ACRL College & Research Libraries News

College & Research Libraries News

THE WAY I SEE IT: Making collections work: Remote access and browsing

by Dan C. Hazen

Many library pundits expect an in- creasingly electronic future as print acquisitions wither away and existing hold- ings are digitized. However, the grandiose schemes through which we would leapfrog from our paper-based collections to a vir- tual future assume an unrealistically mas- sive deployment of digitizing resources. The thoughtful utilization of scanning and digi- tal technology, in conjunction with improved subject access and better management tools for interlibrary loan, could more plausibly provide the bibliographic and technical in- frastructure that will allow large-scale co- operation at last to take shape. The results will include revitalized hardcopy collections, more efficient and effective library opera- tions, and enhanced services focused directly upon users and their needs.

The dysfunctions of print

Print-based library collections are purposeful constructions whose contents reflect a particular topic or theme. By bringing together related items, they foster a cumulative coherence beyond what each work can provide on its own. Most users, however, do not pore over every document potentially relevant to their topic. Researchers instead rely on browsing, through which they first see what there is and then make very quick assessments to decide what to inspect more carefully.

Collections’ cooperation, however, presumes remote access. Reduced acquisitions budgets enforce the same result, with additional complications due to the lack of a coordinated approach. From the user’s perspective, all off-site resources are similar in that they must be chosen sight unseen, requested in accord with special procedures, and received only after a wait. The frustrations are least when researchers can easily identify every item of potential utility and then choose the books that they really want. But current trends leave users even less able to browse through the collections that they need.

The pieces of the puzzle

As direct access to collections subsides, catalog records are more and more crucial in guiding users to relevant library materials. The identification and browsing processes formerly supported by physically accessible collections must now be provided through improved bibliographic records. This requires two complementary approaches.

In the first place, catalog records should be as complete as possible. Libraries use classification systems and call numbers to construct browsable collections. However, “less than full” bibliographic records are commonplace. Many materials, prominent among them those sent to off-site storage facilities, receive only cursory cataloging. Classification numbers and subject headings are among the first casualties as records are simplified. Known item searches suffer few effects, but the omissions can stymie researchers seeking to identify larger sets of materials.

More complete catalog records will help compensate for the difficulties that arise when materials are housed beyond easy reach. Only when all bibliographic records carry organizing information like call numbers or subject headings can they be arranged in the sequences that a browser would expect. There are other benefits, as well. In the first place, the consistent inclusion of classification numbers or subject headings will provide our users with access to a complete roster of relevant materials, not just those that happen to be on the shelves at a particular moment. Our “virtual stacks” will always be in order and complete. Perhaps more important, any library’s holdings can be shelved in but a single physical arrangement, to which stack-bound browsers must adjust. More complete and consistent cataloging will permit users to exploit all the sequencing flexibility that our cataloging formats and online systems can provide. Enhanced cataloging, in other words, will allow our users to generate “virtual collections” of their own design.

Online catalogs that permit researchers to create their own collections, however, will not address their subsequent need to “browse” these holdings and isolate the materials that they really want to see. For many years, technological limitations restricted catalog listings to database records comprised of elaborately formatted character strings, machine-readable codes, and brief snatches of text.

Digital technology, as it offers new ways to present and represent information, also enables our second approach to improved bibliographic access. Electronic images that complement and enhance bibliographic records may allow users seeking remote holdings to approximate and in some cases improve upon the sorts of quick inspections that they have traditionally conducted at the shelf. These image files could be limited to the title page, the table of contents, and perhaps a page or two of the introduction. The goal is to convey the flavor and a bit of the substance of a document, so that users can quickly inspect works online and decide what to retrieve.

Our scanning resources are finite, and their deployment requires careful consideration. Only very narrow coverage will be possible if we exhaust our digital energies in scanning entire works. Moreover, large- scale, full-text scanning assumes relationships between research routines, extended electronic texts, and digital delivery mechanisms that are still uncertain: on-screen study is tedious, massive printouts are expensive, fully searchable texts are costly and often unnecessary. Limited scanning to enhance bibliographic records, by contrast, could significantly improve access to the bulk of our collections. This approach also makes sense in terms of technology, economics, and user needs.

Benefits of selective scanning

Digitizing front matter is an activity that can be pursued on its own. The same holds for ensuring more complete bibliographic records. In each case, the advantages will affect libraries as well as users. Even greater benefits will result from a combined approach. The possibilities include the following:

• Simplified cataloging. Cataloging could become quicker and cheaper if elements like long contents notes were replaced by digital images of tables of contents. Some of the difficulties associated with non-Roman scripts might likewise be reduced. Rare book cataloging can also bog down in painstaking transcriptions of complicated title pages. A digital picture could, literally, be worth a thousand words.

• Collection management. Effective electronic browsing should enable library holdings to generate the demand they truly deserve, without artificial distortions due to physical inaccessibility or because catalog records do not fully suggest their intellectual content. Librarians can then employ accurate measures of interest and use as they locate materials on-site or in remote storage, decide on multiple copies or withdrawals, and set preservation priorities.

• Cost control. It is expensive for libraries to retrieve materials from remote storage, and even costlier to order a book through interlibrary loan. Online browsing will not necessarily reduce either storage retrievals or ILL activity. It will, however, encourage informed requests in which materials are used as productively as possible. Keeping track of all these retrievals will allow us to conceptualize more adequately the potential nature, role, and costs of distributed collections. Levels of demand for remote materials will likewise inform our efforts to improve delivery systems.

• Cooperation. Scanning and improved bibliographic control are linked operations appropriate for all our libraries. But repetitive scanning makes no more sense than duplicative cataloging. A coordinated approach is essential. Enhanced records, when incorporated in (and perhaps sponsored by) the bibliographic utilities, will also enable scholars to “browse” the fullest possible universe of materials appropriate to their research.

Better online catalogs and virtual browsing will renew the bases for cooperative collection development. Librarians will be able to associate levels of demand with individual items, categories of material, and entire collections. Appropriate joint strategies can then be devised for collection development, preservation, and cataloging.

• The role of technical services. Targeted scanning with improved bibliographic records will have a direct impact on cataloging. Catalogers, too often beleaguered and too easily ignored, are cartographers of the world of learning.¹ Digital technology could substantially enhance their maps, thereby helping cataloging to fulfill its potential as libraries’ quintessential user service.

• Building the digital library. The enhanced catalog records and digital images proposed here should be complemented with mechanisms to track interlibrary loan requests on a national level as well as within individual libraries. Items generating heavy interlibrary loan traffic will often be strong candidates for digitization. The research library community has not yet devised a compelling strategy for digitizing hardcopy holdings, though our limited resources mean that any efforts must be small. A system that reflects informed user demand will serve us well.

Conclusion

Digital images can be particularly useful in conveying a sense of materials not readily at hand. Catalog records that routinely include subject access will enable our users to exploit the full promise of automated systems and the MARC format, at the very moment when on-site browsing takes a back seat to remote access and the associated reliance on online records. Measures to track more precisely interlibrary loan traffic will open the way both to new strategies for cooperative collection development and to the creation of a shared, cost-effective “digital library.”

Notes

1. My colleague Barbara Halporn introduced me to this happy phrase.