OK, I'm going to be a librarian for a minute, so bear with me. I belong to a librarian mailing list from which I've gotten information on a number of interesting library issues, from libraries' role in regards to homeless patrons, to library issues in the UK and other parts of the world, to library ethics. A thread of emails today about digital library materials caught my eye and I feel compelled to add to the conversation about this issue here. The discussion began with the misconception of the public at large how much (or rather, little) reliable information (from journals, books, articles, etc.) is available freely online. It segued into the worrying trend of some libraries to clear out vast areas of the physical collection to make room for "makerspaces" and relying more heavily--or in a few cases, completely--on the library's digital collection. Perhaps this works for some libraries, but this is not a move I would advocate in general and here's why.
Ownership versus subscription is one of the biggest reasons I hold back. What patrons don't realize is that libraries most often don't actually "own" the digital materials in their collection the same way that they own a book on the shelf. The library subscribes through a vendor(s) to the list of digital materials that show up on a patron's search results. That list is not set in stone. The actual titles are not purchased, access to them is granted through subscription. If the library chooses to end its subscription to that vendor, the materials are no longer accessible. If a book ceases to be offered through the vendor, it will often be removed from the subscription. My district works with a single vendor for all of our elementary library collections. We were approached at the end of the last school year to see and possibly purchase digital books through one of its services. Getting the books would require only a one-time purchase (rather than a subscription). One of my first questions was "do we actually own the books?" followed quickly by "what happens if the book is no longer offered?" The response was that yes indeed our libraries would own the books and would continue to have access to them no matter what, even if it is no longer available for purchase. This is the exception to the trend, and until more vendors--particularly the big ones--follow suit, I would never replace any part of my collection with an all-digital collection.
There is no expiration on a book. Yes, the information in the book may no longer be valid or reliable after a period of time (think of all the books that still list Pluto as a planet--poor Pluto). But it won't suddenly disappear from the shelf because a subscription ran out. It will remain on the shelf and in the collection until the library decides to remove it. With digital materials, many have expiration dates by virtue of being included in a subscription. When the subscription expires, POOF the book or article or journal is gone without so much as a "by your leave." If the subscription is renewed, the expiration is pushed back, but it is never not there. Digital materials expire, and so to rely largely or solely on such materials for a significant part of the collection seems silly and potentially dangerous. What if the library loses funding and can't afford its subscriptions? There goes the digital collection. At least with physical materials, if the library loses funding the books are still on the shelves. They were already purchased outright. Funding is always a major concern within libraries, so having a collection that is mostly or completely digital is borrowing trouble since there is never a 100% guarantee that all services and materials can and will be fully funded.
Digital formats change. Think of how much they have changed in the last 5, 10, 15 years. When formats change, it isn't always possible to transfer digital information to the new format, and it is lost when the equipment for old formats breaks down and can no longer be used. Books don't have that problem. They have outlasted every digital format change since the birth of computers. Stop and think about that for a moment. Even with their physical limitations, print materials have lasted decades, even centuries. With digital materials, there is a built-in obsolescence that can be incredibly problematic in the long-term. With subscription services, a lot of the hassle is mitigated, but things can still be "lost in translation" after an upgrade.
Information can be removed without the library's control. This is something I bet most people don't think about. How can stuff be removed when the library is paying for it? The same way that Netflix can add and remove content without your, the subscriber's, control. Libraries are often not paying for individual titles, journals, etc. It might be that they choose a publisher they want titles from, or a subject area, or an age group. The vendor is the one that chooses which titles to include, which new ones to add, and which old ones to take out. Libraries are put some control of their collection into the hands of vendors. That's not always a totally bad thing. It saves time for the big libraries that don't have the resources to choose every title individually. But it does mean that libraries don't have complete control of their collections' management. There's a level of trust placed in the vendor that it will choose things that patrons want or need and take away things that they don't. Again, not always a bad thing, but the vendor may (and does) make choices on materials that libraries would not. Having a mostly or completely digital collection will essentially limit the choices libraries can make about their own collection.
Now, this isn't to say that digital materials are all bad. There are a lot of pros that digital materials bring to the table, the first and foremost of which is accessibility. Digital materials can be accessed from anywhere, as long as the person is a patron of the library. Digital materials cross devices, so for the most part they can be accessed from a tablet or smart phone, just as they can from a computer. Having materials for patrons that they can access without having to step foot in the library is a huge selling point. Libraries want to connect people with information, and digital materials help them do that in a way that is extremely convenient for their patrons. You also can't lose digital materials the way you can a magazine, book, or DVD. This is good for the libraries as it cuts down on the need to replace items and spend time processing the replacement and trying to recover lost fees from the patron. Additionally, digital materials have the ability to be interactive in a way that physical materials cannot. With a physical book, what you get is what's printed on the page. Sometimes, the book includes links to websites that have more information or resources. With a digital book, you might find that it includes videos, interactive maps, slideshows, and pop-ups with extra information that you can access right from the book itself. You aren't limited to what can be printed or what can fit on the page. And lastly, many digital materials have features that can help ESL readers, or features like audio for the text to help those with special needs. Unfortunately, printed books haven't become advanced enough to read themselves to you.
In a school library setting like the one I work in, I think a balance of physical and digital materials is important and would be most beneficial to students. Teachers are beginning to use more digital materials in the classroom. At my school, students watch videos, play education games, and use Google docs for both solo work and collaboration with their groups and classes. They are using digital resources in the classroom, and they will use digital resources out in the world at large. But books aren't going away anytime soon, either. So a collection that can teach them how to read, use, analyze, and refer to both print and digital sources would be the best support for their education. Digital materials have a lot to offer libraries and their patrons, but relying solely on them would not, in my opinion, allow a collection to reach its highest potential.
No comments:
Post a Comment