The document discusses 10 scenarios for the future of academic libraries concerning publishing, patrons, and technology. It focuses on 9 high impact, high likelihood scenarios including the replacement of print textbooks with open educational resources created by faculty, open peer review becoming the norm, traditional publishing models collapsing, non-traditional students being the norm due to rising costs, a digital divide among students, cross-institutional course offerings, integration of touch screen technology, expanded mobile access, and increased cyber security threats. Academic libraries will need to adapt services and roles to these potential changes.

1. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0888-045X.htm
BL BITS & BYTES
23,4
A couple of miles down the road
John Maxymuk
208 Paul Robeson Library, Rutgers University, Camden, New Jersey, USA
Accepted October 2010
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine some likely scenarios for the future of academic
libraries.
Design/methodology/approach – Ten scenarios concerning publishing, patrons and technology
`
are discussed vis-a-vis their potential effect on libraries.
Findings – Thinking about the future is a necessary exercise for planning. Progress is inevitable and
should be welcomed for its potential for positive change.
Originality/value – The paper provides useful predictions on the future of academic libraries.
Keywords Academic libraries, Continuing development
Paper type Viewpoint
Bad predictions generally take two forms – pessimistic or optimistic. Overly
pessimistic predictions are often embarrassingly amusing in retrospect when collected
in books and on the web. For example, a Western Union internal memo from 1876
declared:
This “telephone” has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of
communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.
Ken Olson, founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, asserted in 1977:
There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.
British scientist Lord Kelvin went for the unimaginative trifecta in 1896 by
proclaiming:
Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be
a hoax.
By contrast, overly optimistic predictions often provide the backbone of science fiction
literature and display an exciting vision of possibilities. While these predictions may
verge on the ridiculous at the time, they also may contain a kernel of truth or
eventually come true in an unforeseen way. For instance in 1865, Jules Verne
envisioned travel to the moon via an enormous space gun that fired a manned projectile
beyond the Earth’s atmosphere. The development of the rocket engine in the twentieth
century enabled that voyage to become a reality 104 years later, although with a vastly
The Bottom Line: Managing Library different means of propulsion. The Jetsons animated television series in 1962 depicted
Finances flying cars, a robot maid and videophones. While there are still no flying cars nor
Vol. 23 No. 4, 2010
pp. 208-211 humanized robot maids, we are beginning to see a market for robotic devices that
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0888-045X
perform simple tasks like vacuum houses and teleconferencing is a common thing in
DOI 10.1108/08880451011104036 today’s world of network connectivity.

2. Peering into even the near future is always speculation that is fraught with peril, as A couple of miles
my investment portfolio has borne out over the years. However, thinking about the down the road
future is a necessary exercise to plan our efforts and try to marshal our resources in the
optimal way to meet the changing environment in which we work. That environment
was “scanned” in 2008 by the Research Committee of the Association of College and
Research Libraries who then identified the “Top Ten Assumptions for the Future of
Academic Libraries and Librarians” (www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/publications/ 209
whitepapers/Environmental_Scan_2007%20FINAL.pdf). That top ten list can be
paraphrased as:
(1) increased digitization of collections and resources;
(2) an evolving and expanding skill set for librarians;
(3) increasing demand for digital access to resources;
(4) intellectual property issues to debate;
(5) the continued growth of information technology services and resources;
(6) a change in the view of academia as more as a business, and the library will
need quantitative measures to meet pressures for accountability;
(7) a new perspective of students viewing themselves as consumers whose needs
must be met;
(8) the further expansion of online learning;
(9) an imperative for free public access to data and research; and
(10) the necessity of defending privacy and intellectual freedom issues.
In addition, the Research Committee listed a half dozen “emergent issues” that bear
watching in the future: there will be broader collaboration amongst librarians of all
types regarding information literacy; library facilities and services will be integrated
thoroughly with the teaching mission of the institution; new approaches to the design
and delivery of e-scholarship will evolve; academic libraries will collaborate more with
university presses; library focus will shift from warehousing collections to the delivery
of services; and social networking tools will become embedded into academic library
services.
High likelihood, high impact
None of the above trends or emergent issues are that surprising or outlandish, but two
years later ACRL built on that foundation by presenting 26 possible scenarios
developed from an implications assessment of those current trends and gauged their
potential impact on all types of academic and research libraries over the next 15 years.
In June 2010, ACRL published their findings in Futures Thinking for Academic
Librarians: Higher Education in 2025 (ACRL, 2010). In that document, each scenario
was surveyed against the likelihood of it occurring and the significance of that
occurrence so that each scenario ranged from high impact, high likelihood scenarios
that must be considered to low impact, low likelihood scenarios that deserve less
attention. Let’s take a look at the nine scenarios that fell into the upper right quadrant
(high impact, high likelihood) of the XY scatter chart of these possible futures.
One-third of the nine scenarios deal with publishing. Scenario 5 foresees expensive
print textbooks being replaced by online open educational resources where faculty

3. BL create their own teaching modules for classes and for which librarians would have a
23,4 role in collecting, organizing and evaluating materials. Scenario 6 anticipates open
peer-review becoming the norm for scholarly publication so that open access facilitates
a better and faster research process. Finally, Scenario 22 assumes that traditional
information dissemination channels such as university presses collapse and will
impact the tenure system employed at academic institutions. In both scenarios 6 and
210 22, libraries will need to act aggressively to play a role in the coming transformation of
academic publishing.
Three more of the nine top scenarios primarily concern students. Scenario 10 posits
that every student in the future will be non-traditional as college costs increase to the
level that no one can afford a straight four-year shot; it may be just as likely that a
higher education bubble like the recent housing bubble that will remake the academic
economy. Scenario 15 portrays a deep digital divide amongst incoming students, with
the more fortunate being extremely tech savvy, while others will need remedial
computing intervention. However, this seems fanciful in that even the most
disadvantaged young people seem very current on technology if nothing else. The
third scenario regarding students is number 25 and envisions college courses available
to students cafeteria-style across institutions so that students can take what they want
from where they want both in-person and online. How library services would be tied to
a free-floating arrangement like that is unclear.
The last three leading scenarios are technological in nature and are coming fast.
Scenario 11 envisions “large touch screen tables positioned beneath camera and
projectors” as standard equipment in computer labs and libraries, easily allowing
technological collaboration on group projects with the ability to combine resource
materials from all different platforms into one unified product. Scenario 21 focuses on
expanded mobile technology that expedites the integration of resources and people with
a handheld device. Finally, Scenario 12 discerns the increasing threat of cybercrime and
cyberterror and contends libraries will need to balance the IT measures that combat the
threat against maintaining privacy rights and online intellectual freedom.
Ranked with only a medium probability of occurring is the scariest scenario of all
for libraries, number 18, which is given the highest impact in this study. That scenario
visualizes campus library services being outsourced to information companies in a
cost-saving move made possible by the growing wealth of online resources. Our main
defense against this doomsday scenario is providing services to meet the
ever-changing needs of our patrons.
Styles of thinking
Underlying these present/future scenarios is a new way of thinking according to some
commentators. Nicholas Carr wrote an article for The Atlantic in 2008 called “Is Google
making us stupid?” (Carr, 2008) in which he notes that how we look for information and
how we use it has changed in the contemporary world. He likened the change to going
from being “a scuba diver in a sea of words” to zipping “along the surface like a guy on
a Jet Ski.” Carr further developed his point in a 2010 study conducted by the Imagining
the Internet Center at Elon University and the Pew Research Center’s Internet &
American Life Project:
What the Net does is shift the emphasis of our intelligence, away from what might be called a
meditative or contemplative intelligence and more toward what might be called a utilitarian

4. intelligence. The price of zipping among lots of bits of information is a loss of depth in our A couple of miles
thinking (Quitney Anderson and Raine, 2010).
down the road
However, three-quarters of the participants in this Pew study disagreed with Carr’s
provocative thesis when the issue was presented to them. Those surveyed generally
felt that something that delivers more information more efficiently is a good thing for
both society and human intelligence.
Changes in thought will produce changes in literacy as well. Perhaps a better way to 211
view how the library world is changing was expressed in the Pew study by Rachel
Smith of the New Media Consortium:
I think the state of reading and writing will be different in 10 years as a result of the Internet.
Languages evolve, and established practices for writing evolve; when books were
hand-lettered by scribes, they were written very differently than they are now, but it’s hard to
make a case that the practice got ‘worse”.
Indeed, library consultant Beth Gallaway responded in the study:
Instead of reading and writing, let’s say communication and content creation will be easier
and enhanced. I hope that the future of books is this: A regular size, regular weight hardcover
will contain not paper but e-paper that any book can be embedded into, and the content can
change at my whim. I can move fluidly between professionally produced audio and text with
optional hyperlinks that bring me to definitions, criticism, reviews, and discussion forums –
i.e. I can read to page 50, plug it into my car and listen to it for 10 pages, and pick up reading
again on page 60 at my destination. Multimedia would be embedded – a novel might link to a
character blog, a reference book might include video, author bios would be a video. The
“paper” will be a full color touch screen . . . My local library will loan me ebooks for free, that I
can download without ever setting foot into a library building. Anyone would be able to
become a content creator, because of the ease of the publishing platform. And I would be able
to seamlessly consume content in any format on any platform.
It is counter productive to rail about how things were done differently in the past. The
group’s repudiation of Carr’s pessimistic thesis reflects an instinctive faith in progress.
Whether Gallaway’s vision for the future of books and libraries proves true or false is
beside the point; her open, optimistic approach is how we all should face whatever
tomorrow dawns.
References
ACRL (2010), Futures Thinking for Academic Librarians: Higher Education in 2025, June, available
at: www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/publications/whitepapers/whitepapersreports.cfm
Carr, N. (2008), “Is Google making us stupid?”, The Atlantic, July/August, available at: www.
theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/
Quitney Anderson, J. and Raine, L. (2010), The Future of the Internet, February 19, available at:
www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/predictions/2010survey.pdf
Corresponding author
John Maxymuk can be contacted at: maxymuk@camden.rutgers.edu
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints