Let's Hope the Glass Is Half-full

The Shifted Librarian - Shifting Libraries at the speed of byte

Let's Hope the Glass Is Half-full

Ernie asks what I think of the new First-Ever Survey of Technology Use by Library and Museum Professionals report from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). Before we get started, I should note that I'm a big believer in the IMLS and the grants they award, in part because I've worked on Find-It! Illinois, a project they've helped fund. I'm also concentrating on public libraries because they're usually the only type of library that is completely independent from a parent source that provides funding. Every type of library has funding issues, but school libraries are affiliated with their schools, special libraries are affiliated with their larger organizations, and academic libraries are affiliated with their institutions).

With those caveats in mind, my first reaction to reading the report was, "Yeah, and...." I find it depressing more than anything else, with little chance for improvement before they do their next survey in 2004. Some highlights:

Technology Use
"Libraries' technology use is pervasive, particularly the basic technologies that automate and support services to the public.

The different kinds of libraries in the survey have sources of funds that have enabled them to invest in technologies.

Public libraries have benefited from E-Rate discounts, grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and IMLS' Grants to States program, which is Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) funds administered by the State Library Administrative Agencies.... ²

Take a look at the first bullet point. Congress is trying to take away E-Rate funding for any library that doesn't filter its internet terminals. Librarians are damned if they do (the slippery slope of ceding our beliefs and skills to software) and damned if they don't (goodbye money to help run that internet connection).

Then you've got the Gates Initiative. Librarians are damned if they do (widespread adoption of a single operating system that is known for its security problems) and damned if they don't (not even possible unless you can afford to have a full-time technical person on staff).

Then you've got your LSTA grants, which it's difficult for me to find anything bad to say about, even though there is a lot of paperwork involved. Of course, there's only so much money to go around, and I've heard of some really good grants that haven't been funded for the most ridiculous reasons (for example, they were five frickin' cents off in adding up the budget line items). Overall, though, LSTA grants = good.

Survey Results for Public Libraries

"Technology use: Ninety-nine percent of public libraries that responded indicated that they currently use some kinds of technologies. The technologies most widely used are: access to the Internet, e-mail, computerized catalogs of library collections, desktop computers, standard office software, and Web sites. Among the small libraries (those serving populations under 10,000), e-mail and Internet access are strong (more than 85 percent), but they lag in online catalogs, desktop computers, standard office software, and Web sites. Only 1 percent of respondents said that 'None of the above' technologies are in use. Ninety-nine percent report some funding source for technology.

Digitization: Twenty-five percent reported activities in the past 12 months. Among the small libraries, only 8 percent reported any activities in that time period. Beyond the next 12 months, 31 percent expect to be involved in digitization. Among the survey groups, public libraries are the least involved in digitization activities. Funding is the most-cited hindrance to digitization activities, though other institutional priorities, lack of expertise and staff time were also noted."

It's great to have a computerized card catalog, but my home library's catalog is accessible via telnet only. Granted, they're in the process of migrating to a new vendor that will provide a web-based catalog, but I point this out because they're part of a consortium.

I think it would have been interesting to qualify how public libraries are using the stated technologies. Are they using email for communication with other libraries and for maintaining contact with other librarians, or are they actively offering email-based reference services? I think you'd see a big drop in the numbers if you started asking specific questions. And my guess is that the 75% that have web sites change about 5% of their sites on anything like a regular basis.

There's a longer list of technologies on that page, but note that wireless and wireless services aren't even a blip on the radar screen to which libraries can check a "no" answer.

And as for digitization, my home library is again emblematic of the problem. We have some great history in this area, with more in the making. A portion of the area served by the Library incorporated last year, and the Library doesn't have the resources to document the evolution of the newest village in Illinois. How sad is that? In addition, the area is experiencing accelerated change from being a more rural community to adding more commerce and denser residential nodes.

The Library desperately needs help to document everything that is going on, but they don't have the money, staff, or resources. They could go for a grant, but grants rarely pay for personnel. They also desperately need to expand the size of the building before they can add even one more staff person, so they have to concentrate on passing a referendum issue first.

Unfortunately, my home library isn't unique in (most of) this situation. And during a time of state budget cuts and voter rejection of requests to increase taxes (and hey, I'm a voter so I feel the pain, too), it's unlikely any of this will change in the near future.

So that's my doom and gloom assessment. I predict that in 2004, the numbers for public libraries will double. You can look at that as the glass being half-empty (only 16% would be involved in current digitization projects), or you can look at it as the glass being half-full (an additional 8% would be providing digital projects online).

Unless something radical changes (like, say, we start figuring out how to market ourselves effectively), I don't see our funding sources or internal resources changing much during the next two years. I hope I'm wrong. I hope that the technology gets cheaper and easier. I do my job day in and day out in the hope that I'm wrong and that we can do more to move forward.