The Reference Librarian
ISSN: 0276-3877 (Print) 1541-1117 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wref20
Why Libraries Should Retain a Core Print
Reference Collection
Naomi Lederer
To cite this article: Naomi Lederer (2016) Why Libraries Should Retain a Core Print Reference
Collection, The Reference Librarian, 57:4, 307-322, DOI: 10.1080/02763877.2016.1145093
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2016.1145093
Published online: 30 Mar 2016.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 2179
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 1 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wref20
THE REFERENCE LIBRARIAN
2016, VOL. 57, NO. 4, 307–322
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2016.1145093
Why Libraries Should Retain a Core Print Reference
Collection
Naomi Lederer
Morgan Library, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
ABSTRACT
KEYWORDS
This article gives an overview of what reference material is and
for what it is used. Desirable characteristics of print reference are
described. Skills that are important for reference librarians are
specifically and generally described throughout. Arguments on
the importance of a core printed reference collection focus on
convenience, cost, availability, online irritants, actual use of
print, historical research, and future librarians’ understanding
of reference resources.
electronic; librarians; print;
reference; reference
collection; research skills
I acknowledge that it is ironic to state that we should always retain a core of
print reference materials, because I firmly believe that reference books are the
best kind of e-books. Need something quick and brief? An e-book reference
title is going to be fast to locate and use. An e-book covers topics as well as a
print one (often they are identical to the print ones). For those of us who are
not keen on reading long texts on a computer screen but are up to reading
two to three pages online, reference entries are a perfect match. However,
devices specifically designed to be e-book readers generally do not have a
large screen that is helpful for reading PDF-formatted texts or for seeing
tables and graphs clearly. So, e-readers (full disclosure: I have three of them
and yes, have read entire books on each) are not generally suitable for the
majority of reference books.
What is reference material? Reference is a place to go for a quick fact,
statistic, biography, outline, summary, and explanation. Who was/is? What
is? When did? Where is? How do you spell? What is the definition of a word?
What was the sequence of events? Who was there? When and where did the
events occur? Who won an event in the past? All these and more are best
answered by a quick reference check. Certainly there are reference questions
best answered online, such as what is the current Dow Jones or NASDAQ
average. Or, what is the score of the game right now? Nevertheless, a visit to a
reference book may be all that is needed. Someone needs to know a quick bit
of material, and a vetted reference source is a better choice than finding
CONTACT Naomi Lederer
Naomi.Lederer@colostate.edu
Campus Delivery, Fort Collins, CO 80523.
Published with license by Taylor & Francis © Naomi Lederer
Morgan Library, Colorado State University, 1019
308
N. LEDERER
something on an unknown Web site. Given the tight budgets we’ve had for
years, chances are excellent that if we own something it is very good.
A growing number of materials are available online, but realistically, how
much of the really good and reliable online stuff is free? I’ve played a game
with myself for years: whenever I’d find a really good, well-designed, useful
Web site, I’d ponder for a moment and say to myself, “This is not going to be
free in 1 year” or “2 years max” and I was always right. People who have
taken the time to put together a really good resource more often than not
want to make money on it. Unless a library’s budget is infinite—and presupposing that these sites will even allow libraries to pay for their constituencies—purchasing all of these is going to be impossible. It is not helpful to
rely on a free site when one has users who have questions. What was
available yesterday may not be available today.
A great deal of thought tends to be put into the design of printed reference
materials so that most of them are easy to use. Bold top-page headers let the
browser or searcher know where they are currently in the book. Indexes
allow the users to know the exact pages desired in any volume. Tables of
contents give a good indication of what is in the source, and introductions
clarify the purposes and intentions of the resource. Text pagination tends to
be reliable so users know immediately if they need to page backwards or
forwards. Included graphics and infographics are visible with the highest
quality available. Need to cite it? Doable easily enough! The confidence level
of the researcher that another researcher can find the same material is very
high. The print edition entry names and pages numbers are not going to
change so years later the same article, provided one library has kept that
edition, can be found.
The Reference and User Services Association (RUSA)’s Professional
Competencies for Reference and User Services Librarians states (selected content) that one of the strategies used by a librarian under Critical Thinking
and Analysis is that the librarian “uses electronic and print media to connect
users with highly recommended, carefully selected sources for topics of
greatest interest to primary users.” Under Evaluation, a librarian “decides
what reference services and products will be retained and what changes will
be implemented, if any.” Under Information Resources, a librarian “assesses
the content of resources in the print and virtual collections for accuracy and
currency.” Thus, the competent librarian evaluates sources for use at a
particular location and does not favor print over electronic any more than
favoring electronic over print (2003). I was hoping there would be an
updated version of this, but the 2013 version of the RUSA Guidelines for
Behavioral Performance of Reference and Information Service Providers
refers to the 2003 document and in the Searching section says the librarian
“[e]xplains how to use sources when appropriate… [o]ffers pointers, detailed
search paths, and names of resources used to find the answer, so that the
THE REFERENCE LIBRARIAN
309
patron can learn to answer similar questions on his/her own, when appropriate.” The type of source is not mentioned. The best source—format is
irrelevant—is what is needed to answer the question.
One of the roles the librarian has to play, alas, is that of informing people
who grade papers that format is not an important consideration, unless there
is a specific reason for it to be. I can recall too many years of trying to
convince students (because their instructor was so adamant) that the online
journal article was legitimate, that it was only showing exactly the same thing
as a print version would do, and so forth. I’m a content person myself and
what information I need directs my research, not the format. To paraphrase
myself, someone who won’t use electronic resources is as bad as someone
who won’t use print. Both types of people are wearing blinders.
Convenience
Why should there be a core print reference area? Well, first start with the
hassle factor. When items are used frequently, it is more helpful for them to
be located at a nearby and convenient location. For example, I still use
Readers’ Guide to Periodicals in print—it indexes things simply not found
elsewhere, such as movies (earlier eras under “motion pictures”), and covers
time frames simply not available online (yet). We had Readers’ Guide online
for a few years, but it covered only 1982 onwards, and trust your librarian
when she says there are some valuable gems in there from other years. What
did the mainstream magazines have to say about certain historical topics?
World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Civil Rights,
women’s rights, GBLT rights, New Math, Moon Landing, Cold War, automobiles, elections, phonics, and so forth. Scholarly articles provide a useful
perspective on these topics, but what was being shared with the general
public at the time? Contemporary sources often mean primary sources! But
back to the hassle factor. If Readers’ Guide was shelved with its fellow AI call
number titles, it would be on the third floor of my library and quite a long
walk to get to; in addition, stacks tend to have taller shelves (ours are) and
using the Readers’ Guide would be a big nuisance without a low shelf to put it
on. It is the sort of resource that one tends to look through multiple volumes,
so taking it elsewhere to look through and then going back and forth is not
going to be productive. Because this valuable index is shelved in Reference, I
can walk out to use it myself or with a researcher, and it is right there with no
stairs or elevator needed. Some users are in a hurry and a visit to the far
reaches of the library is not going to be feasible at the moment. Located
nearby, I can show users where it is and give a quick how-to-use-it overview
and they can find it again—and they do—I’ve seen them.
Having a confined area for Reference means the entire call number range
is compressed. Instead of searching ranges and ranges of material, selected
310
N. LEDERER
materials are easily scanned and a call number in hand is going to make it
possible to more rapidly locate a specific title. Again, hassle factor: our
cultural anthropology and clothing titles (GTs) if in the regular shelves
would be even farther away than the As on the third floor of our library.
Should we be able to use these easily? I would like the answer to be yes.
It is simply more efficient to have all of the materials in one convenient
location (actual mileage varies, I know). I can help my users without having to
go all over the library when we’re simply trying to get a handle on a topic.
Browsing reference stacks gives users a sense of the scope of topics and their
importance to the immediate community. A library located near a business
center is likely to have a larger collection of business materials, and a print
collection allows patrons to see it. A community with a population of nonnative speakers will (I hope) have materials in locally spoken and read languages along with materials to help these users learn the local language. A shy
user can simply look and know that this library has materials that can help him
or her. No need to ask how to use the mysterious computers written in another
language. I have encountered people who are too timid to talk to library staff,
so a collection of material that visually depicts (and contains information on)
what the main subjects covered in that library is going to be helpful. Those who
are not shy but who are in a hurry will find it much more user-friendly if the
staff members can get them their facts and on their way without visiting the
upper reaches of a building. Even in a tiny library it is probably handy to have a
core reference collection so that users using the regular collection need not be
asked to move or tripped over while a staff member is helping someone else.
Jump-off point
Having reference materials close at hand means that getting an overview of a
topic (names, dates, places, and so forth) is convenient so if a researcher is starting
with very little information, pertinent details can be relatively quickly identified.
Then the researcher can visit appropriate databases and other online materials
with correct spellings and terms already identified. Many users do not have the
correct spelling for the person, place, thing, or concept they are researching. A
visit to a reference book can elicit proper spellings and alternative spellings. A
printed reference book will be especially helpful if the user is not a good speller.
Flipping pages and scanning a book allows for the poor speller to have a chance of
finding the word. It is, for the most part, much faster to use a print book than
trying to do it online and wait for pages to load. Now let us pause for a moment.
And again. Now another moment. So, read any good books lately? How are your
classes going? Now we can read it. Hmmm. Let’s try another place. Wait. Wait for
it. It’ll be up shortly. Not yet but soon. Maybe. It is thinking … slowly.
Is the student not sure what topic to do? It is much faster to page through a
printed book to get ideas. Spelling is not going to matter because nothing specific
THE REFERENCE LIBRARIAN
311
is being sought. I would not be keen on browsing an encyclopedia online with
only a broad topic. “Social science” or “education” will be a lot of ground to
cover online versus a quick flip in print. While some online encyclopedias have
topics listed for a quick glance, others have alphabetical ranges. Once having
explored A–C, I now have to return somewhere or other to go through D–F, and
so forth. One day, perhaps, online encyclopedias will be uniformly useful for
browsing, but that day is not here. Looking for a known topic? They work just
fine. Have no idea? Print is going to be much more helpful.
Best of all, having found something of interest in the print reference book,
the correct spelling and background serve as excellent jump-off points for
additional research. Looking for books in the library catalog and for articles
in various indexes will be more efficient once grounded on the topic. Even
using an online encyclopedia is going to be faster!
I think that library staff would prefer certain titles in print. For example, Chase’s
Annual Events is a great inspirational resource for thematic displays. Sure, one can
find some of the same information online, but these tend to show one day at a
time. Maybe the annual event of Tuesday or Thursday is more intriguing to your
audience, but you would have to go back and forth online in sometimes-clumsy
interfaces. Chase has a consistent look with events listed and birthdays at the end.
Yes, you have to look for information, but you don’t have to then look for it.
Birthdays will always be at the end. (Chase, please don’t change this on me!)
Serendipity and discovery
When doing searches online, the results are mostly those that are expressly
searched. Accidentally add a typo, get results with that same typo. Type the
search term correctly, get results on that topic. The benefit of a printed resource
is that one sees other subjects en route to the topic of interest. New concepts
and ideas can be discovered. Hyperlinks only send the searcher to where the
specific item wants to send them (and far too often the hyperlinks rot). Flipping
through pages opens up so many more possibilities. For example, as wonderful
as the Occupational Outlook Handbook online is—yea, online version!—the
print one means that someone might encounter a career that otherwise would
have never occurred to that person. Narrow down by general area online, and
you are mostly stuck in that area. I suggest to those who are completely clueless
as to their desired career that they browse the print version. There are much
greater chances of stumbling across something new and intriguing there.
Cost
I get frustrated with people who think that just because something is online that
of course everyone can get to it. Not so in the real world. I work at a large library,
and we cannot afford the online Dictionary of National Biography. We have it in
312
N. LEDERER
print, thankfully, so if there is a course full of students who are required to use it,
they are able to do their assignment. Because the Dictionary of National
Biography is in the Reference collection, students don’t need to go to the third
floor (with its high shelves) to get to and use it. Keeping a Reference collection
increases the chance that when someone uses a title that they will leave it nearby
for the next user; helpful when there are class assignments. In the past couple of
weeks, I’ve seen individual books of the 11+ volumes of the Encyclopaedia of
Islam and 4 volume the Gale Directory of Publications and Broadcast Media on
shelving carts. The former title might be available online (our library can’t afford
it), and although the latter one is, it currently does not appear to be available in
our online database. It is used often (you should have heard the feedback I
received when the possibility of not getting a newer edition came up), so it is
good to have it in an accessible location.
The price of e-books continues to rise. Some resources require an annual
maintenance fee, so instead of being a fixed cost (I know, keeping an item on
the shelves costs money, blah blah blah), it must be partially repaid on a
regular basis. Don’t have the money for upkeep? Bye-bye and you don’t get
to keep the older edition. In print, if financially unable, a library can choose
to skip annual updates and cycle them to every 2, 3, 4, 5 years, or whatever
works for them. For many topics, the concepts do not change over time, so a
new edition is not essential. The history of almost all subjects is unlikely to
change, and although interpretations of those histories can and do change,
the sequence of events or what someone’s philosophical views were in a
particular year do not. The person might have a different perspective now,
but that is not the generally intended use for reference books. Instead, read a
recent article, preprint, blog, tweet, or Web page by that person for his or her
current thinking. In contrast, an overview of the thinking of Freud or Jung is
fixed. What happened 5 years ago or more is not going to be different now.
One of the more frustrating aspects of online reference books (I have
noticed less of it recently; perhaps others were vocal with the publishers,
whereas I simply did not purchase their online titles) is that publishers will
sell you their online edition, but it is available only until their new edition
comes out. Then, the current edition goes away! The thing is, the publisher
may have moved a comma, and suddenly I don’t have access to their
resources? Really? In print, I have the previous edition sitting on the shelf
and if, and probably when, I do not have the funds to purchase the newest
edition I at least have the previous one available for my users. In addition,
because the previous edition has disappeared, how are researchers going to
be able to see cited material from them? The research chain is broken.
Many public and academic libraries have small overall budgets and consequently very small reference budgets. Electronic has more often than not meant
“more expensive” not less, and having a print copy is better than not having the
information at all. It is incorrect to assume that all libraries are big and have
THE REFERENCE LIBRARIAN
313
large budgets. As I implied earlier, I would love to purchase specific electronic
reference books for my library, but we simply do not have the funds.
Upfront costs are accompanied by ongoing costs. If technical difficulties arise and a library does not have the staff to fix such problems, the
library’s electronic resources are useless to its users. Larger libraries might
have technicians on call during the weekend to address such issues, but
smaller libraries probably do not. Regardless, students and researchers at
a library on a weekend need access to needed electronic resources that are
subject to technical difficulties; the print ones, however, do not face such
problems.
Availability
Print reference is here for a while. A 2012 article noted (from a late 2011
source) that, of identified standard materials in health sciences, “a significant
number of print reference titles (60%) were simply not available in an
electronic format” and that their library prefers vendors who (my words)
play nice with their “federated e-book search engine” (Husted, 2012, p. 274).
If users cannot find the e-book material, it might as well not exist. The time
and hassle to add the 44% “of the electronic versions … available for
purchase or subscription from a single provider” (Husted, 2012, p. 274) is
not going to bring joy to the person doing the licensing and the users
navigating multiple software platforms. Medical professionals need to have
the most recent and reliable information possible, and if it is from a printed
book, that is just fine.
Cost and availability
Many libraries have very small budgets. In parts of the world, Internet access
is still nonexistent or unreliable. It would be doing libraries in these areas a
disservice to suggest that printed Reference collections are undesirable. It is
not only about one’s own library; stakeholders need to be concerned for all
libraries. Certain countries have tenuous economic environments, and even
relatively inexpensive online reference books are still pretty costly. In addition, if electricity is expensive and/or only occasionally available, online
resources are not going to be useful. Infrastructure for building connectivity
may not exist. Even those not in tenuous financial situations can be challenged financially by varying exchange rates.
Online irritants
The basic print reference book does have a learning curve; however, once
learned, it is useful for a very long time. I’m using print encyclopedias in the
314
N. LEDERER
same way that I used them in elementary school. As I like to tell my students,
knowing the alphabet has remained a useful skill. It is even useful in some of
the online reference materials.
Change is a major irritant of online resources. For some reason, vendors
and/or their technicians find it necessary to upgrade—or, far too frequently
for my comfort, “unimprove”—their software. OK, I’ve been using this for a
few years now so I should know where things are—oops that function I was
going to use is not where is used to be. Where is it now? I don’t have the time
to revisit online resources to stay updated in the event that I need to help a
user with that particular function. I once prepared for a session, and the
database changed between afternoon and evening! So, I knew what to click
on just a few hours ago, but now not so much.
For example, although in the future it may improve, the new Artemis
software used for Literature Criticism Online is not user-friendly. The
resource had a clumsy interface and sometimes unclear viewing options to
begin with, but the vendor found a way to significantly un-improve. After
choosing a source, the pages take seconds to change from blurry to semiclear and aren’t of a readable size. The auto-fill function, because it is from
user searches, is populated with typographical errors (this is not a guess).
These errors can be misleading to the novice user who will jump to the
conclusion that these are the only possible spellings or phrases—but they are
not. The author that a user is searching for may very well be in this resource!
Once the catalogers put call numbers on the print versions of this series,
which kept the versions together on a shelf, I didn’t have any frustration
using the Literary Criticism series in print. Furthermore, Literature Criticism
Online is not comprehensive. Copyright restrictions have yielded blank pages
for me more than once, which means I still need the print version! It would
be regressive to tell a student to change authors because we don’t have their
chosen one’s description online in this valuable resource, when, for example,
we do have the author in the print Contemporary Literary Criticism.
In another instance, it took a long time for me to convince the Gale
Literary Vault to establish a way to return to the results page without using
a browser button and thereby risking the loss of marked items. One can now
return to the results page, but I spent frustrated months (was it a year or
two?) wrestling to use the resource without it.
The variety and variation of how to use electronic reference books is
exasperating. Different vendors have their own look and way of doing things
(copyright restrictions may have a role in this), but is it really desirable to
have truncation operators and proximity operators vary so much? OK students, in this set of databases we do this and in this other set, to accomplish
the exact same result we do this other thing. And by the way, when using this
third kind we do something else to do it. Let me show you. This does not
leave a lot of time for high-level thinking or learning. Then vendors change
THE REFERENCE LIBRARIAN
315
the interface somehow—although at least so far I haven’t noticed a vendor
changing how truncation or proximity operators are done and hope I’m not
now giving anyone any ideas.
You can find the purpose and intentions of many electronic reference
books, but it means losing your place online. Fingers or slips of paper are not
going to help someone relocate an area or entry online. Sometimes using a
browser to go back is ineffective and generally speaking is not recommended
if any marks or saves have been added to a resource (this includes indexing
sources) because they will get lost or otherwise disappear.
Another problem with online resources is that they can have off days. The
publisher is upgrading its Web site. A hacker is being mischievous, and remote
databases are not accessible. The local Wi-Fi or Internet service provider is down.
When these issues occur, I would much rather have a printed group of resources
to call upon than to be unable to help a researcher. I do not need the library
catalog to be online in order to walk to the shelves and find a relevant reference
book. (I can do this in some sections of the regular shelves too.) The newer
librarian, either new to the profession or new to the particular library, will have a
better chance of quickly finding reference information in a confined area for
users too. A good librarian should be able to help users with basic reference needs
even if the Web is down. Getting to the third floor is not going to be efficient or
helpful. This kind of “what if” is very rare, but it is the sort of thing that will
probably happen when someone has a grant proposal due the next day and needs
the information immediately. I’ve helped several grant seekers, and their need is
usually immediate. With print reference books, I can help users head in a useful
direction. In the same way, I can help students with papers due, too.
It is amusing the number of online reference resources that have been turned
into printed books. Wasn’t the point that online was better? Oh, it isn’t? OK,
here’s a printed version of it. Now, it could be some of the user’s perceptions
that online materials are not legitimate or, perhaps, it could be that people are
still accustomed to using print. It is a small subset of reference materials that is
being turned into printed books; nevertheless, I do not know how I am to
interpret this. Some of it could be that it is simply too much of a hassle for
grassroots keeping of online reference sources. An example of this is the Guide
to Reference in Business and Economics (Sowards, 2014), which is based on the
Economics and Business portion of American Library Association’s online
Guide to Reference, a site now unavailable to new subscribers and eventually
destined to disappear entirely. Online upkeep becomes an unpaid job. Publish
it in a print book format, and the authors can rest.
Use
Reference books do not always get the use that some of us would like. But
then, even if counted there are false premises. I’ve been guilty of reshelving
316
N. LEDERER
books I have used in the Reference collection. I know where they go (my first
job in a library was as a shelver), and it is easier for me to put the book right
back after I use it over taking it to a cart where it may (or may not—I haven’t
figured out the counting schedule—is it all the time? some times?) be
counted. In true confession mode, I’ve learned that my colleagues often do
the same thing. So we are guilty of not demonstrating use of these resources
to the extent that they actually are being used.
When you have staff at a service desk who are not familiar with the print
reference books, they won’t be used as much as they could be. This applies to
the online reference books too. Switching over to electronic formats has not
suddenly or gradually infiltrated our nonlibrarian workers’ consciousness of
reference materials. It can be frustrating to have carefully selected best
reference resources only to have them sit, inactive, unused by front-line staff.
In library instruction sessions, when appropriate, I’ve encouraged the use
of print reference books that are not available electronically, and I have seen
those same titles on the shelving carts after my sessions (I’ve at least
convinced some of the students not to reshelve their books; a book shelved
incorrectly is a book lost, after all). So although some people might believe
that today’s young people will not use a printed reference book, I have not
found it so. It is important to explain specifically when and why to use the
resource—as tied to an assignment—and when I do, I see that they are used.
Even when I’ve informed and even shown students that a resource is available online, I see them use the print version.
Other use concerns related to online material is that depending on the
resource, it can be difficult for the visually impaired user to read or navigate.
Print books more easily lend themselves to magnifiers, for example. One can
often change the font size online, but not always, and even if you can, there is still
the glare of a computer monitor to be considered. Another concern I’ve
observed is that not all of our users are dexterous with a mouse, and some
online sites have very small areas to click on. I’ve seen users struggle with this
more than once. It is more user-friendly to have at least some vetted resources
available for those who are unable to fix upon a small spot online. We can always
refer students to our office for users with disabilities, but we are providing better
service if users can read through something meaningful immediately, instead of
having to return after training in the use of specialized equipment.
Other use considerations include number of terminals in the building.
Although yes, multiple users can access most of our electronic reference
material simultaneously, if there are no available computers—which happens—they have no access. We do have laptops to check out, but if all of the
desktop computers are being used, it is likely that the laptops are all being
used as well.
A newspaper article published on November 3, 2015, noted that “teenagers
in lower-income households have fewer desktop, laptop and tablet computers
THE REFERENCE LIBRARIAN
317
to use at home than their higher-income peers” (Singer, 2015, p. B2). Even in
higher income households, only 62% of teenagers have their own laptops. A
teenager in some households may be able to borrow a laptop, depending on
parent or guardian permission and availability. It would be cruel and not
doing our librarian duty to impede users from doing research because they
do not have their own laptop.
A core printed Reference collection means that users can access reputable
resources without having to wait for a computer to be available or need to go
long distances to look up quick facts or summaries. The survey that found the
aforementioned laptop ownership numbers was a national survey. Chances are
high that there are many users (teenagers and adults) who do not own laptops,
and it is probable that their local public library cannot afford multiple computers either. Libraries aim to ensure that all citizens, aspiring citizens, and
visitors have access to materials regardless of household wealth or finances. It
is unacceptable to turn away users based on lack of access to technology.
Multiple students can use a multivolume encyclopedia. They can look through
different titles in a Reference collection while someone else uses another
volume—and this scenario would probably exist only if there was a class
assignment and the students all arrived at their local library at the same
time. In some cases, they will because the project is due the following day or
because the students, teenagers, or adults may be working other hours of
the day or week and it is their first chance to do their homework.
Now, some libraries may set limits on the amount of time that any one
user can access a terminal, but if a student is doing real research, or even
simply trying to do homework, 1, or even 2 hours may simply not be a long
enough time. In those cases, a careful consideration of print reference books
will make the time online more efficient and ideally more effective. Eliminate
the core Reference collection and the library is just making things that much
more difficult for their users. Libraries are more likely to get life-long
supporters if they help their users when they need assistance.
Not all users are comfortable using a computer. It is unreasonable to
expect users to use online resources to address all their needs. All this chatter
about diverse learning styles from educators, and one group is isolated?
Besides, a user is limited in the number of simultaneously open windows
on screen, no matter how big the screen. A propped-up reference book next
to a computer monitor is another screen of sorts. Users can compare definitions from multiple sources simultaneously because the user can see all
sources at once. Maybe two or three online, and five to seven or more in
print.
One of my (librarian) colleagues who works at our service desk has told
me multiple times that when offered newer e-books that students will reject
them in favor of an older printed book. We are not doing our users a favor
by not having materials in a format that they are comfortable using. It is like
318
N. LEDERER
not having them at all. The assumption that all young people prefer online to
print does not always apply when it comes to doing research.
Actual use
I have a list of all of our print reference books with pickups over the past
several years noted. As mentioned earlier, this is inaccurate because of
librarians such as myself reshelving and irregular pickup statistic collection.
However, the list is telling and demonstrates that for at least in the near term
that print reference materials are being used—in some cases frequently. I
sorted individual titles with five or more pickups by subject heading and
found that the most popular subjects were as follows:
English language—Dictionaries
Spanish language—Dictionaries—English
English language—Dictionaries—Spanish
These subjects had multiple titles—six for English, five for Spanish, two for
French, one for German, and one for Latin. Now, there are many free online
dictionaries, and we currently have the Oxford English Dictionary online. In
addition, plenty of dictionaries are on the regular shelves (I know, I insist
that those under my sway remain in the building). Yet, users consult with our
print reference copies of these titles. Why? Possibly because they are on the
main floor instead of the others in the lower level (basement), so they are
more readily visible and users don’t need to look through entire call number
series to find them. Another reason for print use is that foreign language to
English and English to foreign language dictionaries, at least in French—
believe me I’ve looked for my personal use—do not exist for a reasonable
price in at least two e-book formats. Specialized ones exist, but one for
general fiction reading? So far, I have not found one. For the general user,
this resource may simply not exist yet. I also cannot see my library purchasing them if they were available given that we are cutting hundreds of
thousands of dollars’ worth of resources and given that the print ones work
nicely. I’m trying to hold onto some subject databases with my fingernails
because updated information is desired by the faculty users. Words found in
class reading are likely to be found in printed dictionaries. In addition, nicely
put by Morse (2005) in “Reference Publishing in the Age of Also”:
The main reason for the persistence of the print dictionary is convenience. Today’s
college-level desk dictionary is a superbly well-engineered product, in which the
best features of print technology are perfectly matched to a user’s ability. Thumb
notches take the user to the desired alphabetical section; guide words across the
top of the page narrow the search; boldface headwords set flush left in each column
identify the exact entry. A selection of typefaces, including boldface, italic, and
small capitals, developed over the centuries help signal the significance of each
THE REFERENCE LIBRARIAN
319
word on the page… A modern-day print dictionary, combined with a set of human
eyes and the human brain, is one of the most effective information storage and
retrieval devices ever invented. (p. 73)
Other groupings of popular print Reference materials at my library reflect
some of our major subject areas:
Building—Estimates—Periodicals
Cattle brands
Dogs—Diseases—Handbooks, manuals, etc.; Cats—Diseases—Handbooks,
manuals, etc.
Fashion designers—Biography—Encyclopedias
Gardening—Encyclopedias
Human anatomy—Atlases
Indians—Antiquities; America—Antiquities
Insects—United States—Classification
Language and languages
Literature—Dictionaries
Medical colleges—North American
Mammals—Europe
Music—Bibliography
Plants Ornamental Encyclopedias
United States—History—Civil War, 1861–1865—Dictionaries
Some users simply prefer the print for some of these topics. The list of titles,
as expected, is a lot of dictionaries of assorted types, encyclopedias, and
handbooks. Reference books, in other words. Other Reference books that see
a lot of use, but are designed to be user-replaced are our heavily used citation
manuals. The MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, Publication
Manual of the American Psychological Association, Scientific Style and
Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers, Chicago
Manual of Style, and Turabian’s A Manual for Writers of Term Papers,
Theses, and Dissertations are frequently used. We do have the APA Electronic
Style book and an online Chicago Manual (I haven’t used the Chicago one yet
but still consult the book). So there is a set of printed reference books that are
used often. It would not be doing our users a favor to send them, without
guidance, into the stacks to look for them. Besides, books in the stacks at my
library can be checked out for a minimum of 2 weeks (my library’s policy does
not allow noncirculating materials to be in the circulating stacks), so lacking a
core Reference collection would mean frequently used titles could be gone for
weeks at a time. Sorry, nice student with your paper due in 2 days, we’ll have
to wait for a copy of your style manual to return.
Historical research
Not all research is up-to-the-minute. Public libraries have a lot of people
doing genealogical research, for instance, and while there is a growing
320
N. LEDERER
number of online resources (some for a fee—can your library afford all of
them?) some of the needed material is found in older books.
Hartman and D’Aniello (2006) noted in their article about directories that
superseded resources, print or electronic, capture “a snapshot at a point in
time, they provide a context, which, although often imperfect, is nonetheless
useful and often irreplaceable” (p. 222). They noted that historians, lawyers,
business people, and physicians (pp. 222–223) use city directories. They also
identified a good number of articles that cite older Thomas Register entries,
available on microfiche (p. 224). They found multiple articles that cite this
resource and note that some of the citations were to the online version and at
some point “the verification of such citations may only be possible if an
archival version … is produced and retained” (p. 224). They noted something
that had occurred to me years ago: “It is not inconceivable that verifying a
piece of information from the 19th century may be easier in the future than
verifying information from the 21st century” (p. 224). Hartman and
D’Aniello provided suggested guidelines for keeping specific materials, but
a challenge is going to be space to keep them.
Future librarians
Levrault (2006) noted in “Integration in Academic Reference Departments:
From Print to Digital Resources”:
It is easy to forget that so much of reference work comes down to basic human
intelligence which cannot be easily duplicated by any type of technology, relevance
algorithm, script, or artificial intelligence system… . [W]e acknowledge technology’s tremendous importance without investing indiscriminately in the next hottest database or trend. The best approach to take involves linking new technology
with traditional library services, keeping in mind that we have a job to do no
matter how we do it—helping people find information. (p. 25)
We just might want to keep printed Reference collections around simply
to help edify future colleagues. It is much easier to learn what an encyclopedia does versus a handbook, for example, in a printed format. A survey
gathered by Bossaller and Adkins (2011) revealed that among students, “most
felt that assignments involving print resources helped them understand the
nature of reference work, understand reference sources, and how those
sources are organized” (p. 155), although many of them used online to
complete assignments, even when required to use print. More than half of
the students did not work in libraries, so they probably did not have easy
access to a Reference collection (p. 155). Nevertheless, the authors noted
“that a majority of students said that print sources should be required for
reference homework assignments, despite the difficulties of accessing these
sources” (p. 156). The article also discussed what practitioners used, which
THE REFERENCE LIBRARIAN
321
include online and print with “general directories and medical resources”
being the most important in print (p. 157). Reinforcing the need for prepared
librarians, the survey noted that “[p]ublic librarians agreed that new hires
should be well-versed in print reference sources—especially those with
enduring value” (p. 160).
In addition, “[g]etting rid of print resources was viewed as fiscally irresponsible because during times of financial crisis … they could still function
if their reference section was intact” (Bossaller & Adkins, 2011, p. 160). In the
conclusion of the article, the authors noted that at a Reference Renaissance
conference that one person said that reference sources could be “taught on
the job” (p. 161). That is not going to work so well in a sketchily or single
staffed library now, will it? It annoys me when my own professional colleagues can only see their own situations and cannot imagine being in a position
where they would be a solo librarian. There is not going to be anyone to learn
from in that case. Even at my larger library, we do not have the time to teach
reference to our new colleagues. We help one another as needed, but I doubt
someone would keep a position in our library if that person asked basic
questions about research or was not familiar with key reference materials.
Those doing reference and cataloging alike should know from day one the
differences and uses thereof of directories, statistical sources, encyclopedias,
handbooks, almanacs, etc. Adkins and Erdelez wrote about reference source
instruction in library and information science courses in an article published in
2005. It is disturbing that 10 years ago there was a predilection on the part of
library science students toward using online sources over print and Googletype searching at that (Adkins & Erdelez, 2005, p. 56). Our users use Google all
the time. Librarians need to know how to use as much of the other resources
as possible, and not mimic their constituents. The growing number of “Webbased courses for distance learning students make it impossible to ensure they
have access to print resources” one respondent to the survey that the authors
sent out noted (Adkins & Erdelez, 2005, p. 56). “Reference sources facilitate
easy access to snippets of information. Effective reference practice requires a
thorough knowledge of a variety of reference sources, thus making librarians’
ability to use these sources an essential aspect of their professional practice”
(Adkins & Erdelez, 2005, p. 50). It was good for me to see at least two library
science faculty members believe this. I hope I have persuasively argued that
some of those sources are still in print and it is helpful to have the core
materials available in one convenient location.
Conclusion
The best source—not the easiest or fastest source, is what a good librarian
uses. If it happens to be an electronic source, I am happy to use it. If it is
print, I’ll go to the print, and I really like having the print reference nearby.
322
N. LEDERER
I’ve had back-to-back reference consultations and when I use print resources
it is a better thing to be able to help my user quickly over trying to dig
through the stacks with their higher shelves and distant location. I have
someone else who needs help with their research showing up soon.
References
Adkins, D., & Erdelez, S. (2005). An exploratory survey of reference source instruction in LIS
courses. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 46(2), 50–60. doi:10.5860/rusq
Bossaller, J. S., & Adkins, D. (2011). Envisioning the future of reference instruction: LIS
students’ and practitioners’ opinions on print and online sources. Reference & User Services
Quarterly, 51(2), 63–72. doi:10.5860/rusq.51n2.153
Hartman, D. K., & D’Aniello, C. A. (2006, April). Subscribe to an online directory today,
frustrate a research tomorrow: Are print directories dead? C&RL News, 4, 222–226.
Husted, J. T., & Czechowski, L. J. (2012). Rethinking the reference collection: Exploring
benchmarks and e-book availability. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 31(3), 267–279.
doi:10.1080/02763869.2012.698166
Levrault, B. R. (2006). Integration in academic reference departments: From print to digital
resources. The Reference Librarian, 35/36, 21–36.
Morse, J. M. (2005). Reference publishing in the age of also. The Reference Librarian, 44,
69–81. doi:10.1300/J120v44n91_06
RUSA RSS Management of Reference Committee. (2013). Guidelines for behavioral performance of reference and information service providers. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/
rusa/resources/guidelines/guidelinesbehavioral
RUSA Task Force on Professional Competencies. (2003). Professional Competencies for
Reference and User Services Librarians. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/rusa/
resources/guidelines/professional
Singer, N. (2015, November 3). Digital divide for lower-income youth. The New York Times, B2.
Sowards, S. W., & Leonard, E. (Eds.). (2014). Guide to reference in business and economics.
Chicago, IL: ALA.