Library technology
Previous: Academic Libraries Home Copyright and Licensing
|
Public access internet services critical to the role of the library, by metropolitan status and poverty | |||||||
|
Metropolitan Status |
Poverty Level | ||||||
|
Public Services |
Urban |
Suburban |
Rural |
Low |
Medium |
High |
Overall |
|
Provide education resources and databases . . . for K-12 students |
80.9% |
82.1% |
75.6% |
78.3% |
80.7% |
82.9% |
78.7% |
|
. . . for students in higher education |
40.9% |
33.7% |
40.3% |
36.7% |
46.9% |
37.3% |
38.2% |
|
. . . for home schooling |
21.0% |
29.5% |
39.9% |
34.0% |
30.9% |
22.0% |
33.4% |
|
. . . for adult /continuing ed. students |
51.9% |
43.5% |
47.5% |
46.8% |
47.4% |
45.6% |
46.9% |
|
Provide info. . . . for local economic development |
8.1% |
7.2% |
6.6% |
6.9% |
7.6% |
13.8% |
7.1% |
|
. . . about state and local business opportunities |
8.0% |
6.2% |
7.7% |
7.3% |
6.3% |
12.7% |
7.2% |
|
. . . for local business support |
12.1% |
10.1% |
4.4% |
7.3% |
8.2% |
17.7% |
7.6% |
|
. . . for college applicants |
9.8% |
10.3% |
17.6% |
13.4% (n=1,711) |
17.0% |
11.3% |
13.9% |
|
. . . about the library’s community |
25.5% |
31.2% |
21.3% |
25.9% (n=3,291) |
22.5% |
19.0% |
25.3% |
|
. . . or databases regarding investments |
9.5% |
8.9% |
3.8% |
6.7% |
4.6% |
8.2% |
6.4% |
|
Provide access to govt. info. (e.g. , tax forms, Medicare, paying traffic tickets) |
47.9% |
52.5% |
60.1% |
55.9% |
54.0% |
54.4% |
55.6% |
|
Provide computer and Internet skills training |
49.9% |
40.4% |
31.9% |
37.0% |
40.4% |
50.0% |
37.6% |
|
Provide services for job seekers |
58.0% |
66.2% |
60.9% |
62.3% |
62.0% |
53.2% |
62.2% |
|
Provide services to immigrant populations |
20.2% |
19.4% |
15.5% |
17.8% |
17.0% |
22.8% |
17.7% |
|
Other |
19.5% |
14.0% |
16.9% |
16.8% |
14.0% |
12.7% |
16.3% |
Weighted missing values, n=1419. Key: -- : No data to report. * : Insufficient data to report. Will not total 100%, as respondents could select more than one option. Source: ALA Public Library Funding & Technology Access Study, 2007-2008.
IT is on the rise @ your library
Technology became an increasingly major component of public-library services in 2008 as demands for and availability of information technology increased. Connected public libraries offer a range of services and resources to the communities they serve, including licensed resources, homework and education support, training, and e-government assistance. (See chart, preceding page).
A majority of libraries surveyed for the Public Library Data Service (PLDS) Statistical Report, a project of the Public Library Association, reported that the following features available through their library websites: on-line public-access catalogues (OPAC), online databases, personalized patron accounts, and online reference services. Almost all the libraries have a website containing a calendar of events, and most provide community links, children and young-adult pages, staff-created pages, and acknowledgement of library friends. The proportion of libraries having these features was the same as or greater than in past years.
Libraries’ technology features, 2008
|
|
|
# |
% | |
|
Total number of libraries |
873 |
100 | ||
|
Library website features |
|
| ||
|
|
OPAC/online catalog |
832 |
95.3 | |
|
|
Library purchased on-line databases |
758 |
86.8 | |
|
|
Personalized patron accounts |
682 |
78.1 | |
|
|
On-line reference services |
645 |
73.9 | |
|
Library website contents |
|
| ||
|
|
Programming information/events calendar |
836 |
95.8 | |
|
|
Children/Young Adult page(s) |
729 |
83.5 | |
|
|
Community links |
739 |
84.7 | |
|
|
Library friends' page(s) |
563 |
64.5 | |
|
|
Basic library information |
856 |
98.1 | |
|
|
Library staff created content |
631 |
72.3 | |
|
Libraries that have website |
857 |
98.2 | ||
|
|
Wireless Internet access |
776 |
88.9 | |
|
|
Wireless extending outside the library |
351 |
40.2 | |
|
Access to locally produced digitized collections |
382 |
43.8 | ||
|
Virtual reference services via |
|
| ||
|
|
E-mail/Web form |
526 |
60.3 | |
|
|
Chat reference |
275 |
31.5 | |
|
|
Instant messaging |
158 |
18.1 | |
|
Filtered Internet access |
623 |
71.4 | ||
|
|
Staff |
507 |
58.1 | |
|
|
Patron |
85 |
9.7 | |
Source: Public Library Data Service Statistical Report, 2008
In the area of technology service, 89 percent of libraries responding offered Wi-Fi inside their libraries, 44 percent provided access to locally produced digitized collections, and 71 percent used Internet filters on library computers. The majority (60 percent) offered reference via email, followed by online chat and instant message.
School library media programs keeping pace — or setting the pace
School library media programs have also been revolutionized by technology over the past decade or so. Internet-capable computers, both in the school library media center and throughout the school, are networked to provide access to library catalogs, licensed databases, and the vast information resources on the World Wide Web. These online resources extend the reach of a media program beyond the media center’s walls into every classroom, lab, and office in the school. And, in many cases, remote access allows students and teachers to access these resources from home.
From “School Libraries Count! The Second National Survey of School Library Media Programs.” American Association of School Librarians, 2008. (SLMC = school library media centers; LMC = library media center)
Half of responding schools report at least 16 computers in the school library media center and at least another 112 elsewhere in the school. The top quarter of respondents have at least 33 media center computers and another 200 elsewhere in the school, while the top five percent have at least 68 media center computers and another 500 elsewhere in the school. The numbers of computers of bothtypes tend to rise dramatically with grade level and total school enrollment.
Online databases also are becoming a ubiquitous feature of school library media programs. Almost three-quarters of survey respondents reported offering remote database access.
E-books and print books are on a par among students when it comes to research or class assignments, with almost equal numbers of students using each type, according to ebrary’s 2008 Global Student E-book Survey. Fifty-one percent of students would “very often or often” opt to use electronic versions of books rather than print versions, compared with 32 percent who “sometimes” prefer e-books and 17 percent who always use the print version.
- Other findings from the ebrary survey:
E-books rank among the top resources students consider trustworthy, along with print materials such as books, textbooks, reference (dictionaries, encyclopedias, maps), and journals. - Google and other search engines are leading tools for students conducting research or completing class assignments. Other top resources include e-books, print books, e-reference resources such as online dictionaries, encyclopedias and maps, and Wikipedia.
- Fifty-seven percent of students view instruction in information literacy as very important, 38 percent consider it somewhat important, and 5 percent find it not important.
Academic libraries maintain leading role in digitizing print collections
Academic libraries maintain their leading role in partnering to scan and digitize print book collections, with the potential to provide unprecedented access to millions of volumes. Large-scale digitization initiatives include Google Book Search, Microsoft Live Search Books, Open Content Alliance, and the Million Book Project. Critics of commercial ventures question potential limitations to access, restrictions on public-domain works scanned for commercial purposes from library collections, technical specifications with digitization partners, and legal restrictions on digital preservation of copyrighted works.
One study concludes that research institutions will be pressured to justify investments in maintaining their legacy print collections. Further, consolidation of holdings in a shared storage environment can save space, and national and regional shared-storage efforts need firm support from the library community. Lastly, research libraries must consider how future selection and acquisition decisions will be shaped in light of increased online content and worldwide access to core collections, according to the study.
In what may portend a collaborative digital future, two dozen large research libraries launched a shared repository of digital collections in 2008, including scanned books, articles, special collections, and a range of “born digital” materials. Called HathiTrust (hathi, the Hindi word for elephant, is meant to evoke not only size but memory, wisdom, and strength), the venture includes the 12 universities in the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC), the University of Virginia, and the 11 university libraries of the University of California (U.C.) system, with U.C.’s participation coordinated by the California Digital Library (CDL). HathiTrust started out with more than two million books — about a billion pages — nearly 16 percent of which are in the public domain and available to the public to read online. Materials protected by copyright, although not available, are nevertheless “given the full range of digital archiving services,” to allow for reliable preservation. Content is expected to grow rapidly as current members and new partners contribute more digitized content.
Further experiments foster books that are “born digital.” Notably, the New York University Division of Libraries and the Institute for the Future of the Book formed MediaCommons, a partnership to build digital infrastructure models for how university presses could expand their publishing programs to include digital and networked formats. This experiment in collaboration should demonstrate possible solutions to the complex issues facing university presses and scholarly communication in the humanities, where scholars most often publish books rather than journal articles.
Digitization fosters collaboration: More than half (53 percent) of the more than 100 digitization projects in museums and academic, public and special libraries that took part in an international study conducted by Research and Markets’ Primary Research Group have collaborated with another department to work jointly on a project, and almost half (49 percent) of the organizations outsource some form of their digitization work.