Abstract

ObjectiveIn recent years, individuals and small organizations have developed new online learning and information resources that are often marketed directly to students. In this study, these nontraditional online resources are defined as apps or other online resources that are not available through large and well-known publishers. The purposes of this study are to determine if academic health sciences libraries are licensing nontraditional online resources and to provide a snapshot of current collections practices in this area.MethodsAn online survey was designed and distributed to the email lists of the Collection Development Section of the Medical Library Association and Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries directors. Follow-up phone interviews were conducted with survey participants who volunteered to be contacted.ResultsOf the 58 survey respondents, 21 (36.2%) reported that their libraries currently licensed at least 1 nontraditional online resource, and 45 (77.6%) reported receiving requests for these types of resources. The resources listed by respondents included 50 unique titles. Of the 37 (63.8%) respondents whose library did not license nontraditional online resources, major barriers that were noted included a lack of Internet protocol (IP) authentication, licenses that charge per user, and affordable institutional pricing.ConclusionsEvaluation criteria for nontraditional online resources should be developed and refined, and these resources should be examined over time to determine their potential and actual use by students. There is a growing demand for many of these resources among students, but the lack of financial and access models that serve libraries’ needs is an obstacle to institutional licensing.

Highlights

  • Academic health sciences libraries spend significant amounts of money to license online resources to support student learning

  • Survey respondents were invited to participate in a follow-up phone interview about nontraditional online resources, based on several guiding questions

  • Forty-two (72.4%) respondents indicated that their libraries were academic health sciences libraries, 13 (22.4%) were from medical school libraries, 2 (3.4%) were from general academic libraries, and 1 (1.7%) characterized their library as an academic medical center library

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Academic health sciences libraries spend significant amounts of money to license online resources to support student learning. Many of these materials are the digital versions of traditional resources such as books, journals, and indexes. Digital formats and an increasing array of multimedia have enhanced libraries’ abilities to meet a variety of learner styles and needs. While these resources differ from those in print-only collections, they are still generally provided by known publishers such as McGraw-Hill, Elsevier, and Wolters-Kluwer. Individuals and small organizations that are not traditional publishers have developed new online learning, exam preparation, and information resources. For the purposes of this study, these resources are characterized as “nontraditional online resources” and defined as online resources that have the following characteristics:

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call