engleski

Changes in the role of the librarian with regard to the level of digitalization of the library

1. INTRODUCTION Even though digital libraries constitute a growing trend and the quantity and quality of information either transferred to or originally created in electronic form is ever increasing, it is apparent that there remains a long process before all relevant knowledge might be accessible in digital form. This paper offers a brief classification of libraries according to their level of digitalization in order to facilitate understanding of the role of the librarian in each of those types, and elaborates on the tasks librarians should take notice of within the transforming environment of a more traditional type of library undergoing a modernization process towards a digital version of itself. 2. CLASSIFICATION OF LIBRARIES A natural classification of libraries can be made according to the level of digitalization that is employed both by the librarians and by the users of the library. Even though modern libraries tend more towards complete digitalization of their inventory, it would be unrealistic to set a limited time-frame within which one could expect that all, or even most libraries undergo that conversion from written to electronic form of all or most of the material they posses (Dowler, 1997). Therefore, when discussing the subject of digital libraries, one should not overlook those libraries that are on their path towards digitalization, and lessons that managing such libraries can teach newer, more electronic-based libraries. There is a number of problems inherent to libraries in general, and a separate set of problems for each type of library in particular. The type of library that could be named "traditional" stores the bulk of its resources in written form, including not only the actual publications of interest to the user of the library, but also the filing system. Even if computers are used, their use is marginal and user-unfriendly, and revolves generally around the inventory, providing little information that would be of use to the library user. The second type could be called "transitional". Transitional library uses electronic computers to a greater extent. Although the term transitional might be thought of as implying change, such libraries might not be under dynamic development leaning towards an ever-increasing level of digitalization. The term is used to generalize libraries that, at a given point in time, have implemented a certain amount of digitalization in their operational procedures, and that amount is critical to the proper functioning of that library. However, a certain part of the library operates in a manner very similar to the traditional type. This division is most often implemented in one of two ways. The first assumes that the traditional part of the library functions largely independent of the digitalized part, and these two aspects interact marginally at best. The second type of a transitional library does not have such strict division, having instead one that cannot be defined so clearly. Such libraries are often those undergoing a fluent transition towards a complete digital library, and their level of digitalization at a given time reflects that state, having some of the library's resources in digital form, but it is often not possible to predict whether a randomly selected item will be available in electronic form or not. It should be noted that the first type of transitional libraries may function as such for prolonged periods of time without it adversely affecting its performance, while the second can not, and the ongoing digitalization process has to either be fully completed or completed to a point where a natural and applicable division between written and electronic material is achieved. Such libraries have problems of both traditional and fully digital libraries. Third type would be fully digital library. Such a library would not only keep track of its entire inventory with the help of a computer but would also actually have its inventory in electronic form, and take care that it would be at the user's disposal to search through and view any desired object within that inventory (Liebaers, 1985). 3. CONSTANTS IN THE ROLE OF THE LIBRARIAN With respect to such division of library types, it is the function and responsibilities of the librarian that undergo most significant changes, not in their function or purpose, but in the implementation of that function and purpose. It cannot be argued that the most prominent purpose of the librarian, as viewed by the user of the library, is to provide that same user with the information he or she needs. In the scientific field, and especially when it comes to research, the demands imposed on the librarian are complex, and it is in this respect where differences concerning the relation between the librarian and the user of the library relative to the type of the library regarding its level of digitalization become apparent. When it comes to transitional libraries, the responsibilities of the librarian are not lessened, but rather compounded. Regardless of the subtype of transitional library, the librarian has to manage both the traditional part of the library's inventory and the "digitalized" part, which requires a new set of strategies and skills in order to be managed effectively. 4. SPECIFICS OF THE ROLE OF THE LIBRARIAN IN A DIGITAL LIBRARY In order to be more precise about determining the role of the librarian in the digital library, one should consider the manner in which such a library is likely to be used. The most prominent feature of the digital library is providing the user with a degree of independence in the use of the library's assets, usually limited only by the users competence to actually extract the quality and quantity of information he or she requires. As the role of the user increases, it is imperative to actually enable such user to use the library and its resources in an efficient manner (Wiederhold, 2003). This is generally a task including two subtasks. The first task is user education. In the context of digital libraries the user takes on a more active role. Like the librarian in traditional library, whose role was to provide the user with the information he or she needed, the librarian operating in a digital library environment, has that very same purpose - to enable the user quickest possible access to the particular asset of the library such user will find most relevant to his or hers current query (Borgman, 2003). User education is one aspect libraries and librarians should be concerned with if the objective is to provide its users with the information they need. Creating the optimal user interface is the second way. The problem encountered by the user of the digital library is most often not the problem of insufficient information, but that of an abundance of information. This would not present a real problem were it not for the existence of a problem common to digital information systems, and which results in the fact that the greatest percentage of information the user is provided with as a result of his or hers query is only marginally relevant to the actual topic of interest (Downie). The question that should be asked is, how can the library's assets be arranged in order to provide the fastest access to maximum of relevant information, and at the same time minimize the part of irrelevant content which will inevitably appear as a result of most queries. Regardless of whether the information is stored in electronic or printed form, it is the job of the librarian to arrange those information sources in the appropriate way. Browsing is the most commonly implemented method of finding anything within a digital library. It has proven to be a reasonably effective method over time, or at least the most effective method available for general use. Specific problems associated with browsing result largely from the fact that browsing is word-based. Digital libraries exercise their superiority over traditional libraries with the ability to store and provide effective access to information that cannot easily be manipulated when stored on other media, such as images, animations and movies. A user wishing to find information in such form has to rely on words to describe what he or she is looking for (Klavans, 2003). It is in the domain of library's responsibility to form and assign such multimedia content words or phrases which describe it best, and at the same time to make certain that a given query will not result in abundance of irrelevant query results. The same problem has even greater effect concerning textual information. The most important fact to realize when organizing library's assets in electronic form is that not all information carry the same weight or value. In any query, the user evaluates the results according to a certain set of values, which is not universal. In the context of a traditional library, any physical printed matter can be positioned according to only one set of priorities. This is not the case with contents of digital libraries, and librarians should take advantage of that. This means that all relevant information, with an accent on information used for scientific work, should be carefully ranked according to several most common criteria. Ranking should be awarded special care. It is natural that the user faced with a large number of query results will consider only a relatively small number of results, starting from the top of the list. Some rankings are natural. Other rankings are less self-evident and this is where the knowledge and the experience of the librarian comes into play. How does one rank articles on the same topic found in two different publications? How does one rank several books dealing with the same subject? Such decisions are not entirely subjective, but such ranking process involves considerations that cannot be done automatically. This procedure should not be left to the user, but should preferably be solved by the librarian, instead of relying on the user to browse through all available information, even that only vaguely relevant, and decide for himself or herself how those results should be ranked. Ranking systems range from obvious to highly specific, and can be adapted and modified as the need presents itself. REFERENCES [1] Dowler, L. (1997). Gateways to Knowledge: The Role of Academic Libraries in Teaching, Learning, and Research. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [2] Liebaers, H., & Haas, W. J. (1985). New information technologies and libraries. Boston: D. Reidel Pub. Co. [3] Wiederhold, G. (2003): Increasing the Information Density in Digital Library Results. NSF Workshop on Post-DL Research Directions. Retrieved from http://www.sis.pitt.edu/~dlwkshop/ [4] Borgman, C. L. (2003): Personal Digital Libraries: Creating individual spaces for innovation. NSF Workshop on Post-DL Research Directions. Retrieved from http://www.sis.pitt.edu/~dlwkshop/ [5] Downie, J. S. (2003): Thoughts on the Present and Future of DL Research and Funding. NSF Workshop on Post-DL Research Directions. Retrieved from http://www.sis.pitt.edu/~dlwkshop/ [6] Klavans, J. L. (2003): Creating More Natural Access to Information - New Ways to Interact with Knowledge. NSF Workshop on Post-DL Research Directions. Retrieved from http://www.sis.pitt.edu/~dlwkshop/

digital library; library digitalization; traditional library; transitional library; classification of libraries

nije evidentirano