Search News


Browse Archives

News

A Truly Bookless Library

September 17, 2010

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The difference between the University of Texas at San Antonio’s Applied Engineering and Technology Library and other science-focused libraries is not that its on-site collection is also available electronically.

It is that its on-site collection is only available electronically.

The idea of a libraries with no bound books has been a recurring theme in conversations about the future of academe for a long time, and it has become common practice for academic libraries to store rarely used volumes in off-campus facilities. But there are few, if any, examples of libraries that actually have zero bound books in them.

Some libraries, such as the main one at the University of California at Merced, and the engineering library at Stanford University, have drastically reduced the number of print volumes they keep in the actual library building, choosing to focus on beefing up their electronic resources. In fact, some overenthusiastic headline writers at one point dubbed Stanford’s library “bookless.” But that is “a vision statement, not a point of fact,” says Andrew Herkovic, the director of communications for Stanford’s libraries.

San Antonio says it now has the first actual bookless library. Students who stretch out in the library’s ample study spaces — which dominate the floor plan of the new building — and log on to its resource network using their laptops or the library’s 10 public computers will be able to access 425,000 e-books and 18,000 electronic journal articles. Librarians will have offices there and will be available for consultations.

Students used to get their engineering and technology books from a collection at the campus’s main library. That collection is still there, and books from it are available upon request. But at the new library dedicated to that specialty, the only dead trees are in the beams and furniture.

The fact that San Antonio has actually built a literal version of what many in the industry hold up as symbol of the inevitability of electronic as the prevailing medium in academe may be commendable, but it is not “earth-moving,” says Roger Schonfeld, the managing director of Ithaka S+R, a nonprofit that promotes innovation in libraries and elsewhere. Many libraries, especially science and engineering ones, have started moving their print volumes out of the building and into remote storage.

Lisa Hinchliffe, president of the Association of College and Research Libraries, says that her institution, the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, and several others have embedded librarians in various department buildings. Their offices in those buildings, it could be argued, constitute bookless libraries inasmuch as they are places where students and professors go to learn about how to use campus collections that can be accessed from anywhere.

More interesting than the fact that San Antonio’s newest library has no printed books in it is the fact that more and more libraries are devoting less space to printed books, and are thus reimagining the physical space of the library, Hinchliffe says. Whether the building houses half of its former print collection or none of it, the evolution of the library as a physical hub is something nearly every library is dealing with.

As a shared space for discovery, socializing, and studying, the library is still very much relevant and in demand, says Krisellen Maloney, dean of libraries at San Antonio. That is why the university invested a new library space instead of just putting librarians in offices around campus, Maloney says. “You study and work in the library,” she says. “That’s how libraries have always been. When people come to the library with books, they’re not necessarily using the books. They’re also there for the services — to consult, get instruction, find content, and use the content.” (This paragraph has been updated since publication to correct an error.)

For the latest technology news from Inside Higher Ed, follow IHEtech on Twitter.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on A Truly Bookless Library

  • eBook ownership
  • Posted by BH on September 17, 2010 at 7:45am EDT
  • I'm curious as to how many of the 425,000 eBooks the San Antonio library owns versus licenses. Is the library as ephemeral as it is virtual? Hopefully any licensed content allows for archival and for copies to be printed in part or in whole. Will old editions be available for those who read for the pleasure of learning about things outside their profession?

  • Posted by Commentarius on September 17, 2010 at 11:00am EDT
  • @font-face { font-family: "Cambria"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }

    It's a PR coup when a library can open a garden variety info commons in a different building and claim it's the world's first anything. This is nothing new, or even particularly innovative. You could put a networked computer in a restroom and call it a "bookless library" if you wanted to. The books are where they've always been, in the main library, and they are no more digitized than they were before. And the alleged 425,000 ebooks are certainly not all in engineering, so one has to wonder where that suspiciously high number comes from. Not to mention that this new wonder doesn't even have its own web page! I'm surprised that librarians seem to be taken in by this hype.

  • and this is good because......?
  • Posted by Hoosier Prof on September 17, 2010 at 12:45pm EDT
  • I am amazed at how easily institutions allow technological advances to drive strategic direction, rather than relegating technology to its proper role as an instrument of strategy rather than a raison d'etre. In this case, every fiber of my being rebels against the argument that a bookless library is best for society. I suppose it's best for the budget, possibly good PR and a way to get IT grants, but is it best for library clientele? The most obvious question to me is whether electronic sources make access more difficult for those with physical and other disabilities (or maybe not so obvious a question, since it wasn't addressed here).

  • Posted by Roger C. Schonfeld , Manager of Research at Ithaka S+R on September 17, 2010 at 12:45pm EDT
  • The impressive new facility that UTSA has created in support of user needs for new and evolving library services suggests some of what is possible when libraries are able to re-allocate resources away from print collections and their support. While engineering and medical (http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/06/09/hopkins) libraries seem to be adopting a growing vision for a greatly reduced role for print, it is too soon to suggest that a complete transition away from print formats is more widely inevitable for academic libraries.

     

    First, note that with respect to UTSA and Stanford (http://chronicle.com/blogPost/Trading-Spaces-Science-Lib/26025/) engineering libraries, no collections have actually been de-accessioned; rather, at least for now, they are being retained but not in close proximity with users. Second, across libraries, most de-accessioning of print collections as a result of their digitization has been concentrated in the field of scholarly journals, where careful research has established that most (but not all) user needs for print journals are supplanted by the availability of digitized versions (http://www.ucop.edu/cmi/). Third, faculty members’ comfort with the withdrawal of collections varies from discipline to discipline; scientists are far more like to accept electronic-only access than are other fields such as certain humanistic disciplines, and even if both are moving in the same direction, as we have seen from surveys we have conducted, that does not mean a complete transition is inevitable for everyone. Finally, especially for humanistic scholars, questions about the quality of digitization of print monographs, and the implications for a transition away from print, were an important focus of a recent CLIR report, which suggested that while new approaches to collection management were called for the notion of widespread bookless libraries was not imminent (http://www.clir.org/pubs/abstract/pub147abst.html).

     

     

    With respect to humanities monographs, currently being digitized at scale by the Google partner libraries and other initiatives, more research (http://www.against-the-grain.com/2010/08/lyrasis-awarded-imls-grant/) will be conducted in the coming years to establish whether the trends that have begun with respect to scholarly journals and with respect to the sciences and medicine are likely to take hold elsewhere. If user needs support such complete re-thinking of other kinds of library collections, then the kind of system-level analysis (http://www.ithaka.org/ithaka-s-r/research/what-to-withdraw) and infrastructure (http://www.crl.edu/node/6474) for journals should also be developed for monographs as well. With the right kinds of system-level models, collections integrity and preservation can be assured while, as UTSA shows us, changing user needs can be addressed creatively by academic libraries.

     

    Roger C. Schonfeld

    Manager of Research, Ithaka S+R

  • re: the Achilles Heel of the Paperless Library
  • Posted by Peter C. Herman , Professor of English literature at San Diego State University on September 17, 2010 at 12:45pm EDT
  • While it's certainly true that most of the journal articles and all of the databases I use in my research have long since migrated online, there is a major danger here entirely unaddressed in this article: cancellations due to budget problems.

    For example, I have just finished writing a book that relied heavily on the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, an essential resource for anybody working on the history and literature (probably more) of the British Isles. One day I logged on only to discover that this resource had disappeared. The library, due to the budget shortfall, had cancelled the subscription. One moment it is there, the next moment, gone. Given the economic situation in the United States, this is not a theoretical problem, but a very real one that has actually occurred. Paperless libraries necessarily depend upon two things: electricity and funds to maintain the subscriptions. If either goes, you do not have a library any more.

  • Hype is right
  • Posted by CalLib on September 17, 2010 at 1:45pm EDT
  • To the point made by Commentarius, I don't think that it is most librarians who are buying into the hype, but university administrators (including some senior library administrators) and campus PR and development people. Whenever you see the term "dead trees" referring to books, the author (or the author's source of information) is making a value statement unrelated to actual needs. If your own ideology considers print materials a problem to be overcome rather than a format with strengths and weaknesses, more appropriate in some instances and less in others, how well are you serving the population you exist to serve?

  • No dead trees in an "electronic" library?
  • Posted by A Librarian on September 17, 2010 at 3:45pm EDT
  • I have to laugh at the statement that the only "dead trees" are in the building and the furniture. Obviously this person has never seen the rate at which students print out articles and content from electronic books, journals, and web resources. The dead trees aren't on the shelf; they're spouting out of the printer!

  • Bookless Library
  • Posted by Felipe de Ortego y Gasca , Scholar in Residence at Western New Mexico University on September 17, 2010 at 3:45pm EDT
  • It seems to me that by definition a library entails the presence of books. Admittedly, the word "book" can take on many meanings, but a library without books is like a beer distributor without beer--forgive such an inept analogy!

    In my Introduction to the Profession course at the Graduate School of Library and Infor­mation Studies, Texas Woman’s Uni­versity, one of my perennial lectures asked students to recon­sider the concept of book beyond informa-tion on bound pages stored in libraries for public ac­cess. Asking them to consider such a concept was, to say the least, disconcerting to many if not all of my students particularly since their aim in acquiring the Master of Library Science or the doctorate in Information Studies was to prepare them for a career in the field of books and docu­ments. No way for a book not to be a book as they eiconically un­derstood the concept of book.

    Short of asking me if I was a Com­munist, the students in my introduction course were aghast at the impertinence of a notion ques­tioning the impermanence of the book and at my cheek as a mem­ber of the faculty to pose the un­thinkable. Undaunted, I assailed their eiconic sense of book ex­plaining apocryphally that the word “book” was after all only an acronym for “basic organization of knowledge” and that being the case it didn’t really much matter the format of that organization. Adding that the word “book” was not a sui generis irrevocable defi­nition.

     

     

     

    A book can be many things I explained. It could be a rolled parchment document with appropriate titula for finding it in the libraries of antiquity. It could be a computer disk inscribed with informa-tion, or it could be an on-line construct available for elec­tronic access (much the way Ste­phen King’s Riding the Bullet is available in cyber space)

     

    I

     

     

    usually brought the students around to the unthinkable by providing them with a bit of history of the book, explaining that books were merely a mne­monic invention that challenged the primacy of the oral tradition at a time when information was grow­ing beyond human ability to remember everything. Books were thus an extension of mem­ory. And in our own time when the growth of information format­ted as books is exponentially a hardship in the face of diminish­ing paper re­sources and increas­ing costs of publishing and ship­ping, it seem­ed an appropriate time, I argued, for a paradigm shift in the manufacturing concept of books as well as a paradigm shift in how we stored and ac­cessed information. Electronic access minimizes trips to libraries I explained and they gasp­ed at the heresy.

     

    Appropriately, my students coun­tered with aesthetic arguments that electronic books (in the form of Sony Bookman) could not re­place the textured feel of books, their tactility. One could not, after all, dog-ear an electronic page of text. Finely crafted books were a joy to behold on book shelves. The book was irreplaceable. Hard “logic” to rebut.

     

    Still, I kept on, the 21st century would challenge prevailing 20th century concepts in an efficient continuity of ideas. The book would survive. Just as old 78 rpm records survive for the aficionado. Things would be dif­ferent as they remained the same. The extensions of “information needs” would just become more electronic in their deli-very.

     

    I’m sure my students nodded tol­erantly, recogni-zing the ploys of professorial polemics intended to get their juices going. But when I see those students at library con­ferences now they talk to me in “cyber-langue” and thank me for the oracu-lar segment of their introduc­tion to the profession.

     

     

    H

     

     

    owever, soothsayer I am not. But, like Hamlet, I know a handsaw from a hawk. I know the concept of the book will chan­ge to meet the chal­lenges of the times and the tech­nologies we develop for informa­tion transfer, storage, and re­trieval. In the latter half of the 20th century our notions of libraries as simply “book ware­houses” has changed as has our notion of li­brarians as just “women” who stamp due-dates on charge slips on the inside back of books and shush us to be quiet in the sanctum li­bris. As an octogenarian still in academe, I know Libraries and Librarians are information repositories and pro­fessionals who help us make it through the plight.

     

     

     



     

  • It is still a library if...
  • Posted by Teacher Scholar and Student on September 17, 2010 at 9:45pm EDT
  • A library holds permanently and makes accessible all forms of media, including print media and books, for the needs to teaching, research, and learning forever. So long as this so-called (but not in fact) bookless library focuses its money on purchasing permanent access to various holdings, it remains a library. If it instead turns itself into a glorified IT department, then the matter would better be handled by capable IT people. Permanent access to material for teaching, research, and learning-- for this and future generations. Why can't people see through the hype?

  • Posted by Another librarian on September 17, 2010 at 9:45pm EDT
  • This is to be admired? The printed book is one of the greatest technological devices ever invented and it will be around a lot longer than any electronic format anything. IMO, all technology is the Emperor's New Clothes until proven otherwise. A library that actually aspires to be "bookless," is not a library at all.

  • Copyright?
  • Posted by Michael Gill , Graduate Student/Psychology at Walden University on September 18, 2010 at 9:30am EDT
  • How have they dealt with copyright issues? Did they just dump anything not digitizable due to copyright? That would amount to an awful lot of 20th Century texts.

    If the students and faculty still have access to that material, can they access more than one chapter at a time? How does someone get hold of the full-text of an entire book? Must they submit 10 to 20 separate requests?

  • Game over, man
  • Posted by Peleus on September 18, 2010 at 3:30pm EDT
  • Sure, like no one could see this coming. Ready? Repeat after me; kilobyte, megabyte, gigabyte, terabyte, petabyte . . .

  • Meet needs and provide services
  • Posted by Charlotte , Library Media Specialist at Spring ISD on September 20, 2010 at 10:00pm EDT
  • Are you meeting students' needs? (They may say yes, being largely unaware of what is not available to them electronically that librarians should know is available.) Are you providing a full range of services? I rather think not.

    I am a librarian and I love technology. I love to read for pleasure on my Kindle. I am not opposed to online databases, but as a librarian, I am all in favor of having online databases--as long as we can keep paying for them. I am looking at having to cut databases this year because I don't think my budget can handle them all, and I don't have many.

    I prefer to read on my Kindle; however, all books are not digitized. I do not expect that they will be in my lifetime. (Unless we put the unemployed to work on digitizing them all.) Digitizing is expensive and time consuming.

    All this pride in saving trees--so short sighted! Electronics in the landfill are more worrisome to our environment!

    My next question is this: only 10 public computers, or did I read something wrong? That is sad, and that cannot possibly adequately serve students. I don't care if most of them do have a laptop. What if they have lugged thirty pounds all day and simply can't keep on doing it but still need to go to the library? What if they are lugging around a relative's old cast off computer that is not adequate? Please! That makes little sense.

    Budget cuts will take a huge bite out of electronic resources that must be paid for repeatedly via subscription. And our capitalists want our electronic resources to be delivered in subscription formats--and sometimes for good reasons. But what will universities do when they just can't afford them? Students won't have anything to fall back on or rely on?

    I do like the idea of having a librarian office in each university building! I'd like to see that replicated!

  • dead trees?
  • Posted by graham , general manager at mac papers on September 22, 2010 at 3:45pm EDT
  • The author of the article speaks of dead trees...as if that is a problem?

    The paper industry is one of the most environmentally conscience industries in the United States.

    Practically every paper mill in the US is SFI and FSC certified, which means that the way they harvest, manufacture and ship their product is environmentally sustainable.

    Did you know that a 16 page 4 color book has a smaller carbon footprint than one DVD?

    What's not environmentally sustainable is the device you're reading this comment on.

    Also, I don't know how anyone can study from a computer...

    Do yourselves a favor and check out SFI and FSC, specify your printer or school uses environmentally certified paper, feel good about yourself.

    Thanks,

  • Posted by Steve Foerster , adjunct IT faculty at a community college in the Midwest on September 23, 2010 at 3:45pm EDT
  • I took the "dead trees" comment to be humorous, nothing more. I sometimes refer to books as "treeware", but that doesn't mean I don't necessarily prefer them, because I usually do: http://tinyurl.com/2ef3aqo

  • Hmmm...
  • Posted by Saraetta on September 24, 2010 at 3:00pm EDT
  • What happens if the power goes out or the system has a major glitch?