In my earlier posts on library technology planning I wrote about initial steps and examining system support operations. Once these categories have been examined by a technology planning group the next area of focus should be digital services for students and researchers.

These are technologies that impact library users the most directly; therefore, it’s important that a library manages technology in such a way so that it can focus on these technologies. Here’s a list of some of the service-based technologies impacting libraries (not in any particular order):

• Library’s Web site: involves not just the library’s web site but also its compatibility with the university web site, possible integration with a campus portal, as well integration with the university’s learning management system (e.g., Blackboard/WebCT). A significant number of the following technologies also are tied to the library’s web presence.
• OPAC: this warrants a separate category though it is part of the library’s web presence.
• Electronic Reserves: part of integrated system or a standalone product
• electronic document delivery: includes the ILL management system, which also may be part of the integrated system or a standalone product. But also includes not just ILL but also e-document delivery from within the university, between libraries, from off-campus storage, or even from the library’s collection to the user’s desktop
• proxy for off-campus access to electronic resources
• authentication - single sign on is almost always the goal but not necessarily easily accomplished at many universities
• electronic resources: that listing of hundreds of databases available through a library’s web site; manual, homegrown system, or electronic resource management system
• electronic journal web listings: again - manual, homegrown, through a service such as Serials Solutions, or tied into an electronic resource management system
• OpenURL resolver - Decisions about which system to utilize, how to present it to users.
• Federated or metasearch systems
• Virtual reference
• Information/Learning/Knowledge Commons issues (including wireless computing throughout the library, possible laptop lending service)
• Selfcheckout circulation kiosks

Okay, let’s take a deep breath. Those are just among the technologies that most users will have contact with in their daily interactions with the library. What about more specialized technology-based services to consider?

• Electronic theses & dissertations
• institutional repositories - preprints, working papers, etc.
• Digitizing projects relating to special collections and archives
• Metadata and image storage and preservation issues
• Geospatial data and geographic information systems
• Numeric data collections
• digital media centers to work with faculty and students on the creation of digital content
• Technical issues revolving around support and use of digital audio/video content and streaming media
• Supporting development and preservation of university-based electronic journals
• Supporting development and preservation of non-traditional scholarly communication, electronic publishing by faculty

Nothing listed so far is new to the library scene but there’s still are the emerging Web-based service ideas that aim to integrate a library’s electronic resources further into the user’s environment.

Obviously, libraries have a lot to think about when it comes to technology.

I’ve recently finished reading an entire semester’s worth of entries of the blog for the course History 696: Introduction to History and New Media, taught by Mills Kelly at George Mason University. It looked like a very interesting course, conducted as a graduate seminar with students required to post entries on the course blog. Not only is it a good example of the use of a blog in the classroom, it offers some interesting insights on digital scholarship as well as pointers to worthwhile web sites.

From one of the grad students:

Digital scholarship becomes exciting for its makers in a more selfish way as well. It allows the scholar to present more of his or her research and ideas. Not in some tacked on, rarely looked at appendix (everyone knows you don’t even need your appendix!), but in an integrated, and, consequently, more relevant fashion. Both textually and graphically, the medium creates a facility for transmitting knowledge which other forms lack, and provides a freedom of presentation to the scholar previously unavailable. It also upsets the hierarchy of publishing, opening access to new and untapped audiences, while encouraging old ones to experiment with new forms. While its definition is far from solidified, it is clear digital scholarship has promise.

The line that really stands out in that statement on digital scholarship is “Both textually and graphically, the medium creates a facility for transmitting knowledge which other forms lack, and provides a freedom of presentation to the scholar previously unavailable.”

A look at some of the other grad courses that history students at GMU are taking, such as “Digital History Documentary Filmmaking” and “Creating Digital History”, should make one wonder what type of information resources and technology support services these future faculty will be needing and expecting from their universities.

(Catching up on my reading)

Acquiring Copyright Permission to Digitize and Provide Open Access to Books reports on CMU’s efforts to obtain copyright permissions to digiize books published after 1923. As with most CLIR reports, it’s an interesting study. CMU was most successful with targeted, specialized collections such as in their rare book collection. Two-thirds of the copyright holders in that collection granted permission.

The report details the process used and the costs. Permissions were easier to obtain in targeted collections than for larger sets of works, such as in CMU’s Million Book Project. CMU found that permissions were more likely to be granted from special publishers, authors and estates, museums, galleries, and scholarly associations. Commericial publishers, including university presses, were less likely to grant permission. University presses often reported that copyright reverted back to the author after the work went out-of-print. In other cases,publishers defined out-of-print differently than libraries since publishers saw potential in print-on-demand for titles were no longer being printed.

Overall, it’s a very useful report on copyright practices related to digitizing book collections.