Rick Anderson

The Perils of Permanent Punctal Plugs

PURPOSE To describe previously unreported complications associated with permanent lacrimal punctal plugs. METHOD Five oculoplastic practices reviewed patients referred to them over the preceding 2 years for permanent lacrimal punctal plug complications. RESULTS In 12 patients, 14 lacrimal punctal plugs migrated distally within the lacrimal drainage system, causing symptoms and necessitating surgical removal. CONCLUSION Luxation of permanent punctal plugs into the distal lacrimal drainage system can occur, sometimes requiring complex surgical intervention.

Implementing the unthinkable: the demise of periodical check-in at the University of Nevada

Librarians generally assume that serial check-in is an essential function. The authors challenge this assumption, maintaining that the practice does not stand up to thoughtful scrutiny. The check-in process does make possible such practices as routine claiming, binding, and the tracking of title and frequency changes, but many of these ancillary functions do little to help library patrons gain access to journal content; the functions can be accomplished by other, less time-intensive means. The authors believe that in the vast majority of cases, staff time currently devoted to check-in could be much more effectively utilized and patrons better served if check-in were eliminated in favor of a much more abbreviated and pragmatic process. Librarians at the University of Nevada, Reno, have conducted a year-long experiment in eliminating serial check-in, and found that doing so enabled them to reallocate staff time in ways that significantly enhance patron access to serial content without any appreciable negative impact on patron access to print issues.

Future-Proofing the Library: Strategies for Acquisitions, Cataloging, and Collection Development

ABSTRACT The future is not perfectly predictable. However, as serialists it is our job to predict the future in some very real ways, and current trends give us valuable tools for at least figuring out a range of possible future scenarios. Certain trends in particular point to highly likely developments in the near future, and wise libraries will position themselves to deal with those developments. They include a continued drift on the part of researchers away from printed resources, from the library catalog, and from non-unique collections, with a concomittant rise in the importance of unique collections and locally-produced scholarships. Libraries can future-proof themselves by, in part, turning decisively away from resources and services that patrons are abandoning and towards those resources and services that are likely to grow in importance.

The (Uncertain) Future of Libraries in a Google World: Sounding an Alarm

Abstract Libraries are in competition with other entities that provide information access to students, scholars and the general public. This constitutes a radical change in the information environment. The library professions failure to take seriously the change that has taken place in the information environment, and to respond with fundamental changes of its own, may well spell disaster for the library as we know it.

Collections 2021: the future of the library collection is not a collection

Research libraries are now operating in an environment that provides less funding, more competition and greatly expanded options for brokering access to high-quality resources. All of these realities suggest a need to rethink, radically, not just the ways libraries build collections, but the very nature of the library collection itself. If online resources can be purchased at point of use, does it still make sense to purchase them before need is demonstrated? If books can now be printed on demand, does it still make sense to buy them on the basis of speculation about future need? What might the practices of collection building and access brokering look like ten years from now?

What Is Open

There is a broad difference of opinion among the many stakeholders in scholarly publishing about how to precisely define open access publishing. Are “open access” and “open data” what we mean by open? Does “open” mean anything else? Does it mean “to make available,” or “to make freely available in a particular format?” Is a clearer definition needed (or maybe just better education on the current definition)? Why or why not? At present, some stakeholders see public access as being an acceptable stopping point in the move toward open access. Others see “open” as requiring free and immediate access with articles being available in CC-BY format. The range of opinions between these extremes is vast. How should these differences be decided? Who should decide? Is it possible to make binding recommendations (and how)? Is consensus necessary? What are the consequences of the lack of consensus?

Is the Journal Dead? Possible Futures for Serial Scholarship

Rick Anderson discusses the pressures on the current models of scholarly communication, as well as some of the major changes in the information environment. He then asks whether journals truly matter in the current information environment, and indicates that journals still serve as important indicators for the credibility and reliability of the articles within. He concludes his presentation with several new models of scholarship now possible in the current information environment, and possible avenues for further exploration for serialists. Andersons presentation was followed by a short question and answer period.

Patron-driven acquisition of journal articles using ReadCube at the University of Utah

The University of Utah Library has teamed with a new company, Labtiva, to experiment with a product called ReadCube Access. This product allows the library to provide access to journal articles using a patron-driven acquisition (PDA) mechanism, using a tiered pricing structure based on level and permanence of access. Outcomes of the pilot program and a value analysis are discussed. Overall, the program is deemed a success by the Library.

Librarians and publishers in the eye of the format-migration storm

In 2010, research libraries find themselves in – to say the least – an interesting position. To a very significant extent, we have succeeded in moving two major subsets of our resources online: it is now generally assumed and expected that the majority of a research library’s journal collection and reference resources will be available electronically. Although significant problems remain to be resolved – pricing, access models, etc. – the move from print to online for those two categories of research material is clearly irrevocable and is, in functional terms, nearly complete. Momentum for the next phase of online migration – that of scholarly and popular monographs – has built more slowly, but in 2010 a tipping point is clearly at hand. Research libraries had earlier begun buying e-books (often in bulk) that they expected patrons to use like databases, which is to say for interrogation and selective citation rather than for extended linear reading. But in recent years two hardware developments have given added momentum to the emerging e-book market: first, the introduction and slow but steady popular adoption of the Kindle e-book reader in 2007 and 2008 (which by late 2009 had reached the important commercial threshold of spawning multiple competitors, including Barnes and Noble’s Nook) [3], and second, the market dominance of the iPhone, a smartphone on which e-books are relatively easy to read and which had also spawned many imitators by 2010, most of which make the downloading and reading of e-books affordable, easy and comfortable. The Kindle offers a more luxurious reading experience, while the smartphone offers supreme convenience; each solves a major e-book problem for end users. E-books have not yet achieved anything like the market penetration of e-journals. However, after more than a decade of false starts, the stars finally seem aligned: sales of both e-books and e-book readers are now rising steadily [9], and mainstream market analysts are predicting explosive growth over the next two years [8]. At this juncture, in what feels a bit like an eye in the storm of format transition, it is worth stopping and considering the issues that remain to be resolved, and to look at the ways that libraries, vendors and publishers are dealing with them.

What will become of us? Looking into the crystal ball of serials work

Is it possible to predict the future of serials work? Not with perfect accuracy, of course - but to do so imperfectly is both possible and imperative.We need to be looking ahead and asking questions like these: What are the implications of the open access movement for serials staff? Will the information economy of the future be driven by problems of scarcity or problems of abundance, and what does each scenario mean for the library? The areas in which we work are especially volatile, and both we and those we serve will benefit greatly if we learn how to anticipate and prepare for change, rather than simply reacting to it after it happens.