Collection Developers – Past, Present and . . . Future?
Buckland’s, Lee’s and Sandler’s articles particularly caught my interest. A feeling of relief warmed my soul as I read the passionate predictions by the first two authors that the role of the collection developer will be enhanced, rather than eliminated by the increasing presence and sheer magnitude of the digital collection. When I reached Sandler’s contention in the reading that ‘it is potentially a world of disintermediation for libraries of all types’ (pg. 241), the warmth turned icy and the future became bleak. Thankfully, even Sandler eventually finds a use for collection developers, if not by name at least by task, in the area of special collections. So, is there a future for collection developers?
Each of the authors described in one way or another not only their contention that there is a future for this role, but also why they believe there is a future. Lee expressed it (pg. 1110) by quoting Taylor, saying that selectivity is ‘the value added when choices are made’ by developers on the merits of the information and its appropriateness for the community served. Sandler pins the survival of the local library collection on relevancy and continual recognition of trends and making the necessary changes. These, are changes, or choices, that must be made by human decision makers, or by another name, collection developers.
Buckland, I think states the case best, when he describes the classical book selection theory. Quoting a number of scholars on the subject, he portrays a sound business model based on meeting demand and delivering value. Because meeting demand can be a quantitative process, it will likely not be a distinguishing feature in the future, since computers will (may already have) take over that analysis and decision process. On the other hand, making the right choices on materials will be subjective tasks that require human cognitive capabilities. The better it is done, the more value to be found in the resulting collection, which is a distinction of note. Buckland quotes Lionel McColvin, an early contributor of the selection theory, to make the point that having the right materials in the collection is the most important aspect of the developer’s job. Buckland makes a strong case that an information professional will be needed to do that for the foreseeable future.
Creating value is obviously a key to survival. Providing services that are valued by patrons, beyond mere perceptions, will ensure a place for information workers of all kinds, including the collection developer. In fact, value creation is the underpinning of all employments in a capitalistic and democratic society. It is a law of economics that when a product or service no longer brings value to a consumer, that product or service will cease to exist. This is as true for collection developers as it is for carmakers.
Interestingly, in as much as these concepts parallel business so closely, comparisons are easily made between libraries and retailers. The tried and true retailing rule of delivering the right product at the right place at the right price is basically what collection development is all about. Buckland makes the case that the development decisions have brought value in the past and continue in the present to do so by giving access to the right materials that patrons are seeking. He claims that there is no reason for that value process to end in the future. In fact, he thinks the value of these decisions will be enhanced in the digital collection environment. The selection of sources into a collection will even more effectively guide the user to the desired information, in spite of the overwhelming amount of available data. Now that is value! And, value means there is a future!
Buckland, M. (1995). What will collection developers do? Information Technology and Libraries 14(3): 155-159.
Lee, H.-L. (2000). What is a collection? Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51(12): 1106-1113.
Sandler, M. (2006). Collection development in the [age] day of Google. Library Resources and Technical Services 50(4): 239-243.
Showing posts with label Moodle Forum Post. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Moodle Forum Post. Show all posts
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Reading Response #1
Inquiring Minds Want to Know – But Why?
Due to my own seemingly insatiable need for information, evidenced by 10 magazine and 3 newspaper subscriptions, of which almost each issue is read start to finish, in addition to reading two non-fiction books every other week or so, the chapters from the Case text on information behavior struck my interest. I have often wondered why some of us are “wired” to be so interested in information. Beyond knowing facts or data, the drive is sometimes deeper and taken to the level of wanting to understand the reasons for things; why are things the way they are, or why are people the way they are.
In chapter 4 of “Information Needs and Information Seeking”, Case notes that information researchers analyzing the issue of human information needs generally cite one of four main authors: Robert Taylor, Nicholas Belkin, Carol Kuhlthau, and Brenda Davis. While the theories of all four authors appeal to me, it seems that their approaches play themselves out in different ways at different times in my own experience. This may also impact how the need is satisfied (when the search is over), the sources and number of sources to be searched, and how the information is then used and incorporated into a body of knowledge.
For example, when facing a simple information need that by all appearances may have a specific and straight forward answer, Belkin’s suggestion of the “ASK Model” may most closely match the motivating force for seeking information. In other words, when the information gap becomes recognized and needs to be answered, the information seeking strategy is also straight forward: get the answer to a specific unknown, and move on. However, when trying to understand the reasons behind any large history-making action or monumental occurrence, Dervin’s approach suggests a different strategy. A more “in-depth” activity is required in order to try and make sense of something. Such a motivation may require more extensive search activity and effort to get underneath the surface of the event. The strategy may lead to context development, analyzing the personalities of the involved people, identifying any extenuating environmental issues, and so forth. All of that background development to me is what Dervin means by making sense of it. It leads to answering the question, “why was it that way”, as opposed to just “how is it”, or “what is it”. Making sense seems to call for a deeper search.
Further, the way that these different models of information seeking motivations play out may very well be related to the concept of satisficing expressed in the Bawden and Robinson reading. For instance, if the motive for information seeking comes from a deeply-seated visceral position, perhaps it is strong enough to cause an in-depth search to really understand and make sense of things. On the other hand, lacking a sense of uncertainty and just wanting to satisfy some curiosity about an information gap may mean that the information seeker is more easily satisfied to just get the first answer from a source and not be overly concerned with authority, scope and treatment of the information by the source.
This may simply be one way of considering Case’s “Spectrum of Motivation”. While there is not necessarily significant difference along the spectrum, or between the models, there is diversity in approach that may encompass more than just the motivation itself. It may also influence the search strategy, commitment to the search and final results or accepted end-point of the seeking exercise.
References
Case, D. O. (2007). Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior. 2d ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Chapter 4. Information needs and information seeking (pp. 68-83) Bawden, D.; Robinson, L. (2009). The dark side of information: Overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science 35(2): 180-191.
Due to my own seemingly insatiable need for information, evidenced by 10 magazine and 3 newspaper subscriptions, of which almost each issue is read start to finish, in addition to reading two non-fiction books every other week or so, the chapters from the Case text on information behavior struck my interest. I have often wondered why some of us are “wired” to be so interested in information. Beyond knowing facts or data, the drive is sometimes deeper and taken to the level of wanting to understand the reasons for things; why are things the way they are, or why are people the way they are.
In chapter 4 of “Information Needs and Information Seeking”, Case notes that information researchers analyzing the issue of human information needs generally cite one of four main authors: Robert Taylor, Nicholas Belkin, Carol Kuhlthau, and Brenda Davis. While the theories of all four authors appeal to me, it seems that their approaches play themselves out in different ways at different times in my own experience. This may also impact how the need is satisfied (when the search is over), the sources and number of sources to be searched, and how the information is then used and incorporated into a body of knowledge.
For example, when facing a simple information need that by all appearances may have a specific and straight forward answer, Belkin’s suggestion of the “ASK Model” may most closely match the motivating force for seeking information. In other words, when the information gap becomes recognized and needs to be answered, the information seeking strategy is also straight forward: get the answer to a specific unknown, and move on. However, when trying to understand the reasons behind any large history-making action or monumental occurrence, Dervin’s approach suggests a different strategy. A more “in-depth” activity is required in order to try and make sense of something. Such a motivation may require more extensive search activity and effort to get underneath the surface of the event. The strategy may lead to context development, analyzing the personalities of the involved people, identifying any extenuating environmental issues, and so forth. All of that background development to me is what Dervin means by making sense of it. It leads to answering the question, “why was it that way”, as opposed to just “how is it”, or “what is it”. Making sense seems to call for a deeper search.
Further, the way that these different models of information seeking motivations play out may very well be related to the concept of satisficing expressed in the Bawden and Robinson reading. For instance, if the motive for information seeking comes from a deeply-seated visceral position, perhaps it is strong enough to cause an in-depth search to really understand and make sense of things. On the other hand, lacking a sense of uncertainty and just wanting to satisfy some curiosity about an information gap may mean that the information seeker is more easily satisfied to just get the first answer from a source and not be overly concerned with authority, scope and treatment of the information by the source.
This may simply be one way of considering Case’s “Spectrum of Motivation”. While there is not necessarily significant difference along the spectrum, or between the models, there is diversity in approach that may encompass more than just the motivation itself. It may also influence the search strategy, commitment to the search and final results or accepted end-point of the seeking exercise.
References
Case, D. O. (2007). Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior. 2d ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Chapter 4. Information needs and information seeking (pp. 68-83) Bawden, D.; Robinson, L. (2009). The dark side of information: Overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal of Information Science 35(2): 180-191.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)