ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries


13 4/C & RL News

G uidelines for Internet 
resource selection

B y G re g o ry  F. P ra tt, P a trick  F la n n e ry , a n d  C a s sa n d ra  L. D. P erk in s

Use traditional evaluation criteria 
in new ways

W ith the rapid growth of the Internet, today’s library user can readily access 
resources from many parts of the globe and 
from many types of information providers. 
These providers may include governments, or­
ganizations, businesses, and individuals mak­
ing their pet projects accessible to the world. 
Unlike the books and journals that have preoc­
cupied collection development efforts for so 
long, Internet resources frequently lack the 
publishing industry’s filters of need and worth, 
may be poorly maintained, and may be only

transiently or intermittently available. For librar­
ies, the basic evaluation criteria of quality, cred­
ibility, accessibility, scope, and cost are still 
issues, but ones that must be viewed in new 
ways.

The guidelines which follow were devel­
oped by the Internet Working Group of the 
Houston Academy of Medicine-Texas Medical 
Center Library and serve as an addendum to 
the collection development policy. They were 
developed with the belief that libraries have a 
responsibility to evaluate and select resources 
for their users regardless of the media. In addi­
tion to highlighting some of the unique chal­
lenges the Internet provides, these guidelines 
can serve, hopefully, as a starting point for other 
libraries with similar objectives.

Guidelines for Internet resource evaluation and selection
( A uthor note: These criteria are intended to assist in the evaluation and selection process. 
Resources can be acceptable without meeting all of the criteria listed.)

1. Quality and Content
Credible source as indicated by:

• Content peer-reviewed by experts in the field.
• Produced as part of the mission o f a national or international organization.
• Developed by an academic institution or commercial enterprise with an established 

reputation in topical area.
• Resource is indexed or archived electronically (if appropriate).

Importance o f  resource as demonstrated by availability:
• Resource is available from or pointed to by multiple Internet sites.
• Database or document is reproduced in multiple formats (print, online, CD-ROM, etc.)

Gregory F. Pratt is information services librarian at the Houston Academy o f Medicine-Texas Medical Center 
Library (HAM-TMC), e-mail: gregp@library.tmc.edu; Patrick Flannery is network and systems analyst at 
HAM-TMC, e-mail: patrickf@library.tmc.edu; Cassandra L. D. Perkins is information services librarian at 
HAM-TMC, e-mail: cassp@library.tmc.edu

mailto:gregp@library.tmc.edu
mailto:patrickf@library.tmc.edu
mailto:cassp@iibrary.tmc.edu


M arch 1 9 9 6 / 1 3 5

Content is comprehensive o r  unique:
• Resource is known or can be shown to cover subject area well.
• Information would likely be unavailable to clients otherwise.
• Resource is full text.
• Internet version o f the resource is the most current.

Content o f  Internet version is complete o r  meets client needs:
• Internet document or database record mirrors that available from other sources or in 

other formats.
• If the timespan or the content o f the Internet version o f the resource is limited, the 

resource is still o f use.
• Because o f subject area, increased demand is likely in the future (e.g., health care 

reform, Americans with Disabilities Act).

The resource stays current through regular updates o r  demonstrates ongoing 
maintenance.

2. Relevancy
• Resource is related to health or biomedicine.
• Library personnel or client recommended resource.
• Access is provided by other local institutions or major health science libraries.
• Usage data indicate client interest or demand.

3. Ease of Use
• If a logon sequence is required, it can b e  scripted or automated for clients.
• If searchable, searching is similar to that o f other available Internet resources.
• If a unique interface is used, the resource is o f sufficient importance that client access 

is still worthwhile.
• If needed, user help files or resource description files are readily available.
• The amount o f user support required from Information Desk staff is minimal or 

acceptable.

4. Reliability and Stability
Resource is generally available; take into account fa ctors such as:

• Internet use fluctuates during different times o f day.
• Inaccessibility may not be the fault o f the host site.
• An initial period o f instability is com m on with new resources.
• Many resources are mirrored at different sites. For an important resource, it may be 

worthwhile to use more than one location.
• Downtimes or machine address changes are infrequent and announced (when 

possible).

5. Cost and Copyright
• Any subscription or access costs are reasonable and justifiable.
• It is simple to comply with restrictions on duplication or dissemination o f information 

from the resource.

6. Hardware and Software
• Providing access requires little or no change in existing or planned hardware and 

software resources.



1 3 6 /C&RL News



M arch 1 9 9 6 / 1 3 7