Is the research library obsolete?

Interesting Post over at The Science Library Pad on the viability of research libraries. Richard asks: “Does anyone disagree that the traditional role of a research library, that of providing local convenient access to scientific publications, is erased by the presence of publisher websites on the Internet? That being the case, what value is left for research libraries to add? Researchers don’t need (or want) the guidance or handholding that undergrads require. Is there anything left for the research library other than inventing new roles for itself?”

February 15, 2006 by Blake Uncategorized 6

MJG says:

February 15, 2006 at 1:21 am

Limited definition of ‘research library’
Before one makes judgments about the conclusions reached in this entry, one should know that the author is defining the term ‘research library’ in a specific sense, namely “as a type of special library that serves mainly or exclusively a natural sciences researcher community” (to be constrasted with a humanities-oriented special library or Any Old Academic Library).

Reply
lijemo says:

February 15, 2006 at 1:53 am

Another role of research libraries….

Another role of research libraries is to preserve materials for research purposes. Publisher websites can’t be counted on to do this, because they can stop any time it ceases to be profitable, or they can go belly-up, taking their archived materials with them.

No matter how “cutting edge” the science is, it is still important to be able to go back and look at older published material on the subject, or related subjects. Of all the “demise of libraries” predictions, I think the research library is the least likely to become obsolete.

Reply
Darla says:

February 15, 2006 at 2:49 am

They NEED it… They just don’t WANT it…

I am the sole MLS, under contract, for a research organization. Every day I find more and more evidence that they desperately NEED someone to do a variety of library-related duties for them. But they don’t WANT anyone to do these things for them. I’m there for a specific project (long term) and that’s all. I have found things that they have been doing incorrectly, that have been effecting their productivity and dissemination of their work, and have tried to bring these things to their attention, but they just don’t care. They don’t care if they do it right or not. They don’t care if anyone reads their research or not.

“You’ve been doing this wrong for 15 years,” I said. “That’s probably why this didn’t work out right, or this other thing didn’t either.”

“Oh, well,” they told me.

*sigh*

Reply
leeb says:

February 15, 2006 at 10:14 am

Diminished role of research libraries
There is no denying that the role of research libraries, or any libraries for that matter, have diminished over the years since Internet. In other words, the libraries do not have a monopoly on information provision. Many librarians seem to be in denial of this fact, evidenced by their reluctance to embrace new methodologies and technology in place of the old (e.g. MARC, AACRII).

Reply
Darla says:

February 15, 2006 at 8:17 pm

Re:Diminished role of research libraries
But you know what? MARC and AACR2 are still, in many ways, better than what’s out there. My library has a non industry standard library automation system. They just have an MS Access database. What I would not give for a MARC compatible, Z39.50 automation system. I do not have HALF the functionality that a regular library automation system with authority files would have. And you know what? MARC is old technology… Access is not. But I’d rather have the old stuff. If it isn’t broke, don’t fix it.

Maybe instead of us getting in step with the world, maybe the world should get in step with us. We’ve been doing it right for over 30 years…

Reply
Chuck says:

February 15, 2006 at 9:13 pm

Re:Diminished role of research libraries
The article says this: “Researchers don’t need (or want) the guidance or handholding that undergrads require.”

Right. Because old crusty science researchers never need any help with research.

Reply