Selection and Collection Development

[Susan Rabe]

I think selection of Internet resources is one area where collection
development librarians are starting to realize that there are associated
costs besides the cost of the information. There has been a lot more
discussion about the cost of storage (in terms of archiving or mirroring a
site to guarantee access), providing hardware and technical expertise about
Internet resources than there has been about print media.  Free is no
longer always perceived as free so financial limitations may still apply.
I don't know how much of this a reflection of start-up costs to provide a
new technology and how much is related to the blurring of functional
responsibilities in libraries. 

At 07:14 AM 4/15/97 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Millard Johnson intruduces an elegant phrase,
>
>> library quality subset,
>
>to refer to those Internet resources that have been selected by libraries 
>according to collection development policies and practices.
>
>Resource selection and collection development are among an array of skills 
>that libraries and librarians bring to information management.  Typically, 
>these skills are manifest in the materials purchased for inclusion in a 
>collection.  "Purchased" is a key word.  With limited financial resources, 
>libraries must select from a smorgasbord of offerings, many of which are not 
>selected because of financial constraints.
>
>The Internet changes this equation.
>
>It's probably fair to say that most information on the Internet today is 
>informally published and made available for free.  This removes the 
>financial limitation, which is one of several factors that motivate library 
>selection policies.  Because cost is no longer an issue, it may seem that 
>the Internet has brought the library a bonanza of free resources, access to 
>which would substantially augment almost any local collection. "Because it's 
>free," some might be tempted to say, "we no longer need to select; our 
>financial resources are not impacted."
>
>But cost is only one factor associated with library selection, and, I would 
>venture to day, it is not the chief factor.  So, does eliminating cost mean 
>that we have also eliminated the need for the other benefits of library 
>selection and collection development?  Or does the mere fact that a resource 
>is available via the Internet automatically exempt it from further scrutiny 
>and selection as though its "Internet-ness" has rendered some special 
>imprimatur?
>
>As a counterpoint to my own argument, it is fair to say that it would be 
>nice (some would say it more strongly) if *any* Internet resource were 
>easier to find, and that efforts to improve general Internet resource 
>discovery and retrieval are essential in the name of both knowledge and 
>practical applications.  I would agree.
>
>Nevertheless, it may be equally fair to say that the world of electronic 
>information, just like the world of information in other media, is very 
>uneven: now junk and gem are both just a click away.
>
>One thing that libraries can do is to extend collection development 
>expertise more vigorously to include Internet resources.  The library 
>community is able and, in some senses, more able than others (because of 
>library standards, systems, and practices and decades of experience) to add 
>value to the Internet by creating, sharing, and providing ready access to 
>"library quality subset[s]."
>
> --Erik
>
>Erik Jul
>jul at oclc.org
>
>
>
Susan M. Rabe
Collection Resources Bibliographer
Center for Research Libraries
6050 S. Kenwood Ave.
Chicago, IL 60637-2804
Tel: 773-955-4545 x323
Fax: 773-955-4339
Email: rabe at crlmail.uchicago.edu