Very recently, I have started handling the difficult interlibrary loan requests at work. We've had an influx of students requesting books from the 1700 and 1800's.
Obviously, no libraries are willing to loan out these materials, and the best we can typically get is a reel of microfilm. When I started looking into these requests, I realized that over 50% of them have been digitized by Google.
I was thrilled!
It seems like a win-win situation for the patrons and the library. The benefits go on and on...
great image quality (for the most part)
immediate access
no cost
no due dates
text is fully searchable!
PDF download available
available anytime, anywhere
So... why don't I feel like I have discovered the best resource of the century!?!
People just aren't the excited about what I've “discovered. “ Sure, the students are. But when I tell them about Google books I sense the attitude of "okay, but you won't tell my professor I'm doing this, will you?”
What's wrong with Google books???
I am aware that there are certain copyright issues with Google, so let just focus on the old public domain works such as the ones that my students are in need of. No copyright issues. Just sheer ease of access to quality information... for free! Isn't that what we are all about!
No librarian or professor has directly denounced Google books, but one professor did emphasize the fact that she really wants to "get her students into the library." Whenever I send her students links to Google books, I feel I have to word everything in such a way that her student will still feel dependent on the physical library. I feel like a traitor.
When I first asked my librarian colleagues about directing these ILL requests to Google books, I got the feeling of "well… If that’s what we've got to do." Since when has preservation and universal access become a last resort? I guess since it got the name Google attached to it.
I’m sure you can tell I’m just venting at this point. Has anyone experienced a similar attitude towards utilizing books digitized by Google (that’s how I refer to them now, sounds less threatening than calling them Google Books)? Can anyone help me understand the lack of acceptance of Google’s efforts to digitize works in the public domain?
Gosh, I totally hear you Allison. Even though billions of dollars each year from thousands of organizations and libraries are spent on digitizing their unique collections, we are shunned from relying on them!
ReplyDeleteI think the whole misconception derives from the whole point that they are open access. Many open access databases feature articles that are unrefereed. I do understand this hypercritical-ness because when they aren't published in a refereed journal, there is no peer-review process that authorizes the work being free of errors and proves it's scholarly-ness.
However, the entire initiative behind the open access movement is to facilitate more research through free means. Why does one have to pay to reach information, that they could otherwise receive by visiting their local university library or public library stacks or journal collections? Thus, just because it's free (Google Books) doesn't make it negative- while we need to carefully pay attention to it's level of scholar-ness, we should all be whopping and hollering that we have access to so many more pieces of information now!
At Purdue, we are in partnership with Google to digitize some of our older collections. These collections are in agriculture and engineering. Staff in the repository have been busy for the last two years pulling the material to be sent to Google...who has promised to have the materials back to us in record speed. It's funny, a top Google representative came to our libraries to talk about the project and address concerns some librarians had about digitizing material. When questions came up about their scanning techniques and the type of machines they use, it was suddenly "hush hush." Google developed their own scanning devices which are top secret. I personally think books that sit in public domain should be readily available in a digitized form. Otherwise, those texts sit in repositories where no one even knows or cares they exist. About a third of the collection we unearthed from the repository were not even cataloged, they were that old. And also LOST until now.
ReplyDeleteYou could always tell the professors who want the students "in the library" that "Google Books" refers to books located in the "Google Room" in the library. Seems to me like the professors who dont understand the value of a digitized book available anywhere on the web probably arent too familiar with recent library initiatives, which means they probably havent really thought critically about what the library does, spoken to a librarian with an open mind, or maybe even been in a library for quite some time.
ReplyDeleteI’m as perplexed as you as to the stigma of reading a digitized copy of a book versus a printed copy. A digital copy of the book’s page and the printed page would seem to be identical in content. I must confess I’m not up to speed on Google Books. Do they add a layer of indexing or content summary that would be viewed as doing the student’s research?
ReplyDeleteGoing off of what thestateimin said, not only do I think that professors would/should understand the value of availability, but I also think that they would understand the importance of preservation as well. Not just with preservation of the information but preservation of the actual materials as well. You are talking about materials that are over 200 years old! Digitization cuts down on handling these materials every time somebody wants to do research.
ReplyDeleteI know what you mean Alison. I used to help process ILL requests at IUS and it is sooo nice when there is a digital resource especially for students. I think about the amout of time, money and frustration it saves the students and professors when resources are digitized and I wonder, like you why they are not more widely avalible. I think some of the "old school" librarians are having a hard time accepting the fact that technology has out convienced them. Doesn't it make more sense to make these scholarly sources more accessible? Of course we all want students to continue using the physical library but we need to adapt to the times as well.
ReplyDeleteHolly
Wow, you really got a discussion going, Alison. There are all sorts of issues surrounding Google Books but that's a discussion for an Information Policy class. I would like to go on record as being a proponent of all sorts of materials, electronic as well as paper. ;-)
ReplyDelete