DOCUILIff RESUME ED 345 751 IR 054 097 AUTHOR Ladner, Sharyn J.; Tillman, Hope N. TITLE How Special Librarians Really Use the Internet: Summary of Findings and Implications for the Library of the Future. PUB DATE 29 Nar 92 NOTE 12p.; "This report was posted on March 29, 1992, to nine computer conferences where call for participation announcements had been posted in the summer of 1991: BUSLIB-L, LIBREF-L, LIfflES, NEDLIB-L, PACS-L, LAW-LIB, LIBADMIN, MAPS-L, and PANnet." AVAILABLE FROM Internet, through anonymous file transfer protocol (ftp), using the following location (hydra.uwo.ca), directory (LibSoft), and filename (SPEC underscore Libs.txt). PUB TYPE Reports - Research/Technical (143) EDRS PRICE NF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Access to Information; *Computer Networks; Databases; *Electronic Rail; Electronic Publishing; Information Networks; *Librarians; Library Surveys; Online Searching; Online Systems; *Special Libraries; Telecommunications; Teleconferencing; User Needs (Information); *Use Studies IDENTIFIERS BITNET; *INTERNET ABSTRACT A five-page electronic questionnaire was sent to 113 special librarians who responded to "Call for Participation" announcements posted on nine computer conferences in July 1991 and a similar announcement in the August 1991 issue of the monthly newsletter of the Special Libraries Association. Fifty-four librarians completed the questionnaire, which sought information on the computer conferences to which they subscribed; the length of time they had been using either BITNET or the Internet; and the type of training they had had in using either of the two networks. In addition, the respondents were asked to rank five functions or capabilities available on either BITNET or Internet--electronic mail and computer forums, remote database searching, file transiur and data exchange, research and publication on the Internet--by extent of use. They were also asked to determine the importance and value of BITNET or Internet to their work and for special librarians in general. Analyses of the responses indicated that the respondents' median experience level on the Internet or BITNET was 24 months; 55% of the respondents had trained themselves on the Internet, while 59% had learned informally from a colleague; formal training ranging from a single one-hour class to more structured learning was available to 39% of the librarians; and an overwhelming majority of the special librarians in the study (93%) used the Internet for electronic mail. (NAB) *********************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *****************************a***************************************** HOW SPECIAL LIBRARIANSREALLY USE THE INTERNET: =MARX OF FINDINGS ANDXNPLICATIONS FOR U S. DePaRTROVIT Or SOUCATIOW FUTURE1 Office ot Educabonei Research and Improvement THE LIBRARY oit TEE MUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER IERICI P121( 7 This documem etas been reproduced es to received trOn't tee person or orgorniebOn bYortgleafirvItchanges neve been made ro if-prove reproduction tummy Librarian Po.niaof10te* or Dom ons stated m tarsi:lacy Sharyn J. Ladner, Business meet do not necessamv represem offloal CIO University of Miami (FL)Richter Library OEAIposthon or ochry (SIADNERenaianliIR.Niami.EDU) (SLADNEROUNIAICE.bitnet) C:Z and Hope M. Tillman,Director of Libraries Babson College (TILLNANOBABSON.bitnet) In the Summer of 1991 weasked special librarianswith access to BITNET andInternet to tell us howthey use these networks and what valuethey receive from this use. We hope that our findingswill serve as a basis forfuture research in the use of electroniccommunications technology by information professionalswithin the modernorganization, including the effects ofthese technologies on therole and position of the informationprofessional within the organization. RATIONALE While there has been averitable explosion ofarticles in recent years onlibraries and the Internet,there is a singular lack of publishedresearch on how the Internetis actually used bylibrarians. Articles on the Internet typically discuss policyissues, describe networkservices and guides, or discuss usersupport and promotion. Most address in some way theidea that Internet (orBITNET, or NREN) connectivity isthe key to thelibrary of the future, but none examine actual useother than as casestudies or histories. This research, then, departsfrom the current body of Internetliterature by addressingthese questions: 1This report was posted on March29, 1992, to nine computer conferep=eswhere "call forparticipation" announcements had beenposted in the Summerof 1991. These conferences are BUSLIB-L,LIBREF-L, LIBRES, MEDLIB-L,PACS- L, LAW-LIB, LIBADMIN,MAPS-L, and PAMnet. -PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL. HAS BEEN GRANTED BY 1 Sharlin J. Ladner TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES BEST COPY AAMU INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)," How is the Internet actually being usedby practicing librarians today?Are the network services andefficiencies touted in the literature being used liketheir designers intended? Special librarians are a unique group tostudy because they have a knowledge base in more than onediscipline. Special librarians are, for the most part, not onlyinformation professionals holding advanced degrees inlibrary or information science, they are also specialistsin one or more subject areas, oftenwith postgraduate training in science, business or law. In addition, many special librarians in science or technology fields workclosely with researchers who have been using Internet precursorssuch as ARPANET, NSFNET and MILNET for years. Special librarians, whether managers of industriallibraries or academic subject specialists, are more often in publicservices positions, and they may use the Internetdifferently from technical services or systems librarians. The lack of research on special librarians' use of interactivecommunications technology leads us to ask the followingquestions: Do special librarians differ from other typesof librarians in their use of the Internet?How do they interact with their users who may already beusing these inter-connected networks for their own researchactivities? How does their use of the Internet compareto their use of internal e-mail systems within their ownorganizations? In this report, we havelimited our discussion to Internet use and training andimplications of this use for the library of the future. For the sake of brevity, we have included only a cursory description of ourmethodology. PROCEDE/RS AW PARTICIPMITS Participants were solicited through "Call forParticipation" announcements posted on nine computerconferences in July, 1991, and through a similar announcementin the Amgust issue of the SpeciaList, the monthlynewsletter of the Special Libraries Association. We sent a five-page electronic questionnaire to the 113 librarians whoresponded to this initial announcement; the 54 speciallibrarians who responded to this second survey arethe focus of our study. Our respondents wereself-selected; we made no attempt at probability sampling because our purpose was tofind out the ways in which speciallibrarians use the Internet, not their extent of use. On the "Call for Participation"announcement we included a brief questionnaire which potentialrespondents were asked to return, either electronically,via fax or regular mail. Here we asked respondents tolist the computer conferences 2 to which theysubscribed; the length of timethey had been using either BITNET or theInternet; and to "Briefly describe (in a paragraph orless) your use (and/or your patrons' use) of BITNET orthe Internet."On the five-page questionnaire we asked a seriesof structured questions to find out how and for what purposesour respondentsused BITNET or Internet, so that wecould flesh out the information we had alreadyreceived through thepreliminary survey. We asked them, forexample, to rank fivefunctions or capabilitiesavailable on BITNET or Internetby extent of use and todescribe how they used thesefunctions. We also included a seriesof questions abouttraining and costs involved in accessing thesesystems. To determine theimportance and value of BITNET orInternet to their work andfor special librariansin general, we asked a series ofunstructured open-endedquestions at the end of the survey form. We asked respondentsto describe, based on their experience,"the major advantage or opportunity for speciallibrarians in using BITNET/Internet"; "the majordisadvantage or barrier for special librarians in usingBITNET/Internet"; their "most interesting or memorableexperience on BITNET orInternet"; and finally, we askedthem for "any other comments[they'd] like to make about the useof BITNET or Internet byspecial librarians." Sixty-five percent of ourrespondents are academic librarians and 59% are inlibraries with a subject emphasis in science or technology. Other subjects represented are law, medicine, maps andbusiness. All five respondents from for-profit corporations arein the computar industry. Our participants represent awide range of administrative levels: 34% are in management(library directors, assistant directors or branch ordepartment heads) and 55% aresubject ranging in size from specialists. They work in libraries the single personlibrary to larger academiclibraries with several hundred employees. Librarians from the most technologically advancedinstitutions to smallercolleges and universities outsidethe urban, technologicalmainstream are representedin our study. Although 93% of