Teens are preferring to use their phones for internet browsing even when they have a computer at homeSmart phones require more expensive service plans (digital divide)Designing and maintaining phone apps is challenging for vendors
Younger internet users, are less aware of copyright and digital ownership, and feel free to reuse, remix, repackage digital information. They are more collaborative, and expect interactive interfaces (tagging, commenting, sharing)
Online students will needvitual libraries
Many student continue to want print books, but we think that may changeOlder books don’t get used as the older publication dates sink to the bottom of search resultsUse of print periodicals is VERY low. E-journals are the preferred medium.More and more periodicals and newspapers are moving to online onlyLibrarians’ mindset is changing away from preserving everything to keeping just what is needed and used4. Trends are driving weeding projects in academic libraries nationwide
We own 136,598+ ebooksUse of ebooks is slowly rising – tied to device ownershipEnhanced ebooks are still maybes. Reality is ebooks can lack images and other content.Use in academic libraries slowly increasingThe market place for popular vs academic ebooks is very differentMany publishers are reluctant to sell ebooks to librariesEbook are often more expensive than print counterpartsWhen you buy an ebook, you don’t own it
You can search full text, and
You can search full text and click to navigate to search terms
Smartphone are a popular device for reading ebooksStandardization: too many ebook formats and how to get them, not all formats work with all readers
IIL:There are staff and system costs, and many lending libraries charge us (College Libraries) to borrow books for our users.Historically libraries have not been great about predicting which books students will want or need.Many of the books purchased for library shelves never get used, or are only used once.We are shifting away from buying “good” books, to buying books to fulfill research assignment needsMoving away from just-in-case model to just-in-time.
When thinking about the library of the future, I am certain that I could safely bet that these are not words that appeared on the cards you originally filled out but while these are terms – some of which have been part of the discussion for decades --in 2013 as we anticipate the library in the future they still significantly impact how scholarship is produced, shared and accessed.
These two of Ranganathan’s laws describe what most people consider a library’s critical role and this does not change in the future – simply put -- access to material in whatever format it exists – be it a book, an article or even a three dimensional chocolate bar printed on demand.
We are familiar with the ways libraries have provided access to books and articles that are based on the library’s ownership of content.Increasingly in the library of the future, libraries will pay for licenses to gain access to content rather than paying for outright ownership. When the library owns the content, we can make it available over time to many users. When we license content we are limited by the terms of the agreement. In most cases we believe that we will be able to provide access to users over time but there is less certainty and terms can vary from vendor to vendor. How many times have you accessed something electronically by clicking the “I agree” box – have you read the agreement? What will it be like in the library of future if content requires us to purchase access that is limited to a single use? How will the library of the future leverage the cost of access to best serve our entire population of users?
Intellectual Property – Ideas - and copyright – the tangible expression of ideas – have been part of the landscape for centuries but the digital environment for the sharing of ideas challenges our understanding of what constitutes a “tangible expression” and therefore what is “copyrighted”. Originally the intent of copyright was to encourage the sharing of ideas easily by expressing the idea in a format that could be shared and giving the originator appropriate compensation for sharing their “intellectual property”. Over time, the economics of copyright have become paramount but in the digital world, the response to new technologies has often been new laws and restrictions. While it is far easier to share information in the library of the future, will legalities stifle the sharing? DMCA – copyright laws “digital” response is now 15 years old. Court cases related to peer-to-peer sharing are still being resolved. Universities are carefully following the ramifications of the as-yet-incomplete Georgia copyright decision. And in the meantime…we use the Internet to access information – within the bounds of copyright law and at times in an uncertain environment where the law has not yet caught up to the potential of the technology.
This is a period of significant change in the areas of publishing and access to scholarly content. Where we go and how quickly we change will have much to say about the library of the future. Right now we have more questions than answers about the library of the future as we seek to meet Ranganathan’s laws relating to access. We increasingly see material published in a traditional “print” format that is now also made available on line – where the online content is just a copy of the print. Access is easier but only minimal use of technology is made. Journals, in particular, are abandoning their print format and are available “online” only. Consider the end of the print publication of Newsweek magazine to its new “all digital” content. Why should a publisher wait to publish content in a traditional collection or “volume”? And many are not, so that a web search will find a scholarly article destined for distribution in the current model (i.e a journal volume) but available now (for a mere payment of $37.00). But leave the traditional behind – how will the “power of digital” impact scholarship? Will scholarship exist in distinct blocks in time or will scholarship evolve through processes of editing and commenting and analysis? Should scholarship always cost to access? When it is so easy to share, shouldn’t we just do it? Open Access is appealing because it is just that but what value will we place on freely accessible scholarship over scholarship from sources that we pay for? How will we measure “peer review”? Will it matter?
“One in four teens are “cell-mostly” internet users, who say they mostly go online using their phone and not using some other device such as a desktop or laptop computer” 78% of teens now have a cell phone, and almost half (47%) of them own smartphones. That translates into 37% of all teens who have smartphones, up from just 23% in 2011.3. 80% of Americans say borrowing books is a “very important” service libraries provide.3. 80% say reference librarians are a “very important” service of libraries.3. 77% say free access to computers and the internet is a “very important” service of libraries.4.
Printing chocolate bars
SUNY Potsdam College LibrariesPanelists:Nancy Alzo, Elizabeth Andrews, CarolFranck, Marianne Hebert, JenicaRogers, Abby SmithSUNY Potsdam Academic Festival 2013“Making the Future”http://pluto.potsdam.edu/academicfestwiki/
AUDIENCE ASSIGNMENT 1Write 3 SEPARATE WORDS on the catalog card that you think describe a ―Library of the Future‖
AUDIENCE ASSIGNMENT 2Write 1 WORD on the scrap paper:• What did you do last time you visited the library?
S. R. RANGANATHAN … THEN (1931) 1.Books are for use. 2. Every reader his [or her] book. 3. Every book its reader. 4. Save the time of the reader. 5. The library is a growing organism.
TekVenture Maker StationAllen County Public Library
TekVenture Maker StationAllen County Public Library
TekVenture Maker StationAllen County Public Library
USER BEHAVIOR WILL DRIVE LIBRARY SERVICES 4. Save the time of the reader. • One in four teens are ―cell-mostly‖ internet users 1 • 78% of teens now have a cell phone, and 47% of them own smartphones 2 • Smartphone owners aged 18 to 24 average: 2,022 texts sent per month (67 texts per day) 1,831 texts received per month (61 texts per day) 9
MORE ON USER BEHAVIOR33% of Americans own e-readers (2012), up from 18% in 2011. 423% of Americans (age 16+) read ebooks (2012), up from 16% in 2011. 486% of internet users aged 18-29 use Facebook 727% of internet users aged 18-29 use Twitter 773% of Americans say they would use an online ―Ask a Librarian‖ service 3
BELOIT COLLEGE MINDSET: THE CLASS OF 2016 5They have always lived in cyberspace, addicted to a new generation of ―electronic narcotics.‖Their folks have never gazed with pride on a new set of bound encyclopedias on the bookshelf.Before they purchase an assigned textbook, they will investigate whether it is available for rent or purchase as an e-book.Despite being preferred urban gathering places, two-thirds of the independent bookstores in the United States have closed for good during their lifetimes.Outdated icons with images of floppy discs for ―save,‖ a telephone for ―phone,‖ and a snail mail envelope for ―mail‖ have oddly decorated their tablets and smart phone screens.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY TRENDS WILLDRIVE USER EXPECTATIONS 6Students are being assessed on collaboration andteam dynamics (not just outcomes).Wikis, Skype, Google Docs, and online tools thatpreserve the process and the multiple perspectiveswill become more prevalent.1. Cloud based technologies Where we store our work doesn’t matter. Access to our work, any time, anywhere DOES matter.2. Online Learning will required new digital skills Fewer face-to-face classes / more hybrid learning Ability to use digital media and navigate networked environments Ability to collaborate and communicate in a variety of online systems
GOOGLE AND THE FREE WEBhttp://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/02/05/070205fa_fact_toobin
Ranganathan’s Law #4:Save the time of the reader Library Classification Systems (complicated) vs. Free Web Keyword searching (easy)
―The trend for accessing information is moving toward an expectation of being able to use one start point for all research.‖ Timpson, H., &Sansom, G. (2011). A Student Perspective on e-Resource Discovery: Has the Google Factor Changed Publisher Platform Searching Forever?. Serials Librarian, 61(2), 253-266. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2011.592115― 89 percent of college student information searches begin with a search engine‖ OCLC. (2006). College Students’ Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC.
―The a-literate expect:• instant results• convenience (which is seen as superior to quality)• images are at least as important as text• if it’s not on the web, it doesn’t exist• cut and paste is a legitimate alternative to original thought• just enough material for the task in hand, not everything‖ Law, D. (2011). “As for the future, your task is not to foresee it, but to enable it”: (Antoine de Saint Exupéry). IFLA Journal, 37(4), 269-275. doi:10.1177/0340035211430308
SO WHAT’S THE PROBLEM?The clash: students’ ―good enough‖ vs. faculty requirementsBackground issues:• Students don’t know what they don’t know (and who is responsible for teaching that?)• Few people think about what is NOT in Google• The package no longer defines the information contained in it, which means…• Evaluation of quality is hard to do• Searching almost anything else isn’t as easy and familiar as Google
USING THE FREE WEBStudents might: • Find a reasonable source and/or answer • satisfice with inadequate materials • waste gobs of time trying for find something that isn’t there • Decide it doesn’t exist and give up • Ultimately move to non-free web resources
THE GOOD GOOGLE: PLAYS WELL WITH LIBRARIESGoogle Scholar Links to library databases from on-campus (IP based) Beginning select off-campus proxy authenticationGoogle Books Provides snippits for evaluation Links to libraries (and bookstores) for full access―Ready Reference‖ a la Google (and Wikipedia)
THE BAD GOOGLE: WANTS …MONEY, POWER, CONTROL (BWAH HAH HAH HAH!!!)The Evolution of GoogleGoogle as businessAdvertisingInformation Provider (Google Books)Information Consumer (Personal Data) Google as a player in the library of the future…
FUTURE OF LIBRARY COLLECTIONS1. Print collections will continue to decline in value2. Electronic collections will continue to grow and increase in popularity3. Remember Newsweek?4. Academic library spaces are prime real estate: Increased demand for collaborative and other spaces It costs $4.26 per book, per year to store a book on the shelf 11 ~50% of print books have never been used 7 3. Every book its reader Circulation is down 26% in academic libraries since 1991 (ACRL) 125. Digital repositories are making pre-1922 books readily available (HathiTrust, etc.)
E-BOOKS ARE GAINING POPULARITY SLOWLY1. E-books can have enhanced features: full text searching, annotations, pages can be bookmarked, text- to-audio, embedded video, links to websites, interactive lessons and changeable plots.2. E-books for consumers ≠ E-books for libraries3. Libraries can purchase a Kindle, pay for and download 100 books, but only one patron can borrow the Kindle (with 100 books)4. Academic e-book readers tend to be web-based5. Downloading to hand-held readers = short term and technically challenging • Ability to highlight and add notes, is limited and temporary
E-BOOKS WILL BECOME MORE LIBRARY FRIENDLY AND PATRON FRIENDLYLibraries usually cannot lend e-books to other libraries (Interlibrary Loan)Some e-book vendors have ―loan‖ periods. If you check out an e-book, no one else can use it until your loan period expires.Some publishers limit the number of times an e-book can be loaned, at which point the library needs to purchase another copyPublishers are restricting e-book content for librariesTechnological obstacles need to be resolved, especially for hand held devicesTower of eBabel = Too many formats
PURCHASE-ON-DEMANDWho should develop the library collections?Can we trust patrons to know what they want?Just-in-case VS Just-in-timeInterlibrary Loan is not ―free‖
PURCHASE-ON-DEMAND MODELSSeveral models being implemented inlibraries:1. Records for print books are loaded into the catalog. Patron requests are sent to Acquisitions Department and materials are ordered RUSH.2. Interlibrary Loan requests are submitted into ILLiad. Library staff monitor ILL requests, and if purchase is warranted (affordable, available and appropriate) the request is sent to Acquisition department to be ordered RUSH.3. Records for e-books are loaded into the catalog. Patrons click on the link and have immediate access to browse or borrow or trigger a purchase. Library costs for loans and purchases are unpredictable.
NY 3RS DEMAND DRIVEN EBL E-BOOK PILOTConsortial pilot project to test collaborative e-book collection building18 members (16 Academics, 2 Public Library Systems)18 PublishersMembers contribute funds to common account at WNYLRC to be drawn against as consortium patrons use books7971 records loaded into catalog (published Oct. 2011- )Purchased e-books are owned “into perpetuity” (65 so far)Current costs:Browsing is freeAfter 5 minutes browsing – loan Is triggered (24 hrs or 7 days) ($.20-$44 each loan) Purchase is triggered on 8 loan (list price x 5).Price cap is $250 for any title (X5).
ACCESS IN A DIGITAL CULTURE• Intellectual Property• Copyright• Licenses• Alternate Publishing Models• Scholarly Communication• Open Access• Peer Review
RANGANATHAN’S 2ND AND 3RD LAWS EVERY BOOK ITS READER EVERY READER HIS BOOK ACCESS
EVOLUTION FROM OWNERSHIP TO LICENSINGOwnership – First Sale Doctrineallows a library to lend booksCopyright Law Fair Use and ExceptionsAllows a library to share or obtain copies of articles from content they or other libraries ownLicensing of contentIncreasingly, libraries now obtain access to content by entering licensed agreements of content vendors
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, COPYRIGHT AND SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATIONIn 1968 early Internet developersLicklider and Taylor predicted a―global computer network ofdistributed intellectual resources‖that would ―help usersshare, manipulate and locatedata‖…but what has occurred is a―rising tension between the openarchitecture of theofInternet and legal1. Reyman, Jessica. The Rhetoric Intellectual Property: Copyrightrestrictions for online activities.‖ 1.Law and the Regulation of Digital Culture. New York:Routledge, 2010. Print.
ALTERNATIVE PUBLISHING MODELS, OPEN ACCESSAND PEER REVIEW• What constitutes ―publishing‖?• Access and dollars• Digital Scholarship• Open Access• Peer Review
S. R RANGANATHAN THEN (1931) & NOW AND …1. Books are for use.2. Every reader his [or her] book.3. Every book its reader.4. Save the time of the reader.5. The library is a growing organism.
SOURCES FOR USER TRENDS AND COLLECTIONS1. Teens and Technology 2013 by Mary Madden, Amanda Lenhart, Maeve Duggan, Sandra Cortesi, UrsGasser. Mar 13, 2013. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Teens-and-Tech.aspx2. Teens and Technology 2013 by Mary Madden, Amanda Lenhart, Maeve Duggan, Sandra Cortesi, Urs Gasser. Mar 13, 2013. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Teens-and-Tech.aspx3. Library Services in the Digital Age. by Kathryn Zickuhr, Lee Rainie and Kristen Purcell. January 22, 2013. http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2013/01/22/library-services/4. E-book Reading Jumps; Print Book Reading Declines by Lee Rainie and Maeve Duggan. December 27, 2012. http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2012/12/27/e-book-reading-jumps-print-book-reading-declines/5. Beloit College Mindset List. http://www.beloit.edu/mindset/2016/6. 2012 top ten trends in academic libraries A review of the trends and issues affecting academic libraries in higher education ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee. http://crln.acrl.org/content/73/6/311.full7. AttisD, Koproske C. Thirty trends shaping the future of academic libraries. Learned Publishing [serial online]. January 2013;26(1):18- 23.8. The Demographics of Social Media Users — 2012 (Feb 14, 2013) by Maeve Duggan, Joanna Brenner http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Social-media-users/The-State-of-Social-Media-Users.aspx9. CHART OF THE DAY: Kids Send A Mind Boggling Number Of Texts Every Month,byAlex Cocotas (March 22, 2013) Business Insider, http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-number-of-texts-sent-2013-3#ixzz2ON3Xb9rg10. Trend Data (Teens) http://www.pewinternet.org/Static-Pages/Trend-Data-%28Teens%29.aspx11. "On the Cost of Keeping a Book‖byPaul N. Courant and Matthew Nielsen (2009): http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub147/pub147.pdf12. Anderson R. PRINT ON THE MARGINS. Library Journal [serial online]. June 15, 2011;136(11):38-39. http://webproxy.potsdam.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lih&AN=61428301&site=e host-live&scope=site