievers act as if they had no access to information before the internet. The fuss they put up makes me think they had to cross a lava flow to access information by themselves, previous to the emergence of the internet. Again, this fuss seems to be coming from those who don't place much value in things that they have to work for to receive.
My comments here generalize, to be sure, but I think there is a grain of truth in them. They do not, however, mean to profess cynicism. I agree with Jen Roby that it may also be a part of future jobs to assist the library in "seducing" the patrons for a truly intense informational experience.
I, too, would hate to read a whole book online. I spend most of my day, i.e. 8 - 9 hours on the computer at work, as I'm sure most of you do and like Matthew said, it does a number on my eyes. I would rather read a physical book and not strain my eyes. I believe that books can co-exist with the digital formats.
I recently spoke with a library clerk that I worked with and she clearly does not like e-books. She would prefer to have a physical book rather than having to stare at the computer. I agree with her. You just do not enjoy the book in the same way.
I definitely agree that I could not read a whole book online. I do some reading online, but I can only handle short amounts. My eyes are bad enough as it is.
As far as electronic resources, I like to use them and probably do use them more than print resources. At the same time, I consider myself someone who has a least a decent ability to distinguish between as Jason put it, the "garbage" and "gold". This is not the case for certain patrons, especially for children. This is where I think librarians can and should play an important role.
I don't think e-books and digital downloads will take the place of books. Maybe I am saying that because I'm just partial to paper books. There is definetely a problem with quality and integrety with online information. If there wasn't, we wouldn't need to deal with the questions of filter. But then some people question the integrety of papers. Its all in personal taste. However, with paper books we can just not open that book. With the internet, we often don't have a chance to delete it. We could type in a innocent name and porn sites with similiar name will appear before you.
Kate,
Enjoyed reading your post. You know, on the one hand librarians say that access to all information should be open to everyone. Best that it be available in an insitutional setting in which librarians and other authorities can help the student discern betwen "reliable" and "not reliable." OK. But where do we draw the line between that and doing what the ALA keeps condemning--which is "labelling" work?
Good question. Really, the best I can come up with is to provide some sort of lists of "suggested resources." That way, we're doing our best to guide the patron into resources we think are valuable, but we're not blocking their access to everything else if that's what they want. Depending on the specificity of the library's purpose or field, there is potential for some really precise resource lists. But this is definitely something to think about - I'm sure there is a good answer out there somewhere!
I visited a local suburban library for one of my visits, whose 2000 census states that the ethnic population is 3%. Althought, I did not bring up diversity in the interview the librarian advised me that they are getting a lot of request for historical and modern day African-American literature. The part-time librarian stated that the material is always checked out. As soon as it's returned, it's checked out. A grant was even written to obtain this material. I have a friend who works in the community at a school, who states that racial tension is really high. I was a little shocked at the community's request. However, I was very happy that the library staff appeared to be in favor of having a diverse collection. We all have to be pro-active about diversity, because at some point in all of our lives we all will be part of or have been a part of a small group thatis the minority. I am sure that when we are the minority status, we would like to be heard and understood.
I enjoyed that you mentioned metadata harvesting. In my book review the author mentioned a similar type of searching via the internet. I think this is a big hurdle for most library users and non-users to get over the fact the Google is a very overrated thing when it comes to proper searches and searching techniques. Also figuring out somehow to trump the ever increasing popularity with search engines like Google or Yahoo, the library needs to provide better services when it comes to their metadata harvesters, teach the patrons how to use the systems and provide a comprehensive guide on training employees on how to stay ahead of the learning curve with these technologies.
Post a Comment