Discovery tools: the only way to connect patrons to information?

As e-resources have become more important in libraries, new methods have had to be created in order to help patrons “discover” them. Most patrons do not understand the intricacies of library holdings, the OPAC, and how different “silos” of information are kept for different types of resources. Some of this can currently be explained by patrons expecting a “Google” experience from their library’s website or OPAC. Patrons expect to be able to enter their own natural language search phrase and get access to all types of resources, both print and electronic. Federated searching is one development which tries to tackle this problem. By searching multiple silos of information at once, the patron can get those varied sources s/he is looking for. 

Unfortunately, I do not believe as librarians we should accept technological developments such as federated searching as the only solution to helping patrons locate the resources they need. First of all, federated searching is usually not as detailed or accurate as searching multiple silos of information individually, so meanwhile, as kinks are worked out on the technical end, I think librarians should be focusing on other foundational things such as information literacy education. While this would probably not fall under the responsibilities of the ERM librarian, it cannot be denied that in order to best equip our patrons for their searches and need for information, we should teach them and encourage them to become even more discerning and expect more from their library searches and the resources they use. This can be done not only through collaboration with faculty in order to teach bibliographic instruction classes, but it can also be done through reference interactions or online tutorials about how to use library resources. 

Certainly I am not discounting the incredible usefulness and added value that technologies like federated searching have afforded library patrons, but in many respects, a successful search is the result of an intelligent searcher, and not the technology that carries it out. In the long run, patrons will be best served if we offer then great technological tools along with the proper skills and knowledge to use them.

The confusing, complicated world of e-books!: Implications for collection development

As someone who has never used a Kindle, Nook, or tablet, the notion of an “e-book” has perplexed me for sometime. I couldn’t fathom the idea of libraries “checking out” digital files to patrons. How? Through what platform? Do you have to come into the library to check it out? Do you have to return it? While I still have not engaged in the process of checking out an e-book myself, many of my questions have been answered either directly through things we’ve discussed in class, or via other related discussions. For example, DRM certainly answers some questions about how publishers work to protect their e-books from being shared freely amongst people. 

Despite my lack of personal experience using e-books (except on computers), I will not deny that they have rapidly become important, and that perhaps even for some, the preferred method of reading. Because of this interest and use in e-books, academic libraries have already created e-book collections for their patrons and this is creating special challenges for the library in different ways, one of them being financially. In this respect, especially when viewing it from a collection development standpoint, e-book purchasing and licensing seem to share some of the pitfalls of database licensing. As someone who aspires to eventually work in subject specific collection development, there are two major things which jump out at me.

First, there is the issue of the e-book version of the “Big Deal.” It seems that some vendors and/or publishers want to sell you more e-books than you actually need, so they will package some good titles with some not-so-good titles just to give the illusion that they are offering you a great discount. A discount it may very well be, but it forces libraries to make purchases for lots of books which end up potentially being more work than they’re worth (in terms of cataloging, etc.) and gets the library to spend its money on things it truly doesn’t need! 

The flip side to this scourge of vendor pricing, and my second point, is that usage of e-books needs to be monitored very closely to order to find out how those e-books are being used, if at all. Given that the use and popularity of e-books is still fairly recent, I’m not sure this means that all the e-books we have are getting the usage we think they are. We should be looking for trends in usage. Perhaps e-books are only popular in certain subject areas, or perhaps only certain types of e-books are getting used (e.g. reference books vs. textbooks, etc.). Knowing specific details about how our e-book collections are being used can be vital to informing future decisions about where the librarian will choose to spend his or her budget.  

The ever-changing responsibilities of the ERM librarian

In their article “Marian Through the Looking Glass: The Unique Evolution of the Electronic Resources (ER) Library Position,” Rebecca Albitz and Wendy Allen Shelburne present results of a survey which show the rise of the position of ERM librarian and how it has changed with time. Their main point is that despite the increasing importance of the electronic resources librarian over time, the position remains largely fluid and is still not yet well-defined within the field. Their argument is convincing, despite their very small sample (they net roughly twenty responses each from library administrators and ERM librarians). While it’s a truism to say that the growth of electronic resources has changed libraries and their services, it apparently is not to say that it has changed the job of many a librarian. It is fascinating to see that ERM librarians had been recruited or hired into the positions with widely varying types of experience. No one type of librarian seemed to be at an advantage when hired. Of course, what was most shocking about the survey revelations was that librarians who had been hired into the ERM positions or had their responsibilities changed, had little form of training. This can be blamed on the fact that in the 1990s and early 2000s, the ERM librarian was still a nascent position, and as Albitz and Shelburne would point out, it still had its focus divided amongst other responsibilities such as reference service or library instruction, two responsibilities that are general no longer associated with ERM librarians.

While what the authors present does appear to be an accurate picture of the ERM librarian (at least in 2007 when the article was published), I would venture to say that it is not the only position in the library that experiences ambiguity in its duties. Libraries have been notorious for mixing responsibilities in unique ways; a collection development position at one library may be also responsible for reference services, while the collection development position will be responsible for tasks in technical services at another. New positions such as marketing librarians or special liaisons positions have been created, trying to deal with reaching patrons via social media and the like. There was no precedent for these types of positions, either, but librarians have adapted and learned as they go. My inclination is to say that such changes as these are not likely to go away any time soon. As technology continues to develop at an ever rapidly growing pace, we can’t assume or hope that the ERM librarian job description will at some point normalize. The best a burgeoning ERM librarian can do is prepare oneself with the current tools, try and anticipate the next bends in the road, and above all, learn to be comfortable with the changing nature of his or her work. 

Albitz, Rebecca S. and Wendy Allen Shelburne. “Marian Through the Looking Glass: The Unique Evolution of the Electronic Resources (ER) Librarian Position.” Electronic Resources Librarianship and Management of Digital Information: Emerging and Professional Roles. Ed. Mark Jacobs. Binghamton, NY: Hayword, 2007: 15-30.

Is perpetual access for everyone?

The focus on research libraries in Stemper and Barribeau’s article, “Perpetual Access to Electronic Journals” raises some questions about what role smaller institutions should have in contributing to providing for perpetual access, and also archival access.[1] It seems the onus is largely on research libraries to secure access for future generations of researchers. I say this first of all because research libraries have historically been concerned with preservation issues for its physical collections – preservation in this case being a method to allow for future access – and also because their budgets may be the only ones which can allow for licensing current titles/products, and paying for maintenance fees for content which is no longer licensed. Smaller libraries, even academic ones, may not need to concern themselves much with perpetual access or archiving electronic journals for which they don’t have print copies because they may be able to “get by” without such content, and they may have no vested interest in long-term preservation for most of its collection (print or otherwise). Research libraries, however, have the reputation, and I would argue the duty, to provide for as much content as they possibly can within the scope of their collection policies. But just because smaller institutions can “get by” without, does this absolve them from contributing to greater perpetual access or archiving movements?

In some ways it still behooves the smaller institution to be involved and contribute financially, at least as part of a consortium, to gain perpetual access to electronic journals. As perpetual access becomes more important to licensees (and I agree with Stemper and Barribeau that perpetual access should be a deal-breaker for content licenses), smaller institutions that are not involved in a greater effort may find that when they do need content which they don’t currently license, they will not be able to get it. With print titles dropping off shelves and publishers getting strict about what can be loaned via ILL, an institution with no ties to a consortium may be out of luck when it comes to providing patrons with the content they need. It seems the issue of perpetual access is not just a concern for large, research libraries. Even small institutions will need to figure out how they can be part of this process and how they can free up monies within their budget in order to contribute.

---

[1] Stemper, Jim and Susan Barribea, “Perpetual access to electronic journals: A survey of one academic research library's licenses,” Library Resources and Technical Services 50 (2), (2006): 91-109.