Faculty Survey Warns of Potential Irrelevance for Academic Libraries, Suggests New Roles
Fourth survey by Ithaka may herald a speedier digital transition for libraries
Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 04/08/2010
| Go back to the Academic Newswire for more stories |
- Library disintermediated from discovery process
- Digital preservation more important
- Little uptake on open access
In its fourth survey of faculty members in the United States in a decade, Ithaka S+R warns that declining use of the academic library as a starting point for research portends potential irrelevance and, while the role of a library as a buyer of content remains vital, it must shift to focus on preserving digital content more than on print.
The summary:
Basic scholarly information use practices have shifted rapidly in recent years, and as a result the academic library is increasingly being disintermediated from the discovery process, risking irrelevance in one of its core functional areas;Faculty members’ growing comfort relying exclusively on digital versions of scholarly materials opens new opportunities for libraries, new business models for publishers, and new challenges for preservation; and
Despite several years of sustained efforts by publishers, scholarly societies, libraries, faculty members, and others to reform various aspects of the scholarly communications system, a fundamentally conservative set of faculty attitudes continues to impede systematic change.
“Faculty views are moving in clear directions. Libraries, publishers, and societies need to be attuned to this and, in some cases, to dramatically shift gears or even to catch up,” said Roger C. Schonfeld, Ithaka S+R Manager of Research. “Based on our findings, for example, libraries could consider moving even more rapidly away from print-based holdings, and they should be very cautious in making costly investments in local finding aids for online information as their role as gateway continues to wane. They should also be aware that the value of institutional repositories remains tenuous in the eyes of faculty.”
The report, Faculty Survey 2009: Strategic Insights for Librarians, Publishers, and Societies (PDF), involves responses from 3,025 faculty members based at U.S. four-year colleges or universities, a response rate of 8.6%. Ithaka S+R is the strategy and research arm of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit organization that also includes the archive JSTOR and Portico, a service that preserves digital content.
Reactions
Steven Bell, LJ Academic Newswire columnist, and Associate University Librarian at Temple University, commented on Inside Higher Education that a dramatic revamp of library web sites (as he’s written) is required to re-engage our faculty and students, “putting the emphasis on the librarians—not the content.”
Eric A. Kidwell Professor and Director of the Library, Huntingdon Collage, Montgomery, AL, noted that, at his small, liberal arts college science faculty still seek print books, even when an electronic copy is available. He added that “I do take issue with the impression given that librarians are simply sitting back and still living in some time gone by.”
One commenter suggested that “Ithaka has a vested interest in promoting the end of libraries,” prompting Schonfeld to respond that, “on the contrary we are committed to helping libraries transition to the electronic environment so that they can thrive.”
Library as starting point
Since 2003, faculty members were asked where they started their research:
- The library building
- Their online library catalog
- A general-purpose search engine
- A specific electronic research resource/computer database
The latter two categories have continued to grow, while the former two continue to decline. Only about ten percent of scientists, a discipline where digital documents are common, use library-specific starting points, while about 30 percent of humanists do so, likely because of their continuing reliance on monographs.
Beyond the gateway
Since 2003, the Faculty Survey has asked about faculty perceptions of the importance of three traditional functions of the library. While most faculty have long seen the library-as-buyer as the most vital role, that’s increased: 90% of faculty members view this role as very important, while 71% and 59% now view the archive and gateway roles as very important.
Given the decline as a gateway, the report suggests collaboration: “Libraries should also give careful consideration to ways to deliver these services more efficiently through collaboration and participation in services delivered ‘in the cloud’ or at the network level.”
But libraries may transform from institutions “focused on acquiring, maintaining, and providing services centered on a local print collection into a more electronic hub offering a variety of services to support campus needs for research, teaching, and learning.”
For the first time, the survey asked faculty about their perceptions of two additional roles: teaching support and research support. The results mirrored the gateway role.
Differences in disciplines means strategic challenge
Compared to social scientists and scientists, humanists are more likely to see that archiving and teaching support are very important roles of the library.
The report suggests, however, a dilemma: if the library gears its roles and activities to what is currently most highly appreciated by faculty, it may fall behind on innovation. However, if it does innovate to reengage with scientists, it may lose touch with humanists. And humanists may be moving away from the gateway role, as well.
Less interest in print, more in “e” preservation
The report suggests an acceleration of shared print repositories, given that even faculty at large research institutions showed little interest in local print preservation efforts, even as there’s less value placed in remote print depositories.
But everyone wants to preserve e-journals, which sets up a potential role for libraries, one yet undeveloped. (The report makes a nod to the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access, which prompted a symposium last week.)
Open access?
Though new channels for scholarship such as digital repositories and open access journals have emerged, “a fundamentally conservative set of faculty attitudes continues to impede systematic change,” as faculty members across disciplines are most apt to choose to publish in journals that are read by scholars in their field.
Fewer than 30 percent of faculty members have deposited any scholarly output or research material into some form of repository, though nearly 50 percent have not deposited but hope to do so in the future. Only 15 percent have used an institutional repository.
The solution is likely well beyond the library, as “the highest levels of academic administrators” must change tenure and promotion practices.
What can libraries do? “Further exploration of the possible ways in which information services organizations can help faculty to maximize the value and impact of their research is certainly called for.”
Read more Newswire stories:
Faculty Survey Warns of Potential Irrelevance, New Roles for Academic Libraries
OCLC Proposes New WorldCat Records Policy, Revamping Content and Approach
BCR To Fold, Members To Join LYRASIS
Artists and Photographers Sue Over Google Book Search
After Appeals Court Decision, Whither Net Neutrality?
Columns:
So Big It Fails | Peer to Peer Review
No One Pays the Sticker Price | From the Bell Tower
