"No Room for Books"

A few months ago, an article appeared by one Kevin Kiley on Inside Higher Ed entitled "No Room for Books". It's about the University of Denver's plans to move a whopping 4/5 of the Penrose Library’s holdings into offsite storage and change the building into an '"Academic Commons," much like we have been doing here at Bobst.

A friend sent me this article, wondering what I thought of it in light of my job as Offsite Storage Supervisor. You can read the full article here, but here's an excerpt:

The proposed change has raised the ire of some arts, humanities, and social science professors who say that, while impressive, technology hasn’t yet replaced a good old-fashioned trip through the stacks. They argue that the administration dropped the changes in their laps without consulting them and that it will harm their main mode of research.

"You would never ask a scientist to get rid of his or her laboratory," said Annabeth Headrick, an art history professor. "But that’s exactly what’s being done to us."


Although I remain sensitive to faculty concerns and appreciate a good old-fashioned browsing session as much as anyone - and I must stress that I don't know whether there is truth the the assertion that faculty at Denver were never consulted - I must admit that my first reaction to the above is basically, *Sigh*, here we go again.

At NYU, as with other large libraries utlizing offsite storage space, we've been grappling with these concerns for years, and have had little choice but to get with the times in order to keep our library alive and vibrant.

At Denver, however, the plot thickens:

Once the renovations are complete, the university will bring back some books and leave others at the storage facility. The original plans -- which did not cause alarm -- called for 80 percent of the materials to return to the renovated library, leaving behind seldom-accessed journals and those with digital replacements, government documents, and little-used books.

But the university announced to faculty members last week that the renovated library would now only hold 20 percent of its current collection, much to the surprise of professors.

20%?!!! Holy swiss cheese, Batman! I don't know what the Penrose Library's spacial situation is, but it seems shockingly drastic to me to reduce a collection by that much in one fell swoop.

As I've said before, in my very first post on this blog, "As more of our older material goes upstate to the warehouse... we will eventually reach a tipping point where we have more books Off-Site than we have here."

But to the remaining nay-sayers, we can say that this happened organically, and over enough time that most people have gotten used to it, and have reported that they are at least relatively satisfied with the new methods of research that they've developed as a result.

Future of Libraries

Hmmm, the future of the libraries???

This topic seems to come up for discussion at every meeting I attend. Technology has taken over the world and will continue to play a larger and larger role in the future of libraries. But does this really mean fewer books, librarians and other staff who work in different areas of the library? Can this be entirely true? Hopefully, I will be alive to see this what this kind of a library looks like for myself! While I must admit that I do spend more time on the computer, searching for information when I am writing a paper, I still want to do research the old fashioned way…..FINDING A BOOK AND READING IT!

When I am in class, professors strongly suggest that we get most of our citations from either the library’s electronic databases or Google. This surprised me because I believed that books are the best source of information. Nowadays, such may not be the case. I guess it may be time to throw out my 1980 Britannica Encyclopedia Set. SIGHHHHH.

I am not saying that I’m too old for this new technology movement, but I never thought it would completely change the way a library operates. I may not be too old, but I am not that young either. Anyway, this is a neat clip on YouTube that explains and shows what modern library looks like.

"Our Super Technological Future"? Here's Hoping Not!

Recently, I came across this video of a presentation by Carnegie Mellon University Professor Jesse Schell, given at D.I.C.E. 2010.

Schell spends the first part of the talk discussing the surprising success of certain technology and games over the past year, and trying to explain that success, but then he spends the last part projecting a near-future world which will emerge from this "Facebook Games" era in which we find ourselves. He argues that all aspects of our lives could soon be governed by (primarily) corporate technology that will monitor quite literally everything we do, in order that we may earn various points and rewards.

You can find the entire talk posted on various websites, but this excerpt contains the scariest part:



At the 7:11 minute mark, he brings up something that hits especially close to home - the tracking of our reading habits. Here is a transcript:

"You sit down with your new Kindle 3.0, which, of course, has the eye-tracking sensor in it that can tell what you've read and how much you've read of the book. And it's important to read the whole book because, then, if you leave a review on Amazon, you'll get super bonus points if it knows you read the whole book through. As you finish the book [...] you get an achievement unlocked. This thing has been tracking you for 20 Years. You finished 500 novels, this is like a big achievement. You are thinking, "I'm really embarrassed that my 500th novel was this dumb Star Trek novel that I'm reading, because, like, I'm going to remember that forever". And then you start thinking about all these achievements and points and things and realizing that, you know, you have no idea what books your grandparents read or where they went on their daily basis. But these sensors that we're going to have on us and all around us and everywhere are going to be tracking, watching what we're doing forever. Our grandchildren will know every book that we read. That legacy will be there, will be remembered. And you get to thinking about how, wow, is it possible maybe that -- since all this stuff is being watched and measured and judged, that maybe I should change my behavior a little bit and be a little better than I would have been? So it could be that these systems are all crass commercialization and it's terrible. But it's possible that they will inspire us to be better people [...]"


So here's what I thought when I heard this, in approximate order:

1) What is wrong with Star Trek novels?!
2) Dude is actually saying that this will cause us to self-consciously police our own reading lists and this is a good thing?!
3) Didn't librarians win acclaim for, you know, not revealing users' reading histories when faced with the Patriot Act? Why on earth would people entrust their reading histories with corporations instead?
4) OMG, I have a Kindle. Big Brother is watching me right now...


Setting aside the fact that it would indeed be interesting to know what our grandparents read, it is a little bit narcissistic to assume that our grandchildren will wish the same about us. (Personally, I would be thrilled to discover that my grandmother was reading Star Trek novels!) And setting aside that concern about narcissism, I must admit that it's still a boon to anthropologists of the future that we are leaving behind such a huge amount of information about ourselves already.

But! And this is a really big BUT. I fail to see how reading, not reading, or secretly reading particular kinds of books is an accurate measure of a person's worth, intellectual or otherwise. And I also fail to see how any corporate interests collecting our reading histories would always use their powers for good.

Technology, books, privacy and libraries - this is far too much to unpack in a simple blog post.
But after seeing Schell's presentation, I am even happier to be part of a profession that helps people to read whatever they want, without fear of commercial enterprise, or the Thought Police.

Off-Site Storage, and What Lies Ahead

For my first post here, I'd like to stick close to what I've been working on the most: Off-Site Storage!

Bobst Library is but one of many large research libraries that houses portions of its collections Off-Site. In this day and age, space is a huge issue for the future of libraries that wish to expand or even just to remain viable. This is especially true of cities like New York where real estate is gold.

As you all know, the 4th and 5th floors of Bobst are due to be renovated next year. In order to prepare for this, we will need to shift at least 400,000 items out of the building between 1 April 2009 and 1 April 2010. This is far more than our usual output.

Some of this will be accomplished by deaccessioning duplicate materials and a few bound journals, but most of these 400k books will be sent Off-Site.

Here is the current snapshot:



We're getting closer - nearly 80% of our goal completed before the Winter Break!

This has been a huge juggling act for everyone, with every department that you can think of getting involved.

Most of what goes Off-Site is deemed 'Low Use', but as Off-Site holdings have increased over the past year, there has also been a 50% increase in patron requests for Off-Site material.

This could be because Bobcat has become more transparent and user-friendly, or it could be because word has spread that our turnaround time is lightening-fast. It could also be the start of a change in user culture: a new acceptance of the fact that Off-Site Storage is here to stay.

As more of our older material goes upstate to the warehouse, and a not-insignificant number of new acquisitions go directly Off-Site from the Cataloging Department without ever seeing shelving in Bobst at all, we will eventually reach a tipping point where we have more books Off-Site than we have here.

What will Bobst Library look like then?

Is a library with most of its books Off-Site still a library as we know it?

One Desk? One Department.

On Tuesday our candidate mentioned some future trends for Access Services and suggested that we were considering merging the Circulation and Reference desks here at Bobst. Although I don't disagree with the utility of this, and certainly think it makes sense in some organizations, we have no plans for merging Circ and Reference here at Bobst. She must have been thinking about our plans to merge the Business & Documents Center with the Science Reference Center, or perhaps she was thinking about another library altogether.

I have been spending a lot of time writing the 2008-2009 annual report lately and I'm struck by how much crossover we have between Access Services units. I'm very proud that it is now impossible to list our accomplishments in terms of individual units as so much of what we have done crosses the boundaries of our units. Great examples of this include:

• Stacks now pulls material for both Reserve and ILL
• Eileen has leadership responsibility for 3 Circ, Reserve and LP in the evenings
• Collaborations between Stacks and Offsite Prep, (setting priorities and reballancing)
• Quick Check machines, which were investigated by Pat, implemented by Sydney and operationalized by Eric.
• LP uses circulation data to determine patron eligibility for lockers and carrels
  

Over the past 5 years we have worked really hard to unify Access Services and this year's annual report is the first opportunity I have had to pause and notice how far we have come. Together we share our successes and together we learn from our mistakes.

So, while we aren't planning to merge Circ and Reference any time soon, we have successfully merged Circ, Reserves, ILL, LP, Stacks and Offsite Prep into an interrelated group of units collectively known as Access Services.

The Future of Libraries

So, here's quite a topic for our first Blog entry: The future of libraries. I'd like to thank whomever suggested it for making me think about it and do a little research. Thinking about the future of libraries can be scary. After all, will we still have jobs? Will we want those jobs? My one day of thought and research on the subject by no means makes me an expert, but it does make me a little clearer on the topic.

A few years ago a colleague who was working for NYU's Digital Library department explained that in the future, the digital library would be run in a way analogous to the non-digital library, and that Access Services would handle access to the digital library. At the time I liked this explanation, because it gave me some small sense of what I might be doing in the future. Now I'm not so sure. I'm not sure it's what we'll be doing in Access Services, and if it is, I'm not sure I like it.

I found this 10 minute video on the future of libraries that I thought speculated on our future as well as anyone possibly can.


After all, things are moving so quickly it's hard to predict what technology might offer next year, let alone 5 to 10 years down the line.