The Adoption of a Digital Collection within Archibald S. Alexander Library & Electronic Reader Program - Essay Example

?Tae-Eung Kim 121 Stonegate Trail Cresskill, NJ 07626 January 6, Ms. Marianne Gaunt Vice President for Information Services and Librarian Archibald S. Alexander Library Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 169 College Avenue, CAC New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901-1163 Dear Ms. Gaunt, I believe that libraries are valuable to universities. It is with this belief in mind that I am writing this letter to express my concern that practices within libraries could be enhanced. It is within your scope of influence to view the recommendations I make in the attached document, and, should you find them valuable, assist in promoting the implementation of my recommendation. It occurred to me that the invention of new technologies such as e-readers may provide a solution. Some informal personal research I did revealed that, as you are, no doubt, aware Rutgers University has undergone significant budget cuts in 2010. I discovered that it costs $4.26 per annum to store a print book in a university library as opposed to $0.15 fro an electronic volume. . In addition, The Rutgers University Libraries are essentially filled to capacity – some of the most critical space shortages exist in the Alexander Library. The attached document is a detailed version of an oral presentation that I recently delivered, proposing that comprehensive changes within the Rutgers University Library System can be enacted by the implementation of a digital collection and electronic reader program, at a cost that would not be prohibitive. A saving of upwards of $25 million dollars annually could be saved by not having to extend the libraries physically and by reducing storage costs. Surveys have shown that this move to digital format is something that the students and staff of Rutgers woul welcome. I look forward to hearing from you regarding this project and will make myself available at any time. Please feel free to contact me via email at tufkte@eden.rutgers.edu, or by phone at 201-835-9098. Thank you so much for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Tae-Eung Kim Going Digital: The Adoption of a Digital Collection within Archibald S. Alexander Library & Electronic Reader Program Submitted by: Tae- Eung Kim Submitted to: Marianne Gaunt Vice President for Information Services and University Librarian Archibald S. Alexander Library Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 169 College Avenue, CAC New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901-1163 Submitted on: Jan 11, 2011 Scientific and Technical Writing Course Number: 355:302:01 W11 Abstract This report is a qualitative deconstruction of the concept of the library and argues that contemporary solutions are possible to enhance the library experience and address the changing nature of library space. Connections are made between the changing nature of this library space and physical shortages of space in Archibald S. Alexander Library. The rising costs of tuition and textbooks are considered, as well as the cost of housing a digital book collection versus a print collection (ARL Statistics 2007-2008). Logistical shortcomings of a print collection in isolation are considered in relation to access to research material and Rutgers’ Special Collections. Overarching technological trends are considered insofar as they demonstrate the public’s growing reliance on and acceptance of handheld devices. Trends in media are also considered and sources are cited that forecast the ‘death of print media’ – even the more radical views of for example, Arthur Sulzberger, owner and chairman of the New York Times, are considered. A plan is formulated that is paradigmatically linked to developments made at Northwest Missouri University, the Google Books Program, and the Gutenburg Project, as well as successful local initiatives reported on in the Rutgers University’s The Daily Targum.. The plan includes a three part structure and is designed for students in Rutgers’ Graduate Program in English at the New Brunswick campus to form a pilot study group as precursor to a more general university-wide rollout: (1) A librarian will be self-trained in the use of the Elphel 323 Camera to digitize books and textbooks used in the Graduate of English Program; (2) all course packets and textbooks used in the Graduate Program in English will be required to be digitized; (3) all students in the Graduate of English Program will be required to purchase a portable digital reading device (alternative sources of funding are suggested; and alternative products considered). Options for the budgets and financing for the plan are specified. The study group for the pilot project – the Graduate English Program – has been specified due to its nature: a relatively small number of experienced students, identifiable by their need to examine specific literary and academic texts. The proposal argues that the plan functions as a foundation and guidepost for long-term developments that should occur when the wider university and library budgets permit. Table of Contents Page ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................................i TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................................ii TABLE OF FIGURES...............................................................................................................................iii INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................1 The Modern ‘Library’ Space............................................................................................................1 Rising Costs...................................................................................................................................2-4 Research Access & Special Collections............................................................................................4 Summary comments.......................................................................................................................4-5 LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................................................................5 Death of Print Media........................................................................................................................5 Technological Trends....................................................................................................................5-6 Paradigms of Success....................................................................................................................6-8 PLAN.............................................................................................................................................................8 Three Part Structure.........................................................................................................................9 Concerns Addressed.......................................................................................................................10 Benefits............................................................................................................................................11 BUDGET.....................................................................................................................................................11 Digitization................................................................................................................................11-12 E-Readers……................................................................................................................................12 Elphel 323 Camera and Components.............................................................................................12 Total Costs......................................................................................................................................13 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................................................13 REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................................13-14 VISUAL AIDS...........................................................................................................................................15 APPENDIXES............................................................................................................................................15 Read Scale.................................................................................................................................15-19 Device Comparison Table……………………………………………………………………………..19-23 Extract From LibQual Report……………………………………………………………………………23 Table of Figures Figure 1: Space Shortages in Archibald Alexander Library...........................................1-2 Figure 2: University Libraries 2007-2008 (Expenditure)………………………………..3 Figure 3: Rising Costs in Tuition and Textbooks 1986-2004.............................................3 Figure 4: ARL Statistics 2007-2008…………………………………………………….7 Figure 5: E-reader options..................................................................................................9 Figure 6: Elphel 323 Camera............................................................................................12 Figure 7: Elphel 323 Standing Model...............................................................................15 Introduction The Modern ‘Library’ Space At a recent Educause Conference for librarians the role of the library in the 21st Century was a primary topic of discourse. Suzanne E. Thorin, dean of libraries at Syracuse University, stated, “Let’s face it: the library, as a place, is dead.” (Kolowich 2009). As radical as this conception may appear to be, Thorin’s point is that with the technological advances of the past two decades the function of the library as a repository of books has shifted, and today the primary role of this institutional establishment is to function as a space of collaboration and intellectual discourse. Indeed, if you consider the Read Scale (Appendix), the level of questions relating to logistical issues such as finding books has been greatly reduced and the patron’s primary concern has become more complex and research oriented (Kolowich 2009). While students’ needs and purposes for using the library have changed, most contemporary libraries – including Rutgers' Alexander Library – have not in all aspects met these perceived needs. As stated above, budgetary constraints and logistical considerations of necessity contribute to this inability to change easily, cheaply, and rapidly. Personal experiences, while allegorical, will bear out the sense that frustrations do occur: Numerous times upon arriving at the library, particularly during examination or deadline weeks, students have found it difficult to find many places to study and read. Space has become a major concern. A recent study conducted by the university revealed, “The Rutgers University Libraries are essentially filled to capacity: Some of the most critical space shortages are in the Alexander Library” (Rutgers, Web). Understandably, the majority of the library space is utilized for traditional purposes – namely, the storage of valuable and bulky print collections. Figure 1, below, demonstrates a report conducted by the Rutgers Library System estimating the significant amount of high space needs within Alexander Library (Rutgers, Web) Figure 1: Space Shortages in Archibald Alexander Library Book and manuscript high density storage area 23,400 ASF Cold storage for audio-visual material 1,000 ASF Inspection Area 2,000 ASF Processing and Receiving Space 2,000 ASF Project Room 3,000 ASF Conservation Laboratory 5,600 ASF Public Reading Room 1,000 ASF Six offices (6 x 150 sf each) 900 ASF Staff Room 400 ASF Total space required 39,300 ASF While proposed plans have examined the benefits of high density storage, it is proposed that such solutions are short-term measures and that a more long-term strategy needs to be sought, which is able to address the needs of modern libraries simultaneously to solving a storage problem. The trend, nationally in academic libraries is to convert to electronic formats: “not only have electronic materials expenditures grown sharply in the past decade, they have grown at a rate far exceeding that of library materials overall” (ARL Statistics 2007-2008). Digitization of the current hard-copy texts would enable more creative storage solutions for the current texts, and space could be utilized to more accurately meet the needs for an environment geared toward discussion, study and research. New texts could be sourced at lower costs – in electronic format – and again, the imminent, and ongoing, expense inherent in expanding storage space for print texts could be managed effectively. Rising Costs IN 2010, Rutgers' President McCormick issued an address to the Rutgers University’s faculty. He stated that “Rutgers’ enormous budget challenges will call on all of us to work even harder to sustain the high-quality education and cutting-edge research that our faculty provides and the supportive environment for learning and scholarship that our staff ensures” (McCormick 2010). Indeed, Rutgers has experienced significant budget cuts in 2010, with a 15.1% reduction in allocations, representing in over $46 million less being available. This implies significant reductions in allocations to libraries: thus pressure for expansion of space, and to keep current and excellent collections, while saving money, cannot be underestimated. It is not only the institution that experiences the financial strain, though. Since 1958 tuition fees at tertiary institutions have risen at twice the cost of inflation (see: Fig. 3 overleaf). By the very nature of universities it is appropriate that a fair percentage of tuition fees is allocated to library systems, and that those allocations be used primarily for the acquisition of texts according to Ehrenberg (2002) and the ARL Statistics 2007-2008 (see Fig. 2 overleaf). IN the words of the university’s president: “To make up the loss, we need to increase tuition, acquire national rather than state funding, and work together.” Further expense also burdens students: the costs of required prescribed texts for many courses can become prohibitive. The possibilities for cost reduction in both the above instances are clear: the majority of readings could be just as easily collected and made available online at significantly lower expense to the university, resulting in more accessible individual costs for the student. Figure 2: University Libraries 2007-2008 (Expenditure) Figure 3: Rising Costs in Tuition and Textbooks 1986-2004 The cost of expanding a single (writer’s emphasis) square foot of space in Archibald Alexander Library was estimated by the University to be $365 (Rutgers, Web). With an estimated 39,000 feet of space needed the cost of library expansion would run into millions of dollars. Similarly excessive cost implications are revealed by research conducted into the expense of keeping a paper based collection: statistics demonstrate that it annually costs $4.26 to store each book in a university library, compared to $0.15 per eBook (Roth 2009). By 2008, Rutgers libraries contained 4,529,396 volumes (ARL Statistics 2007-2008). Just the storage of these can be estimated, hence at $19,295,226. If these were, hypothetically, all digital in format, costs would be $679,409. Hypothetically, and at the most basic level, this saved amount could be divided by the number of students at the university, in a given year, and lead to a reduction of $383 per student in annual fees. (based on the total student numbers at Rutgers University in the 2005 LibQual Report; see calculation for estimate below). Other avenues for the spending of this money could also be explored, such as the conversion of conventional library space in to space more suited to study, or debate, and not exclusively reading and book storage. Research Access and Special Collections The current system at the Alexander Library, and at Rutgers libraries generally, leads to some difficulty in sourcing adequate literature particularly for in-depth and specialist research. The requirements of post-graduate and specialist students can be demanding, and the same conditions, no doubt, affect faculty when they are searching for resources. Rutgers has over 52,000 volumes in the Rare Book special collection. These books do not circulate and require the submission of advanced notice to view (Rutgers, Web). Such special collections of highly valued books and documents would certainly benefit from being made accessible in electronic format. They could then be more widely available to users, and their preservation (both because of rarity and value) can be better ensured, if far fewer people have to handle them physically. It is also of concern that books, particularly new and high-use books (generally the most needed), are oftentimes checked out and unavailable to students and professors. As mentioned earlier, particularly during high-demand times such as examination weeks, or deadline weeks, particular sets of books are difficult to come by for students generally. Purely in terms of numbers of students, many university libraries must struggle to meet this demand. Such obstacles are not conducive to the learning, or research process. In this area, too, the digitization of the collections of texts would be beneficial on numerous levels. Added to these observable concerns, are the revelations of the LibQual™ Report of 2005. When asked if libraries at Rutgers are places of inspiration to study and learn, respondents revealed a negative response, well below the desired mean – 7.65 (desired figure) vs. -0.06 (respondents’ replies measured at well below the mean for adequacy). The statistics reveal an even bleaker picture in the area of information control. A desired mean of 8.10 was required as indication that access to print resources “that I need for my work”. Responses indicated that libraries at Rutgers are 0.41below an adequate mean. In all the areas measured by this survey, relating to information control, responses indicated that Rutgers libraries do not meet standards defined as “adequate”, let alone “desirable”. In response to a question: “The electronic resources I need”, results were 0.13 below adequate; “Print and/ or electronic journal collections that I need for my work: 0.53 below adequate; “Making electronic resources available from my home or my office”: 0.11 below adequate ranges. To some degree, then, libraries are not meeting the requirements of the majority of their users in the area of information at all, at Rutgers University. Summary Comments A clear and definite move to embrace the use of electronic books will enhance the reputation of the library and the university, and create an accurate perception of advancement, innovation and academic excellence among members of the wider and academic communities. Students will have simpler, more familiar, and more user-friendly access to far more resources. The academic standards of the university will be enhanced, as students are more likely to research widely and thoroughly, given easier access to materials. It is clear that the financial benefits for the university, the faculty, and the students will be immediately evident. To elaborate on an earlier point: the library system is inherently and necessarily deserving of funding. Libraries form the focal point of tertiary education institutions and serve as invaluable repositories of knowledge essential in the academic environment. It is, however, possible to direct financial allocations more strategically and economically. The conversion of the paper-based collections to digital formats will be economically viable and, in fact, be more financially efficient than present strategies. Such a move will certainly change perspectives on the possible uses of space in the library and potentially avoid the need for costly physical expansions. A beneficial side-effect could be the use of newly-available space as study and discussion areas for students and faculty, needs highlighted by Kolowich (2009) and in the Read Scale (Appendix 1). Literature Review Death of Print Media There is some contentious debate regarding the future of the print media. At the most radical edge of that debate is the claim that newspapers have become a thing of the past, as numerous individuals have announced the ‘death of print media’ (Madigan 2007). Recently Arthur Sulzberger, owner and chairman of the New York Times, stated, “I really don’t know if we’ll be printing the Times in five years, and you know what? I don’t care, either” (Palser 2007). Certainly, more and more newspapers worldwide are available digitally, on the World Wide Web, and paper distribution is no longer taking exclusive precedence. To a large degree, magazines are also following this trend. Similar evidence regarding the publishing of books and journals can also be found. Established in 1971, Project Gutenberg is a volunteer effort to digitize cultural works, to "encourage the creation and distribution of eBooks" (Hart 2004). This initiative has produced the oldest digital library with over 30,000 available electronic texts. Another initiative, the‘Google Books’ program has already digitized over 12 million books for public consumption (Brin 2009). In addition, Google has started the Google Scholars program to digitize old academic journals, perhaps leading the way in the digital preservation of academic writing. Technological Trends A growing trend among consumers in the technology industry is the use of hand held devices. A recent article by Ngo (2009) Meraki: Internet usage via handheld devices soars discusses the undeniably growing trend towards the use of handheld devices, with particular reference to internet usage. Ngo writes, “… the number of mobile devices including laptops and handheld devices grew from some 149,000 in 2008 to more than 211,000 in 2009, a 41 percent increase.” (Meraki, Web). Indeed, much of SNS innovation has occurred within the framework of hand held wireless devices. Armano (2009) references platforms, such as Foursquare, that are constructed specifically for hand-held wireless devices. On April 3rd Apple released the iPad to great fanfare, in great part, for its use as an electronic reading device. The release was one of the most anticipated in the world of technology in recent memory. The growth of this market segment is unprecedented: “Citigroup's estimates say 35 million tablet devices will ship in 2011, with Apple's iPad representing three quarters of the total (around 26 million), giving it a share of the market similar to the company's dominant position in music players with the iPod.” (Citigroup, Web). The Amazon Kindle has also gained considerable popularity as an electronic reader. Paradigms of Success The financial benefits of moving towards a digital collection are undeniable. Courant and Nielsen have conducted research and note, “Where it is legally and functionally possible to make the move to electronic storage and use of the working copies of academic materials, there is substantial economic gain” (Insidehigheredu.com). There are also a number of significant paradigms of success, highlighting proven and tried technologies and approaches. Rutgers had, in 2007-8 $10,454,644 worth of materials – of consequence to this report, are the 4,529,396 paper volumes in Rutgers libraries (ARL Statistics, 2007-2008). This meant that it was ranked 55th of universities in the country for materials. As opposed to this, the first-ranked library by number of resources, Harvard had $16, 259,117 worth of materials. Rutgers University’s ranking in terms of percentage of materials in electronic format was 75th with a figure of 49% determining the ranking. A university such as Washington State, ranked 10th on the ranking of electronic materials as a percentage of total materials, had a figure of 64%, and the national average for electronic materials as a percentage of total materials was 51.46% (ARL Statistics 2007-2008). Rutgers is, hence, below the national average. National trends show (See Fig. 4 overleaf) that universities across the country are spending more, year-on-year on electronic materials in comparison to total spending on materials, and that, as electronic materials become more widely available at these universities, spending is able to reduce. For example, the expenditure of universities nationally on total materials in 2006-7 was 6.06%, reducing to 5.80% in 2007-2008. Spending on electronic materials remained at close to 20% of total expenditure in both years but the trend since 2003-2004 suggests that as universities build up electronic resources, they are able to allocate lower budgets in this area (see Fig. 4 overleaf). . Total expenditure of national libraries in 2007-2008 was $1,290,575,224 - 51.46% of this expenditure was on electronic resources (ibid). Figure 4: ARL Statistics 2007-2008 Using the Elphel 323 Camera the Google Books Project is able to scan 1,000 pages per hour and has the goal of digitizing over 15,000,000 books within a decade (Kelly 2006). Already 12 million books have been digitized. This writer’s contention is that this product is ultimately the only choice for the proposed project and will contribute significantly to the efficiency and success of this pilot. Northwest Missouri State University has instituted a cutting edge program ultimately designed to save that institution an estimated $400,000 annually. The program began in 2008 when 200 students were supplied with the Sony e-reader and instructed to upload their course textbooks instead of purchasing them. Uploads are possible from the university Intranet, or on the Internet, via a designated website, with secure log-in procedures. In the spring of 2009 the program was expanded to include over 4,000 students. The students were not supplied with e-readers but they were given free access to textbook uploads (Jones 2009), thus offsetting costs for the university and the students. The university would not have to finance the tablets at enormous expense; the students would have to commit to a once-off affordable outlay. In comparison to the expense of buying the complete set of texts in printed format required for a university course, the purchase of an E-Reader is a reasonable expense (See Appendix 2). There were complaints regarding the functionality of the Sony E-Reader, though, and these are referred to in paragraphs below. Rutgers itself has made progress in developing a digital collection (see above – Rutgers ranked 75th on this comparative scale). The first ranked university on the ranking list for “Electronic Resources as a Percentage of Total Library Materials” (ARL Statistics, 2007-2008) boasts 88.5% of its library resources in electronic format. This is Wayne State, also a State university, experiencing, presumably, the same budget limitations as Rutgers. This ranking indicates that to a large degree, other institutions have adopted this process, and certainly are making more rapid progress in such initiatives than Rutgers. This process could be enhanced and accelerated. Plan This paper proposes a solution that has the potential to create considerable long-term benefits for Archibald S. Alexander Library and Rutgers University. Capitalizing on advances in technology the plan creates an opportunity where ultimately students, and the faculty, in fact all patrons can gain access to resource material from a wider base, in a more user-friendly manner, and with easier accessibility than in traditional library environments. Further, the plan potentially will save the university money, and position Rutgers at the cutting edge of information. Following the example of Northwest Missouri State University the plan initiates with a small and selected population – the proposed students of the Rutgers’ Graduate program in English – that will develop foundational elements, and a potential model for the implementation of a wider process, culminating in the Alexander Library being able to realize Suzanne Thorin’s vision of the 21st century Library. The study group for the pilot project – the Graduate English Program – has been specified due to its nature: a relatively small number of experienced students, identifiable by their need to examine specific literary and academic texts, as noted in the abstract. One of the key complaints of students who participated in Northwest Missouri State University’s e-reader program was the lack of functionality of the Sony E-Reader that the program instituted. This plan has taken this into consideration and, after reasonable comparisons of devices available (see: Appendix 2), proposes that any E-reader (perhaps preferences should be polled) be pinpointed as the preferred device. It should firstly be noted that the two major complaints that students at Northwest Missouri had regarding the Sony E-Reader were the lack of stylus pen functionality, and did not allow the taking of notes, or highlighting on the e-texts; and secondly, the Apple iPad has the Stylus pen functionality, and also has a benefits arising from iPad Applications. Consideration must be given, nonetheless, to the constraints of finance, and the possibility of sourcing devices is explored in relation to possible sources of sponsorship, or costs relative to value (see: Budget Section). While it may be necessary to adopt other technology, due to the possibility of sponsorship from the companies to be approached regarding partnership (see Plan: Item 3) an essential requirement, offered by the iPad, is the ability to use a stylus to make notes on texts. Figure 5: E-Reader Options Amazon Kindle 3 Amazon Kindle DX Barnes Noble Nook Sony Reader Daily Apple iPad Three Part Structure The proposed plan has a simple three part structure: 1. A librarian will be self-trained in the use of the Elphel 323 Camera to digitize books and textbooks used in the Graduate of English Program. 2. All course packets and textbooks used in the Graduate Program in English will be required to be digitized 3. All students in the Graduate of English Program will be required to purchase an E-Reader (or alternatives which will be explored that may yield potential reductions in cost, such as the sponsorship of tablets by partner companies). Concerns Addressed This section addresses a number of potential concerns that could arise with the Three Part Structure. In light of the significant budgetary constraints on the university, the most pressing concern is clearly funding for the project. As the budget section will demonstrate the costs for the Elphel Camera and its necessary components are a modest $1,525. Despite the relative lack of expense of the camera, it is proposed that sponsorship be sought from the major manufacturers for the pilot project tablets. Each of Apple, Kindle, and Sony (with some reservations as noted earlier) will be approached to partner with the university in the implementation of the pilot. Undertakings to provide future promotion, or supply contracts will be negotiated with the company ready to enter into such an agreement. An appeal emphasizing the corporate social responsibility aspects of involvement with educational research will be highlighted in this approach. The digitization process is not complex and the librarian will be self-trained (figure 5 demonstrates the Standing Model of the camera used in the digitization process). While it is not within the scope of this proposal to indicate which staffing reallocation will occur, the proposal functions to indicate to the Rutgers committee members that a reallocation needs to be made. It may, indeed, not be necessary to employ a new staff member – this function could be supplemented by student volunteerism, or even casual employment. The Rutgers Library System’s annual budget in 2007-8 was $32,434,060 (ARL Statistics 2007-2008)and following contemporary responses to the Read Scale (appendix), the shifting needs of the university student demonstrate that budget and staffing relocation is both economically feasible and necessary (Sewell 2005). Another concern regards the challenge of getting students in the Graduate English Program to purchase an e-Reader, should the possibilities of external financing be exhausted. E-Readers range in price and cost but an average price is in the region of $400. The estimated current spending on textbooks and course packets could exceed $1,000 (Jones 2009), depending on the course and the university. Rather than being cost-prohibitive the new program actually will imply notable cost-cutting for the students involved in the pilot study and potentially for all students of the university. Benefits The costs for the current plan have been accounted for even in the event of no external funding, as the potential savings the project represents will be significant. Alexander Library would stand to save a considerable amount of money over the next decade if only the incoming collection was digital. In addition, consider the following: Whereas the cost of annually storing a print book is $4.26, the Hathi Trust – a shared digital repository – stores books at $0.15 per volume (Hathi, Web). As noted earlier, current storage costs in 2008 can be estimated at $19,295,226. If these were, hypothetically, all digital in format, costs would be $679,409. Students and professors will have increased and more efficient access to texts through designed systems allowing access codes, smartcards or home-access via the Internet and a library website securing evidence of enrolment or employment at Rutgers to the texts within the Rutgers collection. The long-term space shortage problem could be addressed by reducing the need for incoming print collections President McCormick’s challenge to work harder to maintain Rutgers’ academic standards in the face of budgetary shortages will be addressed. As indicated above, the savings realizable just from digital storage as opposed to paper-based storage runs into millions of dollars. The reputation in academic circles and in the general populace will be enhanced when Rutgers’ Alexander Library becomes one of the most groundbreaking university libraries in the nation. As the ARL 2007-2008 Statistics show, the measurement of a library’s success is now also dependant on its materials available electronically – such statistics are ranked, and hence given credence within academic circles. Certainly the traditional measures of a library’s effectiveness are changing from just number of books to include other variables, such as electronic and digital efficiency. The ease with which the public has taken to technology for reading must imply that this is a measure the Association of Research Libraries is not wringing in their decision to measure this aspect of libraries, and rank national institutions by this criterion. Budget Digitization Library staff member responsible for digitization of incoming books, textbooks, and course packets for courses in Rutgers Graduates Program of English............................(estimated) $5,000 (Funding for the staff member’s time will be allocated from the existing university Budget based on reducing spending in areas deemed irrelevant by the Read Scale). E-Readers E-Readers providing suitable and acceptable technology will be required purchases for students in the Graduate Program of English, or will be funded by potential donors. Note that any brand product may be used, given the response to the proposed sponsorship applications, and a student survey. Elphel 323 Camera and Components (Figure 4) Model Description price USD NC323L Network camera base $650 SF318M3C Sensor front end, color 2048x1536 with (3.0 MPix) with Micron MT9T001 CMOS sensor $150 SF338M5C Sensor front end, color 2592x1944 with (5.0 MPix) with Micron MT9P001 CMOS sensor $150 SF338M5M Sensor front end, monochrome 2592x1944 with (5.0 MPix) with Micron MT9P001 CMOS sensor $150 10359 Multifunction multiplexer/FPGA processing board $250 PW-130 Midspan power supply (by Ault) $30 H2Z0414C-MP Computar Varifocal Lens, 4-8mm F1.4 Manual Iris Vari-Focal C-Mount, 3 MPix $145 Figure 5 Elphel 323 Camera Total Costs Elphel 323 Camera..............................................................................................$1,525 Total Costs Estimated Total Costs.............................................................................................................$6,525 Discussion Both sides of the argument regarding the implementation of electronic systems in libraries exist: conservative critics have argued that books will never die out and that it is unreasonable to require students to attain e-readers; others suggest that the need for paper-based knowledge has ceased to exist. Both views need to be modified to a degree, but it is short-sighted to ignore the possibilities represented by advancing technology. In less than twenty years the world has seen computer word processing become a prerequisite in high schools and universities. Just as writing on a computer is now required for any college English class, potentially reading books on a computer could become a necessity. This concept is also in line with trends in publishing, print journalism and academic writing. It seems undeniably clear that the shift towards electronic means of cultural dissemination has already occurred and will continue to gain credence and application. Ultimately, this proposal creates an environment in which students and faculty can have access to material and resources not possible within current budgetary and logistical restraints. Simultaneously, President McCormick’s challenge to develop creative ways to meet university budget constraints can be responded to. While this proposal affects a modest 130 students in Rutgers Graduate English Program as a pilot study, when the university’s immediate budget constraints are eased a strategy for wider implementation will be in place to extend the program to Archibald S. Alexander Library, and eventually the entirety of the Rutgers Library System. References Brin, Sergey. (2009) A Tale of 10,000,000 Book. Available at http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/10/tale-of-10000000-books.html Citigroup News Service. Available at http://www.citigroup.com Ehrenberg, Mark. (2002) Tuition Rising: Why College Costs So Much. Harvard University Press. Hart, Michael S. (2004). Gutenberg Mission Statement Project Gutenberg. Available at http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Project_Gutenberg_ Hart, Michael. Mission Statement. Hathi Trust. March 2010 Jones, Robert. (2009). ‘E-Books to Replace Textbooks?’ Educational Technology. Kely, Kevin. (2006) ‘Scan this Book!’ New York Times. May 14, 2006. Kolowich, Steve. (2009) ‘Bookless Libraries.’ Inside Higher Ed. LibQual+™ 2005 Survey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Madigan, Charles. (2007) The Collapse of the Great American Newspaper. Ivan R. Dee Publisher. ‘March 2010.’ Available at http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/March 2010. McCormick, Richard. (2010) ‘State Budget Proposal for Fiscal Year 2010–2011’ Rutgers Office of the President. http://president.rutgers.edu/letter_031710.shtml November 2006. ‘Bookless Libraries?’ Inside Higher Education. Palser, Barb (2007). ‘Preparing for the End’. American Journalism Review. Roth, Mark (2009) ‘The Thinkers: Libraries finger way to a digital tomorrow Read ‘ Post Gazette, March 2010 Rutgers’ Libraries. ‘Annex Addition Concept Document.’ Available at http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/annex_construct/reports/concept_doc.shtml Sewell, Robert. (2005) RUL Collection Budget Issues. Available at http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/strategic_planning/collection_budget_issues.shtml Visual Aids Figure 6 Elphel 323 Standing Model Appendixes Appendix 1 Read Scale ? Answers that require the least amount of effort; ? No specialized knowledge skills or expertise; ? No consultation of resources; ? Less than 5 minutes; Examples ? Directional inquiries; ? Library or service hours; ? Service point locations; ? Rudimentary machine assistance (locating/using copiers, how to print or supplying paper). ? Answers given which require more effort; ? Require only minimal specific knowledge skills or expertise; ? Answers may need nominal resource consultation. Examples ? Call number inquiries; ? Item location; ? Minor machine & computer equipment assistance; ? General library or policy information; ? More complex machine assistance (how to save to a disk or email records, launching programs or re-booting). ? Answers in this category require some effort and time; ? Consultation of ready reference resource materials is needed; ? Minimal instruction of the user may be required; ? Reference knowledge and skills come into play. Examples ? Answers that require specific reference resources (encyclopedias or databases); ? Basic instruction on searching the online catalog; ? Direction to relevant subject databases; ? Introduction to web searching for a certain item; ? How to scan and save images; ? Increasingly complex technical problems (assistance with remote use). ? Answers or research requests require the consultation of multiple resources ? Subject specialists may need to be consulted and more thorough instruction and assistance occurs. ? Reference knowledge and skills needed. ? Efforts can be more supportive in nature for the user, or if searching for a finite answer, difficult to find. ? Exchanges can be more instruction based as staffs teach users more in-depth research skills. Examples ? Instructing users how to utilize complex search techniques for the online catalog, databases and the web; ? How to cross-reference resources and track related supporting materials; ? Services outside of reference become utilized (ILL, Tech services, etc), collegial consultation; ? Assisting users in focusing or broadening searches (helping to re-define or clarify a topic). ? More substantial effort and time spent assisting with research and finding information. ? On the high end of the scale, subject specialists need to be consulted. ? Consultation appointments with individuals might be scheduled. ? Efforts are cooperative in nature, between the user and librarian and or working with colleagues. ? Multiple resources used. ? Research, reference knowledge and skills needed. ? Dialogue between the user and librarian may take on a 'back and forth question' dimension. Examples ? False leads ? Interdisciplinary consultations / research; ? Question evolution; ? Expanding searches / resources beyond those locally available; ? Graduate research; ? Difficult outreach problems (access issues that need to be investigated). ? The most effort and time expended. ? Inquiries or requests for information can't be answered on the spot. ? At this level, staff may be providing in-depth research and services for specific needs of the clients. ? This category covers some 'special library' type research services. ? Primary (original documents) and secondary resource materials may be used. Examples ? Creating bibliographies and bibliographic education; ? In-depth faculty and PhD student research; ? Relaying specific answers and supplying supporting materials for publication, exhibits etc; working with outside vendors; ? Collaboration and on-going research. Appendix 2 http://www.wireless-reading-device.net/ebook-reader-comparison-chart 2011 EBook Reader Comparison Chart Model: Amazon Kindle 3 Amazon Kindle DX Barnes Noble Nook Sony Reader Daily Apple iPad Unit Image Size 7.5" x 4.8" x 0.335" 10.4" x 7.2" x 0.38" 7.7" x 4.9" x 0.50" 5" x 8-1/8" x 19/32" 9.5" x 7.4" x 0.50" Diagonal Display 6" 9" 6" 7" 9" Pixel Resolution 600x800, Now with 50% better contrast than any other e-reader. The clearest text and sharpest images. Uses latest Pearl E-Ink Technology 1200 x 824 800x600 600 x 1024 1024x768 Gray Scale 16-Level 16-Level 16-Level, Also Nook Color edition 16-Level Color IPS LCD LED-backlit glossy 3G Wireless Global (100+ Countries) HSDPA modem (3G) with a fallback to EDGE/GPRS; utilizes Amazon Whispernet to provide Free wireless coverage via AT&T's 3G high-speed data network in the U.S. and partner networks outside of the U.S. Global (100+ Countries) HSDPA modem (3G) with a fallback to EDGE/GPRS; utilizes Amazon Whispernet to provide Free wireless coverage via AT&T's 3G high-speed data network in the U.S. and partner networks outside of the U.S. Free U.S. AT&T Free U.S. AT&T Extra Monthly Plan Fee for 3G; US-Only connectivity via GSM/EDGE & UMTS/HSDPA Wi-Fi NEW, Built-In Wi-Fi! – Supports public and private Wi-Fi networks or hotspots that use the 802.11b or 802.11g standard; does not connect to enterprise or peer-to-peer Wi-Fi networks. Amazon Whispernet to provide only currently wireless coverage. Wi-Fi/802.11b/g 1st Wi-Fi eReader/Free in all Barnes & Noble Stores Wi-Fi : Supports HSPA, UMTS, Edge, and GPRS data services with two bands (850 and 1900 MHz) Wi-Fi/802.11b/g/n Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR Web Browser Yes Yes Basic Web Browser (Beta) No Yes Storage Capacity 4GB internal, 3,500 books 4GB internal, 3,500 books 2GB Internal memory/storage (up to 1,500 eBooks) User available capacity: Up to 1.6 GB 16GB - 64GB Expansion Slots No No Micro SD expansion slot; a 16GB card holds up to 17,500 eBooks Dual Memory Card Expansion Slots for Memory Stick Duo™ and SD Card up to 32 GB. No Supported Media Formats Kindle (AZW), TXT, PDF, Audible (Audible Enhanced (AA, AAX)), MP3, unprotected MOBI, PRC natively; HTML, DOC, JPEG, GIF, PNG, BMP through conversion. Kindle (AZW), PDF, TXT, Audible (formats 4, Audible Enhanced (AAX)), MP3, unprotected MOBI, PRC natively; HTML, DOC, RTF, JPEG, GIF, PNG, BMP through conversion EPUB and eReader Formats, PDFs, MP3s, JPEG, GIF, PNG, BMP * DRM Text : ePub (Adobe DRM protected), PDF (Adobe DRM protected) * Image : JPEG, PNG, GIF, BMP * Unsecured Audio : MP3 (Non encrypted), AAC (Non encrypted) * Unsecured Text : ePub, PDF, TXT, RTF, Micrsoft® Word, (Conversion to the Reader requires Word installed on your PC) ePub, pdf, mp3, jpeg, gif, tiff, doc, docx, htm, html, key, numbers, pages, ppt, pptx, txt, rtf, vcf, xls, xlsx Touch Screen No No 1st color touch screen for navigation The Reader Daily Edition™ features simple, easy-to-use touch screen navigation. Yes Text To Speech Read-To-Me feature can read English newspapers, magazines, blogs, and books out loud to you Read-To-Me feature can read English newspapers, magazines, blogs, and books out loud to you No No No Sharing Capability No No 1st eReader with digital lending; between nook™, iPhone™, iPod touch®, BlackBerry®, PC, Mac OS® No No Battery Type Rechargeable Lithium Polymer battery Rechargeable Lithium Polymer battery Rechargeable- Replaceable Lithium Polymer battery Rechargeable Lithium Ion battery Rechargeable Replaceable Lithium Polymer battery Battery Life Up to 1 month with wireless off, 10 days with wireless on Up to 14 days with wireless off, 4 days with wireless on Up to 10 days with wireless off, 2 days with wireless on Up to 18 days with wireless off, 7 days wireless on 12,000 (ePub) Continuous page turns Up to 10 hours with wireless on Weight   8.7 ounces 18.9 ounces 11.2 ounces 12.75 ounces 1.5 pounds Wi-Fi model; 1.6 pounds Wi-Fi + 3G Price $139 WiFi only $189 WiFi+3G $379 $149 WiFi only $199 WiFi+3G $249 Nook Color, WiFi Only $299.99 $499-$829 depending upon storage (16-64GB) & Wi-Fi vs Wi-Fi + 3G Best Price Online NEW Amazon Kindle 3! Amazon Kindle DX US & Global Barnes and Noble Nook Sony Reader Daily Edition Apple iPad WiFi and 3G Models Available Appendix 3 Extract from LibQual™ Report Read More