futureofthebook.com

reverse

“Integrating mobile devices such as smartphones, e-readers, and tablets into your library can be a daunting proposition. In the past few years, libraries have seen a decline in public PC use and a sharp increase in use of free, public wireless devices such as iPads.”

Strange, just in the middle of library renovation to remove stacks and increase workstation studios, we may have reason to reverse the process.

Imagine an upholstered future of a research library well adapted to student naps. Infiltrating the lounge are the bookstore stacks with face-out display of new print publications. Around the perimeter are the high-speed copiers ready to supply double column, text and note format, class reserves as well as vintage text and current journal items. Or, if still preferred, library resources could be displayed at your sofa.

by-pass

“In preparing for the 2012 cycle, we have transitioned our survey from a paper-based to an online survey methodology and revised our questionnaire to address current strategic priorities while maintaining comparability with our historical Faculty Survey findings. We plan to release our findings in a freely available report in spring 2013.” ITHAKA S+R

This series needs to maintain a consistency but that can also mean a persistent omission. There is a need to dig deeper into “conflicted” faculty enthusiasms for both print and screen books. Evermore comparative measures of these enthusiasms as separated agendas will by-pass a need to discern inherent interdependence between the print and screen formats.

There is an echo of another comparative study. “Evidence in Hand: Report of the Task Force on the Artifact in Library Collections”, CLIR, November, 2001, that was so busy weighing the balance between the attributes of the artifact vs. the attributes of the surrogate that it overlooked the attributes of their interaction.

The curious indication from faculty and student surveys (Book Industry Study Group, Ithaka S+R) on the comparative use of print and screen texts is an expressed enthusiasm for both display methods. Just such a curiosity should be followed-up. The surveys should ask, “Are both print and screen displays necessary for efficient learning.?” And following that, “Do you suspect that print and screen displays of texts are complementary for efficient learning? Do you suspect that they may even be interdependent?”

This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 11th, 2012 at 10:07 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.