E-Reserves in Transition: Exploring New Possibilities in E-Reserves Service Delivery

Abstract

Nearly all academic libraries offer course reserves and most have long considered it a core library service. However, expanding use of course management systems in academia have opened new opportunities for libraries interested in exploring changes to electronic reserves services. Budget constraints and staffing shortages have also led several institutions to consider eliminating or modifying their e-reserves operations. Potentially difficult challenges, however, also accompany making significant changes to often well-established practices.This environmental scan of selected academic libraries across the United States discusses institutions which have maintained the status quo in e-reserves services, as well as those who have changed or discontinued these services. The article also provides insight on why some of the latter decided to make these changes.

Leveraging Strengths and Meeting Demands: The Construction of a Modern and Comprehensive Electronic Reserves Service at Central Michigan University

“…This model, consistent with the history at CMU, was to remain a full service e-reserve model where the "library remains at the center of the reserves process providing full service from the beginning to the end" (p. 35), consistent with the first of Goodson and Frederiksen's (2011) three general categories of academic libraries e-reserve environment.…”

“…The state of the current literature expands our understanding of a number of issues regarding electronic reserves ranging from the inherent difficulties of navigating copyright law (Gasaway, 2010;Gerhardt & Wessel, 2010;Gould, Lipinski, & Buchanan, 2005) to broad studies examining the evolution of electronic reserves at the libraries of our nation's institutions of higher education (Goodson & Frederiksen, 2011;Oliver, 2008) to the specific approaches individual libraries have taken to address the economic and legal constraints new technology has visited upon them (Bridgewater, 2008;Cubbage, 2007;McCaslin, 2008;Quartey, 2007;Wagner, 2008;Woodman, 2007).…”

“…Most recently, Goodson and Frederiksen (2011) conducted a broader "environmental scan of selected academic libraries across the United States" in an effort to "understand the present landscape of electronic reserve services in academic libraries" and "get a general sense of any changes taking place in this area of library operation" (p. 35). According to the seminal work of Fahey and Narayanan (1986), environmental scans are a methodology used to identify changing trends and patterns in the hopes of forecasting the future direction of these changes and patterns and thereby assess their organizational impact.…”

User perceptions of ebooks versus print books for class reserves in an academic library

“…Clumper et al (2011) presented their efforts to embed the course reserves at Northern Michigan University through their Moodle course management system. Another article from Goodson and Frederikson explores ways in which libraries can take advantage of online course management software to enhance their electronic reserve services (Goodson and Fredericksen, 2011). Both articles highlight ways in which libraries can utilize course management software to make electronic collections more accessible.…”

Engaging Faculty and Reducing Costs by Leveraging Collections: A Pilot Project to Reduce Course Pack Use

“…Bridges (2007), in describing a threat of litigation made to Cornell University, wrote that "E-reserves practices ... vary widely and are influenced by institutional organizational structures, the information and technology infrastructure, manpower, demand, and the copyright law" (p. 317). Goodson and Frederiksen (2011) provide an overview of the multiple models of e-reserve delivery across a survey of ARL institutions, placing services on a spectrum between full service Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication and self-service, with many hybrids in between. Goodson and Frederiksen also point out that by 2011 many US institutions were reducing or disbanding their services in this area, allowing the work of administering electronic course materials to be decentralized to individual academic units or instructors through campus-wide LMS systems.…”