ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries M ay 1989 / 375 profession. T h e c rite ria in clu d e co nsiderations such as cost-effectiveness, im m ediacy of the need or effect, and breadth of applicability. Members of the working group, chaired by L aw ­ rence Dow ler, are now preparing background or inform ational papers on several topics raised be­ fore the group reconvenes in June. The issues ad ­ dressed will include th e potential for developing guidelines or conventions for archival inform ation systems, th e im pact of form at integration on archi­ val uses of th e MARC form at, and the relationship betw een description standards activities in the U.S. and C anada. For m ore inform ation, contact Victo­ ria W alch, 65 N. W estm inster St., Iow a C ity, IA 52245; (319) 338-6650. ■ ■ O n lin e se a r c h services in th e c o m m u n ity c o lle g e By Wanda K. Johnston Director o f Learning Resources M orton College O nline services can im prove the L R C ’s image. I n 1977 the Am erican L ibrary Association passed a resolution prom oting equal access to inform a­ tion. This resolution states in p a rt th a t “It shall be th e policy of the American L ibrary Association to seek to m ake it possible for library and inform ation science agencies w hich receive their m ajor support from public funds to provide service to all people w ith o u t additional fees and to utilize th e latest technological developments to ensure the best pos­ sible access to inform ation.” 1 Academic libraries in the U nited States are suf­ fering from severe economic pressure due to tig h t­ ened budgets and coupled w ith rapidly increasing costs. T uition revenue and enrollments are declin­ ing. State and federal assistance has decreased. Lo­ cal tax referenda are increasingly difficult to pass. Some costs, such as those for facilities and tenured 1Sara D. K napp and C. James Schmidt, “Budg­ eting to Provide Com puter-Based Reference Ser­ vices: A Case Study.” Journal o f Academ ic Librari- anship 5 (March 1979): 9. faculty, are relatively fixed com pared to enroll­ m ent, necessitating budget cuts in other areas, such as libraries. Academic library budgets are rising m ore slowly than overall university budgets and definitely more slowly th an inform ation costs.2 H ow are academ ic libraries, specifically com ­ m unity college libraries, responding to the ALA policy of equal access to inform ation during this period of economic decline? A review of the litera­ ture, com bined w ith a survey of th e mem bership of the N orthern Illinois L earning Resources C oopera­ tive, provides m ore inform ation. Among published individual case studies, three describe successful free online services. T he L i­ b rary at C alifornia State College considers online services an integral p a rt of the total reference ser­ vice; consequently, online search services are not treated any differently from any other reference 2D onald W . King, “Pricing Policies in Academic L ib ra rie s,” L ibrary Trends 28 (Summer 1979): 47-62. 376 / C&RL News tool.3 At the University of Pennsylvania, end-user searching for free is offered successfully and has re­ sulted in an improved library image coupled w ith pressures for expanding the services.4 Governors State University considers the book budget to be an information budget and consequently provides free online search services. Twice as many patrons are served w ith more effective results. Subsequent in­ terlibrary loan requests have increased, w ith docu­ m ent delivery the only weak link.5 The fee structure varies am ong academ ic li­ braries th a t do charge fees for online services. SUNY/Albany had offered free online searches for five years but finally had to impose charges for off­ line printing. By sharing the costs, the services could be expanded to serve more patrons.6 At the University of Delaware, a student search program is in tro d u ced as a “ h a lf-p rice ” search. O n th e whole, “students and librarians alike have found online searching to be an im portant new reference tool and student exposure to it an im portant p art of college research experience.”7 To gain a broader view of how academ ic li­ braries are responding to the equal access policy, two published surveys have been reviewed. In 1981 ALA distributed a survey to publicly supported li­ braries providing online search services. A total of 985 libraries, including 610 academic libraries, re­ sponded. Seventy-two percent of the respondents charged fees for at least some users of the service. Of those charging fees, 75% charged only for di­ rect costs of service. The report concluded: “These findings support a current trend of thought that public funds may be used to finance the costs of making a service available to all (i.e., for start-up and general operating expenses or overhead) but th at private funds should be used to cover those ‘di­ rect costs’ related to a service from which one per­ son benefits (i.e., communication charges, connect time, and offline printing for a specific search).”8 The report also found th a t the “level of funding available” had the most im pact on the decision of w hether or not to charge a fee.9 In 1982 the Association of College and Research Libraries conducted a survey to determine the ex­ 3P aula C raw fo rd and Ju d ith A. Thom pson, “Free Online Searches Are Feasible,” Library Jour­ nal 104 (April 1, 1979): 783-95. 4Michael H alperin and Ruth A. Pagell, “Free Do-It-Yourself O nline S earching...W hat to Ex­ p ect,” Online 9 (March 1985): 82-84. 5Virgil Diodato, “Elim inating Fees from Online Search Services in a University L ibrary,” 10 (No­ vember 1986): 44-50. 6Knapp and Schmidt, “Budgeting,” 9-13. 7Pamela Kobelski and Jean Trum bore, “Student Use of Online Bibliographic Services,” Journal o f Academ ic Librarianship 4 (March 1978): 14-18. 8M ary Jo Lynch, “ Libraries E m brace Online Search F e e s,” A m e rica n L ibraries 13 (M arch 1982): 174. 9Mary Jo Lynch, “Financing Online Services,” R Q 21 (Spring 1982): 226. tent to which college libraries were involved in on­ line bibliographic searching. A total of 223 public and private colleges w ith enrollm ents between 1,000 and 5,000 responded. Of these, 65% offered online search services. O f those who did not, ex­ pense, insufficient anticipated use, and insufficient p erso n n el w ere c ited as th e p rim a ry reasons. Seventy-three percent indicated th at they charged faculty and students for the services. DIALOG was the vendor most frequently used and the average direct cost per search was $ 10—$ 15, w ith the aver­ age range from $5-$25.10 Since little information discussing online search services in community colleges is available, I sur­ veyed th e m em bership of the N orthern Illinois L e a rn in g R esources C o o p e ra tiv e (N IL R C ). NILRC, a cooperative of two- and four-year insti­ tutions in Illinois, Iow a, and Missouri, was estab­ lished to improve cost effectiveness, to share and ex ch an g e resources a n d in fo r m a tio n , a n d to strengthen the skills and knowledge of its m em ber­ ship. O f the 35 member community colleges sur­ veyed, 31 responded. O f these, eighteen (58%) provide online reference search services. This is slightly less than the ACRL survey cited earlier. Similar to the ACRL respondents, DIALOG is the most used vendor. Of the respondents providing online search ser­ vices, 100 % provide services to faculty and adm in­ istration or staff, 83 % provide services to students, and 72% provide services to other patrons. When asked, “Do you charge a fee for reference database services?” , 89 % did not charge faculty and adm in­ istration or staff, 61 % did not charge students, and 1 % did not charge other patrons. Among colleges charging fees, the fee structures varied, but most charged only direct expenses on a cost recovery ba­ sis similar to the ALA survey findings. These statis­ tics support the stated mission of the community college and the role of its learning resources center (LRC ). The LRC provides the resources necessary to support the instructional programs of the col­ lege. LRC services then extend beyond the trad i­ tional college community into the com m unity at large. The NILRC survey did not address the issue of why LRCs did not provide online search services; however, if the reasons paralleled the ACRL sur­ vey, helpful data was gained. In response to “ex­ pense,” Jean Koch discusses in depth the costs in­ volved w hen a library adds online bibliographic search services.11 The capital outlay necessary to initiate online search services totals approximately $2,000 for' purchase of a microcomputer system 10David Carlson and P. G rady Morein, Online Bibliographic Searching in College Libraries: Clip Note #4-83 (Chicago: American Library Associa­ tion, 1983). 11Jean E. Koch, “A Review of the Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Online Bibliographic Ser­ v ices,” R eferen ce Services R e v iew 10 (S pring 1982): 59-84. May 1989 / 377 with telephone modem and printer. W ithin Illi­ nois, the College of Lake C ounty coordinates group discounts to DIALOG for libraries who place $1,000 “on account” each October. NILRC survey respondents estimated the annual direct on­ line search costs ranging from $200 to $6,000 per year. Sixty-four percent had annual costs less than $900. The average direct cost per search was $7.77. In response to “insufficient anticipated use,” the NILRC survey showed th at the number of searches per college ranged from 29 to 1,022 per year, with 71 % conducting fewer than 100 searches per year. Among the colleges reporting searches by patron category, 30 % searches were for faculty, 13 % for administration/staff, 39% for students, and 18% for other patrons. Although use of online search services is low, access to the information resources is provided. Finally, in response to “insufficient personnel,” the survey showed the amount of staff time re­ quired for online searching was low. Seventy-two percent estim ated staff tim e devoted to online search services during the academic year to five hours per week or less. In conclusion, academic libraries, especially community colleges, consider online search ser­ vices as a part of their overall library service in sup­ port of the college’s instructional program and in­ stitu tio n al mission. F u n d in g av ailab ility and philosophy determine the interpretation of equal access to info rm atio n w ith in bud g etary con­ straints. Fee structures can range from simple to complex, from free to the patron to cost-recovery. Structures consider the patron status (student, staff, external), the search category (basic or spe­ cialized), and pricing goal (token, discount, or cost-recovery). Community colleges tend to pro­ vide free online services to faculty, administration, staff and students more frequently than other aca­ demic institutions. Implem enting online search services need not be prohibitively expensive to initi­ ate or maintain and will not only provide enhanced reference service but also will improve the image of the library. ■ ■ In defense o f FIRST and freedom o f access to inform ation By Helen B. Josephine Information Manager, FIRST Arizona State University and Maxine H. Reneker Associate Dean o f University Libraries for Public Services Arizona State University Campus-based information service ruled no challenge to private enterprise in Arizona. F IRST, the Fee-based Information and Research Service Team at Arizona State University L i­ braries, was challenged in July 1988 by an informa­ tion broker marketing online database searches to clients in the Phoenix metropolitan area. The chal­ lenge was brought under the Arizona Private En­ terprise Law, ARS 41-2751, which constrains the publicly-funded community colleges and universi­