Scholarly Information Practices: Implications for Library Collections and Services

Research

Scholarly Information Practices in the Online Environment Implications for Academic Library Collections and Services

Constance MalpasProgram Officer

UC Berkeley Library Roundtable Meeting12 March 2009

Research Disciplinary Research Behaviors and Library Services

UC Berkeley Library Roundtable - 12 March 2009

2

First, some context . . .

Library Services Framework – DLF, OCLCGeneric business requirements, processes, functions

Net-workflows - Dempsey Adapting to changed user expectations

Virtual Research Environments – JISC (etc)Integrated service environment tailored to research lifecycle

Scholarly information practices –UCB, UMinn (etc)An ethnographic approach to modeling library services



3

. . . and some circles



4

Actionable Intelligence … Assisted Thinking?

Analysis and synthesis of the available evidence base

Improved understanding for library management



5

Aim and Intent

Identify current themes in the literatureDisciplinary differences in scholarly work; commonalities

Reflect on how library services can support current scholarly practicesExpectations cultivated in broader online environment

Assess ‘specific gravity’ of service requirementsLocal, group and global solutions; intensity of demand

A literature review aimed at library managers



6

Analytic Framework & Methodology

Scholarly ‘primitives’ (Unsworth, 2000) “functions common to scholarly activity across disciplines”

Five core activitiesSearching, Collecting, Reading, Writing, Collaborating

Disciplinary patterns, high-intensity activitiesDifferent modalities of scholarly work

Adaptive services within (and beyond) the libraryAreas for future research and development



7

Core Findings

Opportunities for shared service development are concentrated in a few areas Knowledge organization, discovery, curation

Operational & network ‘location’ of services varies Some solutions will be found (and should be sought)

outside the library, or between the library and CIT

Significant convergence in disciplinary information practices Core service requirements can be modeled generically



8

accessingassessingchaining

disseminatingnetworking

Interdisciplinaryprobing

translating

Humanities Sciences direct searching scanningco-authoring coordinating monitoring data-sharing

browsing collecting

re-reading assembling

consulting note-taking

Patterns of Convergence in Scholarly Practice

Adapted from C. Palmer, L. Teffau, C. Pirmann (2009)



9

Implications for Library Service Development

Shared understanding of ‘core requirements’ for cross-disciplinary research environments a framework for assessing services

Increased specificity for customization supports modular development model

Clarified picture of where local / community investment is most needed (and where it is not) shared, network-aware service architecture



10



11

Support for core scholarly activitiesAccessing OpenURLAssessing tagsChaining search historyDisseminating forumsNetworking groups, calendar . . . plus browsing, collecting, consulting etc



13

A shared knowledge base and access to disciplinary peers

‘probing’ and ‘consulting’



14

Social scientific behaviors . . .Direct searching known-item access Scanning abstracts, evaluative metadataMonitoring sort by currencyData sharing self-archived contentAccessing OpenURLNetworking contact details



15

A model of the research life-cycleContext-specific Support Services

Support for scientific information practicesco-authoring wikicoordinating grant/project mgtmonitoring current awareness . . . in addition to core activities



17

the function and value of print collections is changing.

half-life of scholarly literature

economic imperatives

How will the university library adapt?

mass digitization

Copyright regimes

academic mission

As scholarly information practices move online

disciplinary disparities



18

“The Library is a common interest of all the departments. In its prosperity is bound up the scholarly fate of the University. Until we have a great library, properly housed and administered, we cannot have a great university. The promise … that a suitable library building will be provided during the next three years constitutes the strongest encouragement for the future of the institution which any single occurrence of the biennium, if not our entire history, has warranted.”

Benjamin I. Wheeler, President of the University of California (1904)

“… all of our major competitors had spent or planned to spend literally tens of millions on new buildings or extensions – indeed the sector as a whole in Scotland appeared to have committed some quarter of a billion pounds to library buildings, apparently as an act of faith, rather than with any obvious rationale. It became very quickly clear that, were Strathclyde to spend say fifty million pounds on refurbishing its library, it would be no better off relatively in any league table.Derek Law, Professor Emeritus and former University Librarian, Strathclyde (2009)

Then . . .

now . . .



19

... collection development as we now know it will cease to exist as selection of library materials will be entirely patron-initiated. Ownership of materials will be limited to what isactively used. The only collection development activities involving librarians will be competition over special collections and archives.... libraries will have abandoned the hybrid model to focus exclusively on electronic collections, with limited investments in managing shared print archives. Local unique collections will be funded only by donor contributions.

And shortly thereafter (by 2014)

... library buildings will no longer house collections and will become campus community centers that function as part of the student services sector. Campus business offices will manage license and acquisition of digital content. These changes will lead campus administrators to align libraries with the administrative rather than the academic side of the organization.

... libraries will have abandoned the hybrid model to focus exclusively on electronic collections, with limited investments in managing shared print archives. Local unique collections will be funded only by donor contributions.

... library buildings will no longer house collections and will become campus community centers that function as part of the student services sector. Campus business offices will manage license and acquisition of digital content. These changes will lead campus administrators to align libraries with the administrative rather than the academic side of the organization.

TAIGA Forum - Provocative Statements - February 2009

... collection development as we now know it will cease to exist as selection of library materials will be entirely patron-initiated. Ownership of materials will be limited to what isactively used. The only collection development activities involving librarians will be competition over special collections and archives.



20

In a partnership with

So, where do you stand with print?



21

RLG Shared Print Collections

Four core projects in FY09 Journals preservation project – managing risk MARC 583 for print archiving – core infrastructure Regional collection of record – model agreements De-accessioning print working group – shared strategies

Advisory Group Shared Print Coordinating Committee – 11 partners

Working Groups Prospective Journals Preservation - 9 partners Regional Collection of Record - 4 partners De-accessioning print back-files - 13 partners

Future of Collections Discussion Group - +120 partners



22

Outcomes and Impact: FY09

Shared Print policy report Synthesized available evidence base for library mgt

Prospective journals preservation Modeling cooperative management of at-risk serials

Shared infrastructure for distributed management Immediately deployable infrastructure supports

‘anonymous’ participation

De-acccessioning print backfiles Identified key obstacles to downsizing redundant

holdings



23

For Discussion

Does distribution of physical inventory at UCB libraries map to current disciplinary requirements?

What strategies are in place to address imbalance in digital access to long-tail humanities resources?

How can confidence in persistence and accessibility of (diminishing) print and (increasing) digital content be raised?

Can a common service architecture serve multiple institutionally distributed populations?



24

Questions, Comments?

Constance [email protected]

OCLC Research White Paperswww.oclc.org/programs/publications/reports.htm

Research Information Management Programwww.oclc.org/programs/ourwork/researchinfo

Shared Print Collections Programwww.oclc.org/programs/ourwork/collectivecoll

Scholarly Information Practices: Implications for Library Collections and Services

Education

Transcript of Scholarly Information Practices: Implications for Library Collections and Services