Trends in Change
PROGRAMS, SERVICES, AND COLLECTIONS
Trends in Change: Programs, Services, and Collections in Hartford County Public Libraries
Karen P. Patterson
Southern Connecticut State University
1
Trends in Change
2
Abstract
The study explores directional changes in program, service, and collection offerings in public
libraries in Hartford County (CT) between 2000 and 2007. Thirty-five public libraries were
surveyed using a nine-question instrument that gathered information about age level and format
of collections, non-English language materials, program target audiences and attendance, remote
and onsite services, and factors influencing decisions for change. Results showed that technology
advances were most frequently perceived to be the agent of change in the library during the study
time frame. Information gleaned from the study of community demographic profiles and overtly
stated user needs were also cited as influences. A follow-up study of public libraries in all
counties of Connecticut should be conducted in order to generate a data pool large enough to
make generalizations more meaningful.
Trends in Change
3
Trends in Change: Programs, Services, and Collections
in Hartford County Public Libraries
In the early 1900s America saw a great influx of immigrants, especially in its larger
cities. Many public libraries focused on this group and devised services, collections, and
programs aimed at integrating the foreign-born into the general population. But there was not a
uniform “code” to which all public libraries subscribed. Some libraries simply did not serve
ethnic groups and minorities. Other libraries chose to serve some groups and not others. Rubin
(2004, p. 292) tells us that it is unclear whether the slights were intentional or grew out of a lack
of insight as to how these excluded groups should be served.
A century later public libraries still struggle with issues surrounding service to the
community; DeFaveri (2005) stresses the importance of the library identifying the full range of
potential users and not simply catering to users who reflect the attitudes, culture, and values held
by those who design programs and services.
In addition to this need to clearly define the library’s service population, there is an issue
of technology in libraries that has become a part of most discussions about service. The growth
of computer technology late in the 20th century ushered in an era of unprecedented volumes of
information that were the result of harnessing technology for the acquisition and dissemination
of data. The public library in America, in adhering to the ALA Bill of Rights and its directives to
provide access to resources for all people in the community for their “interest, information, and
enlightenment” (ALA, 1996), became an important access point for the information
superhighway in the late 1990s when only 25 percent of all households were connected to the
internet (U.S. Dept. of Commerce’s 1999 report on use of technology in the United States [as
cited in Kibirige, 2001]).
Trends in Change
4
User information needs have evolved along with technology. According to Anthea
Stratigos, in her keynote address to The American Society of Information Science & Technology
(ASIS&T) 2007 annual conference (as reported in Varnum, 2007), almost a third of public
library users are still struggling with information retrieval, and most don’t want to have to pay
for their information.
Over the past decade public libraries have reconfigured, redefined, rewired, and rebuilt
themselves. Along the way their librarians have had to confirm (or re-discover) who their users
are, find out what needs the users have, devise methods of meeting those needs, and verify that
the library’s efforts are on target. These activities, as they relate to defining programs, services,
and collections in public libraries, were the impetus of the current study.
A search of a number of library and education literature electronic databases (Emerald
Library Suite; Library Literature; Library & Information Science Abstracts [LISA]; Library,
Information Science, and Technology Abstracts [LISTA]; ERIC; Academic Search Premier) for
journal articles published within the past ten years turned up a number of sources that revealed
that libraries most often concentrated on one of three strategies for guidance in the building of
collections and planning of programs or services to satisfy client needs. These strategies can be
described as demographic, technological, and participatory, with some variations existing within
each.
The review of the literature that follows aims to present an overview of the basics of and
some variations on these three approaches to decision-making.
The literature includes reports of studies and articles reporting on different strategies for
pinpointing user needs and implementing change to meet the perceived needs. The greatest
number of studies located had to do with college and university libraries and were not considered
Trends in Change
5
for this paper. Journal articles relating to the topic in public libraries generally were reports on
either what changes had been made in the library or how one could determine need as a
precursor to change.
One means available to aid in predictions of need is the study of the demographics of the
community to be served, including estimates and projections. Demographic data for a specific
group of people is data that describes them in terms of aggregated numbers of such
characteristics as sex and age, race, education, income, and several others that give us a picture
of who people are (U.S. Census Bureau. American FactFinder).
Librarians can use demographic data to learn about the characteristics of their community
in order to better serve the people with appropriate programs, services, and collections. (Peluso,
2008). While many library managers have a sense of who their clients are, this may be intuitive
data only (Hertel and Sprague, 2007); demographics can turn intuition into a certainty that is
usable in budget discussions.
Since August 2, 1790 the federal government of the United States has collected census
data at ten year intervals about everyone who lives in the country (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000).
Recent census data is available online to anyone interested person and can be fashioned into
textual and visual reports according to the user’s need.
The Reference and User Services Association (RUSA) of the American Library
Association, in the body of their guidelines for collecting and selecting materials for inclusion in
multilingual collections, specifically recommends U.S. Census statistical data as one basis for
materials selection (Guidelines, 2007). Library resources, the guidelines say, should take into
account the ethnic groups, language, and culture of the service population, as well as general
needs assessments.
Trends in Change
6
Hertel and Sprague (2007) conducted on a study that used census data in a new way,
combining it with GIS (Geographic Information Systems) in an effort to better understand
potential public library users, leading to the development of services that would better meet the
needs of the users.
The advantage of the GIS/census data tool is that it is able to graphically demonstrate the
concentration of certain demographic characteristics over a specific geographic area such as the
library’s community (Hertel and Sprague, p. 247). The combination of GIS technology with
census data created a tool for library planners that allowed for pinpointing library services that
capitalized on the demographics of the service area and led to better services (Hertel and
Sprague, p. 256).
Successful use of demographics was also demonstrated by planners in Edmonton
(Ontario, Canada) who worked on the revitalization project for the Stanley A. Milner Library;
they found that the changing demographics of the downtown area, combined with user input,
were powerful tools to be used in devising programming and outreach activities to support
collections and services to a user population that included weekday business office transients as
well as a resident population with entirely different demographics and needs (Jobb & Moore,
2004).
Another factor that has the potential for great impact on library operations is the
introduction of new technologies and the rapidity with which new products are developed. New
formats of content delivery have made it possible to access information remotely and portably,
giving users more choices for information access and how they want to use their public libraries.
Possibilities, however, don’t always transform into realities when public funds are at stake. The
pace of change in the formats themselves is accelerating as we come to the close of the first
Trends in Change
7
decade of the new century. And change usually translates into dollars. Public libraries need to be
creative and selective about services, programs, and resources that depend on technological
support for use.
One way to harness technology in a way that makes sense to users and dollars and cents
to librarians is to leverage communications and collaboration tools that are available and with
which modern users are comfortable. Many free or inexpensive technologies can be easily
implemented and used to deliver service to library customers. Among these are blogs, wikis,
RSS feeds, podcasts, vodcasts, instant messaging, and web conferencing (Kajewski, 2007).
Blogs offer an especially good bang for the buck. They can be used to push content, to
harness feedback from users (interactive), to provide gateways to information through live links,
and to stimulate interaction among specialized groups of users, to name just a few uses (Block,
2007; Kajewski, 2007). Wikis, a tool for sharing information collaboratively, can be librarygenerated (at a cost to the library) or libraries can provide the means for users to become aware
of and access wikis that are maintained elsewhere on topics of interest to library users, such as
book recommendations and reviews, or gaming (Kajewski, 2007).
RSS (really simple syndication) is an inexpensive means of distributing information
about the library’s services, programs, and news without requiring a user to even visit the library
website. The advantage is that once users have subscribed to a feed, the library’s presence will be
brought to their attention every time a new feed is produced and distributed (Kajewski, 2007).
Podcasts and vodcasts (online delivery of audio and video) can be used to deliver
programming on demand, so that when the user is ready, so is the program. Web conferencing
gives the library the capability of offering interactive programming to users who cannot or prefer
not to physically attend an event but who want to participate. Web conferencing software usually
Trends in Change
8
allows for the recording of a session so that it can later be used in either podcast or vodcast
formats (Kajewski, 2007).
Technology must be given at least some consideration when library planners review their
collections and make decisions about what programs to offer and what services to deliver.
Marshall Breeding (2006) tells us that understanding how the new generation of users deals with
information is crucial to the success of library service delivery. That is to say, the way
information is delivered is as important to these users as is the what. Breeding says “Millenials
have less of a tolerance for slow, nonintuitive, and unattractive Web sites and will quickly turn to
other sources if the library’s doesn’t meet their expectations.”
Finally, there is the voice of the library user. Participatory information needs assessment.
The rise of the Age of the Boomers, for instance, has resulted in public libraries hearing the
clamor of unsolicited voices. The group is dynamic, educated, vocal, and demanding. And there
are signs that the next generation (the X-ers) are following in their attitudinal footsteps
(Dempsey, 2007).
The baby boomer generation (individuals born between 1946 and 1964) has driven the
consumer marketplace with their wants and needs since birth. They are used to getting
everything they want; they like to experiment with new products and services and enjoy
experiencing new things (Thornhill, 2006).
Boomers want to volunteer, or have another career as they grow older, they want an
active old age, are interested in health and fitness, and in genealogy. They have relationships
with and contacts in organizations with resources (both monetary and human) that can be of
immense use to a public library in planning programs, offering services, and making collection
Trends in Change
9
development decisions. They want to be fulfilled, and libraries are well positioned to help them
in that quest (Dempsey, 2007).
For groups of users that are less vocal or insistent than Boomers, analysis of survey
responses of library clients can be highly informative for librarians because they force library
staff to evaluate services through the eyes of the user. But surveys that offer expected findings
are not of much critical use; and surveys that present totally unexpected findings may either
point to a poorly designed survey or librarians who are completely out of touch with the service
community (Balas, 2008).
Library 2.0, reminiscently named after Web 2.0, indicates a user-centric concentration on
development of programs, services, and collections. And although it’s regularly associated with
technology, Library 2.0 isn’t necessarily about hardware, software, and cutting edge technology
– “it’s about using the best tools and ideas to provide the best possible service to our users.”
(Block, 2007).
The key to Library 2.0’s success is customer as collaborator. More than simply
responding to requests by customers, the Library 2.0 model allows the user to actually develop
his or her own services by means of empowered interaction with the library (Casey &
Savastinuk, 2006). Regular solicitation of user response to the library is essential, as is the
evaluation and updating of resources (including programs and services). The virtual component
(computer technology) is not an absolute requirement for Library 2.0, but it can facilitate the
gathering of user need information. Low-tech library 2.0 solutions involve things like change to a
physical library space that is made as a result of user input (like making a program room
available for teens and letting library users set it up the way they want and using it for activities
they design, like gaming or movies).
Trends in Change
10
Doing needs assessments through focus groups, direct interview, and user surveys are all
viable and important means for soliciting feedback from library users (Guidelines, 2007), as is
outreach through ICMs (intercultural mediators) to portions of the service population that may
have unique needs that might otherwise be overlooked (Pyati, 2003).
Minority groups (especially those with limited English proficiency) in public library
service communities may be reluctant or ill-equipped to respond to surveys regarding their
information needs, resulting in underserved populations without visibility. Considering the
diversity of culture, languages, and ethnic groups that are being found more frequently in
communities, public libraries are facing some pressing challenges to build success with limited
fiscal resources:

whose needs should be met – the needs of the majority or the minority needy?

how big does a minority group have to be in order for their needs to be considered in the
equation of services, collections, and programs?

what portion of effort should be expended in the recognition and promotion of minority
culture and identity in the public library arena?

is there a limit to the range of minority needs that should be met?
Partnering with community groups to discover need and deliver services is one possible solution
(Roach & Morrison, 1999).
There are, then, a variety of means that may be used by public librarians to help them
determine what programs, services, and collection composition will best meet the needs of their
service population. Current and projected town demographics, user surveys, direct user input,
and employing some of the techniques for which Library 2.0 is known are all avenues that can be
explored in the quest for the “best” fit of library offerings and user satisfaction.
Trends in Change
11
Much of the literature focused on the needs of a particular user group and the actions that
were taken. The literature warns against the “librarian knows best” conceit that cuts users as a
valid measurer of their own needs out of the equation and relies either entirely on data (the
quality of which may be in question) or on preconceived notions held by the librarians. A caveat
is that it is hard work to keep on top of changing user needs and to find ways to quickly learn
about them and respond with changes in the library. It is important that librarians not become
complacent and fall into the trap of justifying the status quo by surveying the satisfied customers;
that way may lead to the possibility that entire subsections of the “real” client base of the public
library will be ignored (DeFaveri, 2005; Schmidt, 2007; Roach and Morrison, 1999).
A combined approach of strategies is no doubt best for determining the answer to the
question of what services, and programs should be offered and what collection development
decisions should be made in today’s public libraries. Community demographics, solicited and
unsolicited user input, and timely intelligence on current and future developments in information
technology should be employed in order to achieve the best possible balance of offerings for the
library’s users and to keep the library viable in the 21st century.
Method
Directors of 35 public libraries in the 29 cities and towns in Hartford County were
queried about programs, services, and collections in their institutions. Several sources were
consulted to get the most complete and current information for each library, resulting in a
composite listing that included directors’ names as well as library address. Conflicting
information was resolved by reference to by accessing either the library’s website (where there
was one) or town information made available by the local government.
Trends in Change
12
A paper survey, accompanied by a letter of introduction, was used to collect data (see
Appendixes A and B). The survey questions gathered information about audience level and
format of collections, non-English language materials, program audience level and attendance,
remote and onsite services, and factors influencing decisions for changes in each of the three
study areas of collections, programs, and services.
Following the identification of the 35 libraries to be included in the study, town profiles
for each of the 29 cities and towns where the libraries are located were accessed through the
State of Connecticut’s Department of Economic and Community Development webpages1 and
demographic data from the 2000 U.S. Census with projections to 2007 were extracted. The plan
was to see if, in addition to survey data, any inferences could be made between size and ethnic
composition of the towns and library collections, services, and programs. The cities and towns
were broken down into 4 groups corresponding to population group sizes. Because the U.S.
Census definitions of rural and urban2 would place all but 5 cities in the county in the rural
group, new groupings were defined as follows:

rural (R)
< 5,000

small suburban (SS)
>= 5,000 and < 20,000

medium suburban (MS) >= 20,000 and < 35,000

large suburban (LS)
>= 35,000 and < 50,000

urban (U)
>= 50,000
The town profiles were coded with a combination of letters corresponding to the
population breakdown and sequential integers to keep them unique (i.e., R1, R2, R3 for the first
3 rural towns encountered).
Trends in Change
13
For each library, survey pages were coded to correspond to the town codes described
above. When there was more than one library in a town, unique letters were appended to the
codes. After this coding was completed, town names were removed from the top of the profile
pages and towns were thereafter known only by code.
Survey packages were assembled with an introductory letter, a nine-question survey, and
a preprinted self-addressed, stamped return envelope (to encourage survey returns). Outgoing
survey envelopes featured a preprinted return address coupled with hand-written recipient
information, including the name of the library director when it was known. Hand-addressing the
envelopes and use of personal names was meant to convey a more personal look to the exterior
of the survey package and to have it stand out from mail that was entirely mechanically
addressed. A period of two weeks from the date of mailing was set for the returns deadline.
Returned surveys were sequentially numbered and the results, including population code
designation, were entered into an excel spreadsheet for analysis.
Results
Of the 35 surveys mailed out to public libraries in Hartford County, a 14 (40 percent)
were returned, representing libraries in 13 of the 29 cities/towns in the county.
Questions 1 – 4 of the survey asked respondents about changes in library collection
composition in terms of target age level, format, and language (other than English). The greatest
increases reported in collection of materials were for the teen/young adult age group (100 percent
of the libraries answering the survey) while the adult group suffered the greatest decrease with
46 percent of respondents reporting cuts in acquisitions for adult users. Figure 1 graphically
illustrates the emphasis placed on acquisition of materials for the teen group from 2000-2007.
Trends in Change
14
Figure1. Change in collection by age group, 2000-2007.
14
Responses
12
10
Increase
8
Decrease
6
No Change
4
2
0
Infant/Pre
school
Young
Child
Teen/
Young
Adult
Adult
Older
Adults
Age Group
The most frequently reported increase in collection by format (100 percent) was that of
audiobooks, with video collections right behind them at 93 percent. Half of respondents said they
increased collecting in electronic books; one library said they did not collect eBooks. Print
periodicals and online databases were formats that showed the largest decrease in acquisition: 43
percent of libraries reported a decrease in their collection. Book acquisition levels either
increased or held their own (see Figure 2).
Five libraries (36 percent of all survey respondents) reported increases in
acquisitions of materials in languages other than English, but two of those failed to specify which
languages in the section provided for that purpose. The remainder cited Spanish language most
often, followed by Polish. Korean, Russian and Japanese language materials rounded out the
answers to that question. Adult users were most often the beneficiaries of non-English language
additions to collections (all five of the libraries who answered positively to this question
collected for adults). Young children were the next most frequent recipients of other language
Trends in Change
15
resources (40 percent); and 20 percent of the libraries also collected for the teen/young adult
group and older adults.
Figure 2. Change in collection by format, 2000-2007.
16
14
Libraries
12
10
Increase
8
Decrease
6
No Change
4
2
0
Book
Audiobook
Video
eBook
Print
Periodical
Online DB
Resource Format
Questions five and six pertained to changes in numbers of programs offered by the
libraries for different ages groups and if there were perceived changes in attendance at programs.
Two (14.3 percent) of the libraries surveyed reported that they did not offer any programs for
patrons. Of the remainder, ten libraries (71.4 percent) responded that they have increased
program offerings for the teen/young adult group. Adult programming was the next most
specified age group with more program offerings (in 42.8 percent of libraries). The biggest
decrease in programs was seen in the infant/preschool group (57 percent). The numbers of teens
and young adults were most often reported as increasing in attendance at library programs (50
percent of libraries surveyed), but the responses showed that attendance was up for all other
groups as well in nearly as many libraries: infant/preschool and adult program attendance
increased in 42.8 percent of responding institutions; programs for young children and adults were
up in 35.7 percent.
Trends in Change
16
In answers to the question on services (question seven), six libraries responded that they
had added websites between 2000 and 2007; four of these were also part of the 71.4 percent that
did a redesign of their sites in that time period. Program calendars and 24/7 reference were the
most frequently (78.5 percent of the libraries) cited additions to library websites. Virtual
reference services were well represented as additions to existing sites through 24/7 reference,
email reference, and online reference chat. None of the respondents had added either video
reference or text message reference capabilities, both of which are newer technologies that are
now being used in some public and academic libraries (Patterson & Lindquist, 2007). Catalog
access and online renewal/ILL/hold requests were mentioned as added features in 42.8 percent of
cases. Website features mentioned least frequently as having been added were library newsletters
(35.7 percent), readers’ advisory and purchase suggestions (21.4 percent), internet resource
recommendations (14.3 percent), and school curriculum support (7.1 percent).
Wireless internet was added to all of the responding libraries during the period of time
covered by the survey, and 12 of 14 libraries (85.7 percent) reported increasing their number of
computer workstations for patron use. Twenty-eight and a half percent of libraries responding
had begun delivering library materials to shut-ins, added gaming and social networking areas,
obtained loaner hardware for use with newer formats of materials, and reconfigured their space
for use as a commons area or added a “café”. Five of the libraries also added quiet or study areas,
and two extended their library hours.
Questions eight was a general question about staffing changes. Less than half (42.8
percent) of the libraries surveyed reported increases in staff, most of which (83 percent) was
professional. The remaining respondents had no increase in staff, citing lack of funding as the
most frequent reason (42.8 percent). Only one library reported that they had no need for
Trends in Change
17
additional staff, while another explained that, instead of additional staff, vacant positions were
reclassified and duties reassigned.
When asked what they saw as the most significant factor in driving change in their library
during the years 2000-2007 (question nine), some respondents felt that there was more than one
predominantly driving factor, but a full 78.5 percent (11 of 14) cited rapid changes in
technology, dramatically outstripping others answers (see Figure 3). One responder elaborated
on this, citing the ability of users to get materials on their own (from such vendors as Netflix,
Amazon, Kindle, etc.) as having influence on change in library acquisitions of like materials.
User requests were seen as less of a factor (28.6 percent) and changing demographics was
cited only twice (14.3 percent). Three respondents felt that other factors influenced change in
their institutions. One did not explain, but the other two both cited lack of space. In one case,
overcrowding of people and collections caused limiting of program attendance and a slowdown
in acquisitions as well as an aggressive weeding of existing library materials.
Figure 3. Factors influencing change in library programs, collections, and services, 2000-2007.
12
Libraries
10
8
6
4
2
0
Technology
Demographics
User Feedback
Factors
Other
Trends in Change
18
Discussion
Results of the survey indicate that technology has played a significant part in changes that
occurred in services, collections, and programs in public libraries in Hartford County from 2000
to 2007. Not only was technology cited more than any other factor for driving change, but newer
technology formats saw an increase in acquisitions (audiobooks, 100 percent; video formats, 93
percent) in surveyed libraries, as did making room for gaming, social networking, and increased
patron computer use. Wireless internet access, new just a few years ago, is a universal fixture in
all of the responding libraries.
The fact that 66 percent of library websites launched since 2000 have already undergone
a redesign speaks volumes about both the importance libraries place on their web presence, and
the speed by which new technology is developed and becomes a part of the people’s lives. The
inclusion of wireless service over the past seven years in all of the responding libraries, the fact
that all responding libraries have web sites, and the array of remote services available suggests
that technology has become a staple item in public libraries in Hartford County; the question is
no longer whether or not to consider technological solutions to library business but how much
and what kind of technology makes sense for the library.
It comes as no surprise that the group most benefitting from increases in collections and
programs is the teen/young adult group, traditionally the most avid users of newer technologies.
Focusing on this age group makes sense for public libraries since they represent the next
generation of public support monies and libraries have been struggling to remain relevant to this
age demographic.
Evidence of the influence of cultural and ethnic heritage in the population (another
demographic) on decisions about library collections also emerged in the survey. Matching up the
Trends in Change
19
survey’s town codes with codes on the demographics sheets for the respondents who said they
have increased their collecting in Spanish language materials showed projected increases in
Hispanic population of 22 percent and 36 percent in two towns with populations under 20,000.
The last, an urban location with an estimated population of just over 72,000, showed an increase
of 16.8 percent in Hispanic population (but slower population growth overall than each of the
first two). Korean and Japanese language materials were reported to make up a part of the
collection of one respondent. Unfortunately, population estimations for the Asian race are
available only on the county level, so it was not possible to track estimated increases for the
small suburban town. However, a comparison of FactFinder’s Fact Sheet for 2000 (U.S. Census
Bureau. American FactFinder) and Population Estimates Program for Hartford County for 2006
(U.S. Census Bureau. American FactFinder, 2007), shows that the increase in the Asian
population in the county was expected to increase 47 percent, so we may assume that the
increase in the demographic was significant in the reporting library’s town as well.
Finally, it seems clear that at least some of the libraries responding to the survey (28.6
percent) consciously responded to user input in the form of requests for specific programs,
services, or materials. The survey, however, does not allow for determining if the input was
solicited or offered.
The survey instrument, while indicating change, did not measure it. However, requests
for actual numbers or percentages of change in categories, even if they were readily available,
may not have been accurate measurements: the definitions of age groups for which statistics are
kept may change annually. Libraries follow published definitions used for an annual State Grant
for which the public libraries apply (and which frequently change, based on national statistics
database group definitions). This creates a situation where there is not a reliable standardized
Trends in Change
20
definition that can be used to compare statistics from year to year (M. Etter, personal
communication, February 13, 2008).
The demographic information collected prior to the study did not have the usefulness
expected because there were not sufficient responders in each of the population groupings
devised to make generalizations that might extend to all of the members in the groups.
A better frame of reference might have been obtained in the question seven web site
section by splitting it into several questions that would benchmark data: one pertaining to
features of websites already in existence before 2000; one pertaining to features of post-2000
new websites, and a third one that would specify features of re-designs.
Also, the survey does not ask about consortium membership and its impact on libraries.
Consortium initiatives in licensing audio book or video products, for instance, could account for
the increase in the numbers of those formats available in collections.
Additional questions regarding specific avenues of input patrons have available might
yield interesting results. Services and programs for the socially excluded are other areas that
should be explored as the current survey does not specifically address these. A more
comprehensive survey, distributed both electronically and physically, and extended to all public
libraries in the state should be conducted to obtain a more reliable measure of trends due to
greater numbers of responses.
A trend of focusing on the teen/young adult patron is indicated from the fact that more
libraries reported increases in acquisition, programs, and program attendance for that group.
While the collection of audio and video formats has increased in most libraries, the traditional
book format is holding its own.
Trends in Change
Survey responses clearly indicate that technology is seen as having the most influence
over determining the collections, programs, and services offered by the participating public
libraries, but it is equally clear that user input and demographics are integral parts of decisionmaking as well.
A three-pronged approach to public library planning should be employed to achieve a
balance in serving all segments of the user population. A reasonable use of widely-used and
proven technology which is constantly evaluated, a study of existing and projected community
demographics, and solicitation of user input (by any and all means that will reach not only
current users but potential ones as well) is a combination that cannot fail to improve the image
and substance of the public library in the community.
21
Trends in Change
22
References
American Library Association. (2006, June 30). Library Bill of Rights. Retrieved April 19, 2008,
from
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/statementsif/librarybillrights.cfm.
Balas, J. (2008, January). Asking users what they want. Computers in Libraries, 28(1), 35.
Retrieved February 16, 2008, from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts
database.
Block, M. (2007, April 19). Library 2.0 Means Better Service. Presentation for the British
Columbia Library Association. Retrieved March 24, 2008, from
http://marylaine.com/lib20.html.
Breeding, Marshall. (2006, November/December). Technology for the Next Generation.
Computers in Libraries, 26(10), 28-30.
Casey, M., & Savastinuk, L. (2006, September 1). LIBRARY 2.0: Service for the nextgeneration library. Library Journal, 131(14), 40-42. Retrieved February 3, 2008, from
Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
DeFaveri, A. (Winter 2005). The Culture of comfort [Electronic version]. Information for Social
Change, 22.
Dempsey, B. (2007, July 1). What Boomers want. Library Journal, 132(12), 36-39. Retrieved
February 4, 2008, from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
Guidelines for the development and promotion of multilingual collections and services. (2007,
Winter). Reference & User Services Quarterly. Retrieved February 4, 2008, from Library,
Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
Hertel, K., & Sprague, N. (2007). GIS and census data: Tools for library planning. Library High
Trends in Change
23
Tech, 25(2), 246-259. Retrieved February 4, 2008, from Emerald Library Suite database.
Jobb, P., & Moore, J. (2004). What experience has taught us: The Four R’s of library
development. Feliciter, 50(6), 239-241. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from Library,
Information Science & Technology Abstracts database.
Kajewski, M. (2007). Emerging technologies changing our service delivery models. The
Electronic Library, 25(4), 420-429. Retrieved March 31, 2008, from Emerald Library
Suite database.
Kibirige, H. (2001, June). Internet Access in Public Libraries: Results of an End User Targeted
Pilot Study, 1997-2000. Internet Technology and Libraries, 20(2), 113-114. Retrieved
April 16, 2008, from
http://www.lita.org/ala/lita/litapublications/ital/volume20no2.cfm#anchor189620.
Patterson, K. & Lindquist, R. (2007, December 5). Libraries and Mobile Technologies: Early
21st Century Uses. [Powerpoint]. Unpublished work.
Peluso, N.. (2008, February 27). Introduction to Using Your Community’s Data. Connecticut
State Library Continuing Education Workshop presented at the Willimantic (CT) Service
Center.
Pyati, A. (2003). Limited English proficient users and the need for improved reference
services. Reference Services Review, 31(3), 264-271. Retrieved February 18, 2008, from
Emerald Library Suite database.
Roach, P., & Morrison, M. (1999). Pursuing the wind of change: Public library services in a
multicultural Britain. Asian Libraries, 8(4), 112-117. [Reprint of “Pursuing the winds of
change” first published in The Library Association Record, vol. 100, no. 7, July 1998].
Retrieved February 18, 2008, from Emerald Library Suite database.
Trends in Change
24
Rubin, R.E. (2004). Foundations of Library and Information Science (2nd ed.). New York:
Neal-Schuman.
Schmidt, J. (2007). Promoting library services in a Google world. Library Management,
28(6/7), 337-346. Retrieved February 4, 2008, from Emerald Library Suite database.
Thornhill, M. (2006). Marketing to the middle age of Aquarius: Five “new” priorities for
Boomers Over 50. Retrieved February 15, 2008, from The Boomer Project Web site:
http://www.boomerproject.com/Middle_Age_of_Aquarius.pdf
Varnum, K. (2007, October 22). ASIS&T 2007: Keynote -- The Impact of Web 2.0. [Weblog
Entry]. Retrieved April 19, 2008, from
http://www.rss4lib.com/2007/10/asist_2007_keynote_the_impact.html.
United States Census Bureau. American FactFinder. Accessed March 4, 2008, at
http://factfinder.census.gov.
United States Census Bureau. American FactFinder. County Population Estimates. Generated
using American FactFinder, March 14, 2008, from http://factfinder.census.gov.
United States Census Bureau. American FactFinder. Fact Sheet for Hartford County,
Connecticut. Generated using American FactFinder, March 14, 2008, from
http://factfinder.census.gov.
United States Census Bureau. (2000, May). FactFinder for the Nation. Retrieved April 15, 2008,
from http://www.census.gov/prod/2000pubs/cff-4.pdf.
Trends in Change
25
Appendix A
Survey About Changes in Public Libraries in Hartford County
SURVEY
DIRECTIONS: The nine questions below pertain to changes during the past 7 years (20002007). Please answer each and feel free to enter additional comments on the back of the survey.
Please return the survey in the provided envelope by March 14, 2008. Please return even if
all the answers are not complete. YOUR INPUT IS CRITICAL TO THE SURVEY’S
SUCCESS.
LIBRARY COLLECTION INFORMATION
1. How has the composition of your collection changed by age group in the past seven
years?
Age group
Increased
Decreased
Remained
same



infant/preschool



young children



teen/young adult



adult



older adults
2. How has the composition of the collection changed by format in the past seven years?
Format
Increased
Decreased
Remained
same



books



audiobooks



video formats



electronic books



periodicals (print)



online databases
3. Has there been an increase in the acquisition of materials in languages other than
English?

yes
Languages:

no
(go to Question 5)
Trends in Change
4. If you answered “yes” to Question 3, for what target user group(s) did the increases
occur?
user group





infant/preschool
young children
teen/young adult
adult
older adults
PROGRAMS
5. How has the number of library programs offered changed in the past seven years?
Age group
Increased Decreased Remained
same



Infant/preschool



Young children



teen/young adult



adult



older adults
6. How has attendance at library programs changed in the past seven years?
Age group
Increased Decreased Remained
same



Infant/preschool



young children



teen/young adult



adult



older adults
SERVICES
7. Which of the following user services have been added in the past seven years?
 Added a Library website (if there was not one prior to 2000)

Added the following features to an existing website:
 Website redesign
 Program calendar
 Readers’ advisory
 Library newsletter
 Catalog access
 Renewal/ILL/hold requests
 Purchase suggestions
26
Trends in Change















School curriculum support
Internet resource recommendations
Email reference
Online reference chat
Texting reference service
Video librarian interactive reference (ex: Skype-a-Librarian)
24/7 reference
loaner hardware to accompany new information formats
addition of gaming and social networking areas
addition of a library cafe or reconfiguration of space to act as “lounge” areas for
social groups
Addition of group study/quiet study areas
additional computer workstations to serve as public use computers
wireless internet access
home delivery of library materials for shut-ins
expanded library hours
GENERAL
8. Over the past seven years, has the number of staff increased?
 yes
 increase in professional staff
 increase in support staff
 increase in volunteers
 no
 lack of funding for additional staff
 lack of need for additional staff
9. What do you see as the most significant factor in driving change in your public library
over the past seven years?
 rapid changes in technology
 changing demographics of the community
 changes in expressed user needs (user requests for specific
programs,
services, or acquisitions)
 Other (please explain)
END OF SURVEY – Thank you! Please enter additional comments on back ==>
27
Trends in Change
28
Appendix B
Letter of Introduction to Survey
Southern Connecticut State University
New Haven CT 06515
SURVEY CONCERNING CHANGES
IN HARTFORD COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY
PROGRAMS, COLLECTIONS, AND SERVICES
February 2008
Dear Participant:
I am a graduate student in Master of Library Science Program at Southern Connecticut State
University, conducting a study of changes in Hartford County public libraries over the past seven
years, seeking to determine what kinds of change have taken place and what factors may have
influenced these changes. The study is being undertaken as part of coursework required for
completion of my degree.
Participation is voluntary. There will be no penalty for refusal to participate. Return of this
survey indicates your consent to use this data in research. [This research has been reviewed
under the Human Research Protection Program, Institutional Review Board at Southern
Connecticut State University (Protocol 06-107).] This survey is being sent to public libraries in
the 29 towns and cities that make up Hartford County. Because of the relatively small number
of potential respondents, your participation is critical to the success of the study.
Your individual responses will be kept completely confidential. Only the aggregate data will be
reported; this data, however, may be used as part of publications relating to factors influencing
services, collections, and programs in Hartford (CT) County public libraries from the years
2000-2007.
There are 9 questions in the survey; most questions ask you to check the most appropriate
response from a short list of possible replies; some ask you to write a few words of explanation..
The survey takes approximately 15 minutes to complete. You will have the opportunity to
provide additional information if you wish. Please complete this survey in the next day or two
and return it by March 14, 2008, in the provided addressed and stamped envelope. Please do not
hesitate to contact me by either email or phone with any questions.
Many thanks for taking the time to complete this survey. Your assistance and participation are
greatly appreciated.
Karen P. Patterson, Graduate Student
Dr. Mary E. Brown, Buley 416
Trends in Change
Master of Library Science Program
karen.p.patterson@gmail.com
(860) 289-8291
Dept of Information & Library Science
Southern Connecticut State University
501 Crescent Street
New Haven CT 06515
Brownm6@southernct.edu
(203) 392-5781
Fax: (203) 392-5780
29