Thank you to the people who did respond. I will gladly take more and post another
hit, or this could move to a list discussion!
Original question or observation...
A library world definition for the reference section of a library includes the
wording that these are the materials that are NOT circulated the materials that the
librarian uses to answer questions.
With the changes I'm seeing in information collection and delivery, it seems to me
that the traditional reference collection is dwindling down to the basics;
encyclopedias, atlases, almanacs, specialized dictionaries and non-fiction sets or
specialized encyclopedias. Mainly, the items are sets, things because of the
nature of their use need to stay together as the set. Their size or the quantities
owned are other reasons for items to remain in a reference section. These items
are not being checked out on a regular basis, so do stay mainly in the library.
(Ours are on an overnight checkout basis.)
The on-line resources and the Internet are taking over for other items that
traditionally were considered reference materials. These are being called ready
reference.
With shrinking budgets and more strategic use of purchase power, the vast majority
of information resources that are purchased in book format are placed in the
non-fiction section so that the patrons of the library are successful researchers
(users of information) and the materials are more likely to be checked out. (Used!)
The 21st century library's collection is shifting from a reference warehouse to a
resource provider. The plethora of books being published on almost any topic means
that big expensive volumes do not need to be purchased anymore to cover topics (and
shelved in a reference section), but individual books covering specific topics that
can be made available to the patrons in the non-fiction section of the library.
And of course online resources, that greatly expand our collections.
Please share your thoughts on this topic, agree or disagree? As 21st century
libraries shift to meet the needs of their patrons, the traditional reference
section is shrinking as Online databases, Internet and non-fiction materials takes
it's place.***
And then on to the responses...
***
I absolutely agree with you. I've been transferring materials from
Ref to nonfiction for many years now.
***
With the way that our particular teachers and students use our library, our
reference section is actually growing. I determine resources for reference a
little differently: While I do have many items that are sets, I base my
reference determination largely on whether the item should be available to
all students at any given time rather than limited to one individual who may
check it out. Of course, any volume that provides quick information such as
a dictionary, almanac, etc. is placed in reference as there is generally no
need to check it out. Our teachers tend to bring classes to the library to
work on group projects and research and we have only 12 computers in the
library. That necessitates some students using books. I think this is a good
thing. Also, when the network is down, I appreciate being able to provide
ample information via print resources.
***
I spent the last few months building a new middle school collection
from scratch. Reference is one of those areas that I really had to
make decisions about what we need. Like you mentioned, sets will
comprise a majority of the reference section, which I expect to be
small. I had the great opportunity to learn from my current
collection about what was used and not used. Two years ago, I
slashed the reference section by a third, moving several books to
circulating non-fiction and weeding many more.
I do see the Internet and online databases replacing print reference
sources. Online resources are often updated more regularly and at a
more reasonable price. I have classes that regularly use the
Occupational Outlook Handbook (OOH). Instead of buying a class set
every 2 years, the free web site has the same information and allows
me to spend the money on other resources. Which brings to mind
another point . . . a book can only be used by 1 or 2 people at a
time whereas a web site or database can be used by the whole class at
once. This is a great benefit for schools, especially for teachers
and librarians to teach with resources like the above mentioned OOH.
I am curious to see how others respond to this question.
***
Interesting topic... We use the overnight checkout policy too. The reference
materials are so expensive that I am timid about shelving them with the regular
circulation items. I always warn the students before they take one home about the
replacement cost for the item. I'll be interested in hearing how other libraries
are dealing with their reference collections.
***
I've thought a great deal about this as well. My colleague and I opened
our media center in 1995 with a heavy emphasis on reference material
and spent heavily in that area. We ended up with multi-volumed sets of
information that, for the most part, sat on the shelf - and
increasingly do so. Some reflections about this:
***
ONE: If there were better MARC records for these multi-volumed
materials information would not be so hidden from the students. Because
of their natural inclination to nest at a computer, the students need
to be able to know there is information in them thar' books. My
experience is that they will turn to them only as a last resort and
then they are completely flummoxed by how to go about finding the
information when they do make their way there.
TWO: I can't help but feel that with the emphasis on speed on the
return of information (any information, by the way) and the nature of
current events-type assignments there is an acceptance of a greater
level of superficial information - hence in-depth reference sources are
less likely to be consulted. I know, I know, that's a broad brush, but
I'm not convinced that we have a great appreciation of expertise of
knowledge anymore (Web 2.0) and almost anyone's knowledge is as good as
anyone else's. So, reference by experts is not so necessary.
THREE: I keep wondering why when I wander around LMC Web pages why we
are continuing to call certain Free Web sources or even electronic
sources as "Reference" areas? I wonder if this has any meaning any
longer with sources covering such a breadth of material? I wonder how
much meaning it has in the print world, although it does seem to have
more relevance there.
***
Our greater demands for most non-fiction books come when classes conduct
research in units requiring the students to access the information in these
books. These non-fiction books morph into reference because we usually
place them on special reserve [they stay in the library] to enable all
students to use them. After the unit is completed, these books return to
their non-fiction [non-special reserve} status.
Your analysis agrees with what has evolved in my K-6 library over the past 11
years. I would emphasize that the internet does not replace books. The book as a
concrete, stable object to explore remains powerful, particularly for young
children who are very hands-on. Well-designed books, full of interesting pictures
and accurate information, always have a place in the
library.
***
Absolutely--I see the same thing here in Ohio.
***
In my library, the reference section has really been changing. When I first came
to the place 5 years ago, there were shelves of musty old National Geographics and
their accompanying indexes, 15 years worth of World Almanacs, Multiple volumes of
antiquated "Something About the Author", Children's Magazine Index, and lots more.
I felt terrible ditching some of these things, since I know how expensive they
were, but hey- it never got used, and it seemed silly to keep them when I needed
the space, and the info offered in them was easily attained elsewhere. Now my
reference section has two sets of encyclopedias, 2 unabridged dictionaries, a book
of World Records, (I have copies to circulate as well), a current almanac, a set of
presidential biographies, field guides of numerous topics, a few good atlases, and
some specialized multivolume encyclopedias on general science and animals. The
reference section also increasingly holds special books that are delicate,
valuable, have special parts, or are otherwise likely to be damaged easily if they
leave the room. The kids enjoy these books under my direct supervision only.
I keep a class set of thesauri, atlases, student dictionaries, almanacs, and phone
books for instructional purposes. I'm really thinking seriously about phasing out
the almanac instruction. With factoids so easily attained on the internet, I have
found that I very rarely refer to the almanac anymore. I figure that if I don't
need to use them, chances are slim that any of my students will either.
I try to teach the print reference books along with on-line reference sources. I'm
sure I don't need to tell you which ones the kids enjoy using more!
***
Yes, I would agree that Reference Sections in a school library are on the way out.
I keep just the basics, mainly for the 4-6th grade population. I have also begun
to develop a local history/NY State collection that I keep in reference. I have
two libraries, one k-3 and 4-12. There is no reference section at all in the K-3.
***
I have always allowed my "reference" books to go out on overnight loan and
am going to try a three-day loan period for them next year. Our students
tend to have either sports or jobs in the evening, so one night is not
really enough time for them to finish using even a reference book. (I check
nonfiction and fiction out for three weeks at a time.)
My school is fortunate to have access to a large group of online databases,
and those do get much more use than the print references. Very close to 100%
of our students have permission to use the Internet at school, and I have 22
computers in the library, which is great. Also, the databases can be used
from home by students who have Internet access available there.
I certainly believe that students are researching and using reference skills
when they use nonfiction books. There may have been a time when students
would read a nonfiction book cover-to-cover for research, but I find it's
important now to explain to them how to refer to the table of contents to
find applicable chapters or the index to find specific facts for their
research. I have also started adding a plethora of keywords to the catalog
records for the books, sometimes including the entire table of contents in
the contents field plus additional keywords in the notes field.
Last year I got unnecessarily concerned about the statistical comparison of
my collection with the Follett and Wilson recommended numbers on Follett
Title-Wise. My reference collection was nowhere near as large a part of the
collection as they recommended. I've realized over the course of the year
that my collection is fine. I keep the usual ready reference materials
(almanacs, biographical dictionaries, dictionaries, encyclopedias, atlases,
etc.) in the reference section along with non-fiction sets that need to stay
together. I also put subject specific encyclopedias in the reference
section. I guess my primary basis for choosing what is reference is whether
it includes short entries on subjects or is arranged in chapters.
It's a bit frustrating that when I order my books pre-processed they don't
always come with the nonfiction or reference status that I would choose for
them. But that is not difficult to change.
I think that the days of a non-circulating reference collection are behind
us, but I would even go further and say that the demand/need for nonfiction
books is also declining, and that our print collections in the future will
much more heavily balanced toward fiction that can excite the students about
reading and provide them with "life-lessons" in an enjoyable format.
***
I agree with your position, Jean. Reference has surely changed. One thing I
hope never changes is the ability to have a print World Book on hand for the
school library. I think there is still a place for a print encyclopedia set
and an almanac.
***
Yes, my reference section is changing. Except for general mid-level
encyclopedias, my thesauri, almanacs, atlases and dictionaries are gathering dust.
Kids prefer to go on-line - and why wouldn't they - most home/school software
packages include basic references. Even I have Merriam-Webster bookmarked!
What I have expanded are the special areas: health, literary analysis,
careers, art, etc. On the whole, my collection is lopsided - 5 copies of Guinness
Book of Records, 10 copies of University of Chicago English/Spanish dictionary, 10
OOH's, etc. All based on curriculum and usage.
Everything circulates, and I vary the due date from overnight to one week.
Weekends and vacations are prime time for borrowing.
Also:
I have gotten better pricing on databases if I also get the print. That really
equalizes access. I believe some pricey database companies should consider RWADA
pricing, rather than flat rates. Little schools, like mine, will lose out and there
will be the temptation to use the open web, rather than juried databases. If you
pay per student, wouldn't it be fair?
***
I'm working in a high school that was built in the early 1950's. The
library (as it was designed in the '50's) has virtually it's own wing.
It is the first thing you see when you walk in the front door. It had a
separate, large room just to house the periodicals and reference
materials. It really has some wonderful books, although most of them are
outdated now. The students hardly ever use it--mostly it is used to hold
medium size meetings as there are no conference rooms in our entire
school. I am working hard to whittle down the materials here (I don't
think anyone will be using the car repair guidelines from the 1960's any
time soon) and thinking of better ways to use the "reference" room. Of
course, there are many items that I think are imperative to keep, but
with databases at our fingertips--literally--I don't think the reference
room will ever relive its glory days. I think it would better accommodate
professional materials or possibly more computers.
***
Jean makes some very good points about the changing nature of the reference
section. I would just like to add that I have an increasing number of books
that are reserved for library use because they are fragile and/or very
expensive. Some are duplicated in the circulating collection, and it really
helps with the most popular books, which are frequently lost or stolen to
have that back up copy. These books are looked at when the students have
finished their written work and book checkout. Getting free photocopies of
pages from those books is one way I reinforce citation format, as the
photocopy request is in the form of a bibliographic citation.
R. Jean Gustafson
Teacher/Librarian
Selah Jr. High
Selah, WA 98942
jeangustafson@selah.k12.wa.us
________________________________
From: School Library Media & Network Communications on behalf of Sylvia Seawell
Sent: Wed 7/19/2006 9:12 AM
To: LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: TARGET>Number of encyclopedias for HS
The recent thread about dwindling reference sections has prompted me to
ask your opinions about my own.
I am in a high school of approximately 1500 students. In addition to
two online encyclopedias, we have the following print sets: 4 of World
Book, all 2001 or newer (the oldest is on a cart for checkout for
classroom use); 1 of Encylopedia Americana, 2006; 2 of Britannica, 1990
(which will be discarded) and 1998, which are occasionally our best
sources but rarely used; and 1 each of older (1990s)sets of Compton's
and Academic American.
We plan to discard the older sets this fall but are unsure about
whether or not they need to be replaced. Online sources continue to be
used in research here, and shelf space is really at a premium! My
question then is: How many sets of encyclopedias are really
needed/desired for a school of this size? And are there official
guidelines for determining this? TIA.
Sylvia Seawell, Media Coordinator
Ashbrook High School
Gastonia, NC
sssea1@carollina.rr.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note: All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
You can prevent most e-mail filters from deleting LM_NET postings
by adding LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU to your e-mail address book.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL 4) SET LM_NET DIGEST * Allow for confirmation.
* LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
* LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
* EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/sub/
* LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note: All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
You can prevent most e-mail filters from deleting LM_NET postings
by adding LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU to your e-mail address book.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL 4) SET LM_NET DIGEST * Allow for confirmation.
* LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
* LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
* EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/sub/
* LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LM_NET
Mailing List Home