Exploring Education for Digital Librarians: Meaning, Modes and Models

Chandos Information Professional Series

Exploring Education for Digital Librarians

Meaning, modes and models

Susan Myburgh

Anna Maria Tammaro

Table of Contents

Cover image

Title page

Copyright

Dedication

List of figures and tables

List of abbreviations

Preface

About the authors

Acknowledgements

Chapter 1: Regeneration of the second oldest profession

Abstract:

Introduction

From books to ideas

DLs as socio-technical systems

Education for the information professions

What digital libraries can be

What digital librarians could do

Interpersonal activity

Decoders and interventionists

Digital knowledge creation and critical thinking

Interdisciplinarity

Conclusions

Chapter 2: The influence of the current context

Abstract:

Context

Abbott and the professional context

What is a ‘profession’?

Context 1: the information society

Context 2: context of professions

Context 3: ICTs

Explaining ideologies

Conclusions

Chapter 3: Previous research on education for DLs

Abstract:

The perplexed state of education for information work

Technology and education

DL courses currently offered

DL programmes in LIS and CS

Conclusions

Chapter 4: First things fourth

Abstract:

Unravelling long-standing ambiguities

What do librarians do?

Technical tasks

Purpose and processes

Hegemony

Selection

Access

Organisation of information resources

The social role of librarians and abstruse hegemony

Chapter 5: Purposeful digital librarians

Abstract:

The activities of the digital librarian

LIS education and ideologies

Chapter 6: No theory, no discipline = no profession

Abstract:

Notes towards solving these dilemmas

Theory and praxis

Distinction between theory and praxis

Disciplines

Neutrality of science

The information metacommunity

Multidisciplinary metacommunities and their metatheories

Digital library research and education is particularly inter- and multidisciplinary

Facilitating interdisciplinary work

Chapter 7: Constructing a theoretical framework

Abstract:

The purpose of a theoretical framework

Steps of theory construction

Step 1: clarification of the axiological position of the researcher(s)

Step 2: nomos, or ‘existing situation’

Step 3: existing theories examined and tested teleologically

Step 4: lexical register and conceptual identification

Step 5: development of alternative conceptual models in an ontology

Step 6: taxonomy of information professions

Step 7: model tested against purpose/teleological assumptions

Conclusions

Chapter 8: Designing curricula

Abstract:

Changes in LIS education

Didactics

Epistemological approaches to curriculum design

Creative industries

Cultural institutions

Interdisciplinarity

Chapter 9: Aims and outcomes

Abstract:

Curriculum aims

Professional philosophy and phronesis

Results and effects of the curriculum

Competencies and skills

Graduate qualities

International equivalences

Internationalisation

Chapter 10: Pedagogies and teaching methods

Abstract:

Teaching and learning

Use of ICTs in education

Social responsibilities of higher education

Epistemological frameworks for learning

Social constructivism

Social constructionism

Connectivism

Three common modes of teaching/learning

Critical pedagogy as heutagogical

The Socratic method

Online learning and heutagogy

Education, culture and internationalisation

Digital and critical literacy, critical thinking

Chapter 11: Content and structure

Abstract:

Substance and speculation

Theoretical framework

Human information behaviour

Knowledge creation

Representation of information: language and linguistics

Evaluation of information: interpretation, meaning and critical information literacy

Evaluating information economically

Technology and other ‘stuff’

Level of programme

Structure

Metacommunity

Core

Chapter 12: A bright future

Abstract:

The past and the future

Libraries and freedom of thought

Democracy and social role

Metacommunity and agreement

Changed service model

Evaluation of the social role of librarians

New profile

Research for the future

References

Index

Copyright

Chandos Publishing

Hexagon House

Avenue 4

Station Lane

Witney

Oxford OX28 4BN

UK

Tel: + 44 (0) 1993 848726

E-mail: info@chandospublishing.com

www.chandospublishing.com

Chandos Publishing is an imprint of Woodhead Publishing Limited

Woodhead Publishing Limited

80 High Street

Sawston

Cambridge CB22 3HJ

UK

Tel: + 44 (0) 1223 499140

Fax: + 44 (0) 1223 832819

www.woodheadpublishing.com

First published in 2013

ISBN 978-1-84334-659-3 (print)

ISBN 978-1-78063-300-8 (online)

© S. Myburgh and A.M. Tammaro, 2013

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the publisher. This publication may not be lent, resold, hired out or otherwise disposed of by way of trade in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published without the prior consent of the publisher. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.

The publisher make no representation, express or implied, with regard to the accuracy of the information contained in this publication and cannot accept any legal responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions.

The material contained in this publication constitutes general guidelines only and does not represent to be advice on any particular matter. No reader or purchaser should act on the basis of material contained in this publication without first taking professional advice appropriate to their particular circumstances. All screenshots in this publication are the copyright of the website owner(s), unless indicated otherwise.

Typeset by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk

Printed in the UK and USA.

Dedication

I would like to dedicate this book to my dear friends, Spoon (Lindy Messaris) and Watty (Helen George), who both love reading, libraries and education.

List of figures and tables

Figures

7.1. Creation of knowledge 159

9.1. Diagram of learning outcomes 193

11.1. Curriculum for digital librarians 248

12.1. Sketch of what the new digital librarian should be like 265

Tables

3.1. Comparison of DL offerings 59

6.1. Similarities between the information professions 116

7.1. Tasks associated with data, information, knowledge and objects 166

List of abbreviations

AIDS Acquired immune deficiency syndrome

ALA American Library Association

ALIA Australian Library and Information Society

ANT Actor Network Theory

BP Bologna Process

CIBER The registered name of the research group

CILIP Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals

CS Computer Science

DIK Data, Information, Knowledge

DILL Digital Library Learning

DL Digital Library

DLF Digital Library Foundation

EQF European Qualifi cations Framework

GATS General Agreement on Trade in Service

ICT Information and Communication Technologies

IFLA International Federation of Library Associations

IP Information Professionals

LIS Library and Information Science

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

SCOT Social Construction of Technology

STS Sociology of Technology in Society

TEEP Transnational European Evaluation Project

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

Preface

There is little doubt that the preparation of the next generation has long occupied the minds of information professionals, no matter what their area of research or praxis. This has been increasingly stimulated by the rapid growth of technological interconnectivity over the past twenty or so years, making the future seem volatile and unpredictable. Sadly, the paradigm for education for library and information science (LIS) has not shifted nearly as much as the paradigm of practice in libraries, records centres, archives, museums and galleries. The compulsion to create, maintain and exemplify what information professionals are and what they do has mostly comprised adjusting courses in curricula, offering more options, sticking to what has, since Melvil Dewey’s time, considered to be ‘core’, and not making the necessary conceptual breakthrough that is necessary if information professionals (that is, the non-technological ones) are to continue to exist. A great deal more technology has been added to programmes, but without necessarily explaining its purpose within the field: in fact, such additions suggest that technology will entirely replace the field.

This work constitutes an attempt to address this predicament, not so much by offering the final solution or a model syllabus, but to encourage discussion and debate by suggesting a quite different vantage point. Instead of extrapolating on what is being taught, or how things have always been done, or emphasising the practical or technical in order to meet purely vocational requirements, here Anna Maria and I have adopted possibly the broadest view of all: that of philosophy, the seeking and creation of knowledge. Using this as a starting point, the information professional is understood to be less involved with managing and controlling documents as physical entities (even when they are digital), but rather more concerned with connecting people and ideas. Everybody is, we believe, a knowledge creator to a greater or lesser extent. I therefore coined the term ‘information interventionist’ (Myburgh, 2007) to indicate the role of the information professional in the cycle of knowledge creation. We are in the business of connecting people with the ideas that others have had (and recorded) so that they can learn, be inspired, and create their own knowledges and understanding.

Looking at the role of the information professional in this way not only removes the librarian (and other information professionals) from a particular place and space (albeit that the physical space of a public library may serve other community functions). Instead, the intellectual encounter of a professional with a knowledge creator is emphasised. The terminology concerning the description of those who use libraries or museums or records centres reveals the lack of understanding that we, as professionals, have of an individual’s purpose in information seeking. The word ‘client’ suggests some commercial exchange; ‘borrower’ means somebody who is borrowing library materials (‘documents’), without any regard to whether these are read and even less as to whether they have been understood. The term ‘user’ is similarly culpable of inaccuracy: using what, exactly? If using ‘information’ is meant, then it is alarming that no studies have been done – to the best of my knowledge anyway – on what the information is used for, or how it is used. Typically, studies on user information behaviour or information use almost always examine how individuals negotiate information retrieval mechanisms, systems or centres.

A long personal experience in libraries, and specifically educating new librarians, has led us to ponder the dilemma of how best to change the education for Library and Information Science (LIS) in order to meet the present societal demands for information professionals, as well as preparing information professionals for careers which will stretch for several decades into the future. Technological change must of course be considered, particularly as information and communication technologies (ICTs) have led to the possibility of digital libraries – and a different set of skills and competencies that digital librarians require. In addition, there have been many global changes in society, in perspective, lifestyle, and perhaps even personal considerations of what is important in life.

With all of this in mind, and having had many long conversations with one another and many colleagues, we felt compelled to sketch out what we believe is a useful approach which can take this profession into the future.

We do not believe that any research – particularly of this nature – can be value free, and thus we feel compelled to declare our axiological position. As Miller has noted, values are the lenses through which we view the world, and we cannot eliminate them in scholarly processes (Miller, 2002, p. 28). Our work has been guided by our direct experience of several international approaches to education for LIS (including, inter alia, the United States, South Africa, Australia, the United Kingdom, Singapore, Tanzania and Italy), through international conferences, professional meetings and activities, as office bearers in IFLA and other professional associations, and conversations over some years with the internationally diverse student body of the Erasmus Mundus programme, Master’s in Digital Library Learning (DILL), as well as their visiting professors. The two major sources of research on education for LIS in the English-speaking world are the United Kingdom and the United States of America: we are culturally located outside of these professional constructions. In a sense, a position on the periphery is helpful in that we are able to step outside of the square in which much of the dancing, thus far, has taken place, although this may distort our work in other ways.

In considering our axiological position with regard to our choice of topic, our interpretation of the current situation as personally experienced and as found in the current research literature, motivates us to argue for the survival of the information profession, as we believe that its knowledge base and professional territory are unique, and that it has a considerable amount to contribute to the development of individuals, communities and societies. While we are both very much in favour of the use of ICTs to achieve professional objectives, we clearly distinguish between their role and the societal or professional role played by information professionals. We are of the view that the work of librarians is widely misunderstood or not understood at all; that enough sacrifices have been made at the altars of the technological gods to warrant their attention to our peculiarities, claims and stipulations, and that vastly improved collaboration between librarians, recordkeepers, archivists and curators is demanded and entirely necessary if knowledges and cultures are to be sustained. To this extent, non-epistemic values may well taint our scholarship (Miller, 2002, p. 28), but this is probably not an isolated case, particular in professions that are engaged with social transformation and development.

We are hoping that, at the very least, the arguments and models that are proposed here will begin an international conversation which will include not only colleagues in the discipline/profession, but others who recognise similar or complementary issues and are able to assist in clarification through contribution of their ideas and collaboration. Much of the present undertaking is concerned with describing and analysing those issues that demand further exploration and discussion, rather than adopting a more prescriptive approach and detailing what digital librarians should be taught, which may have been much easier.

About the authors

Sue Myburgh was born in Cape Town, South Africa, and educated at Rustenburg Girls’ High School, the University of Cape Town and the University of South Africa. In 1982, she was awarded a Fulbright Fellowship to study at Simmons College, Boston, Massachusetts.

Her working experience in the area of information management has been diverse, including public, academic and corporate libraries; cataloguing, reference work, online database searching, acquisitions, serials control, records management, consultancies and freelance indexing and abstracting. She has been an academic since 1984, first in the School of Librarianship at the University of Cape Town, and then in the School of Communication, Information and Media at the University of South Australia. Since 2008, she has been a Visiting Professor at the University of Parma, conducting research in digital libraries and teaching in the European Union Masters in Digital Library Learning.

She has published widely in records and strategic information management and knowledge management, but has a longstanding interest in curriculum development for the education and training of information professionals, with particular reference to addressing their changing cultural, societal and organisational roles.

Besides the Fulbright, Sue has been awarded several honours and awards, including the Silver Jubilee Prize at the University of Cape Town, and the Britt Literary Award from the Association of Records Managers and Administrators International (ARMA), and the Best Paper Award from the International Integrated Information Conference in Greece. She is also a member of Beta Phi Mu. She is frequently invited to speak at international conferences, often as keynote speaker. She is also a reviewer for, or on the editorial board of, several professional journals, and has served on several conference programme committees.

Anna Maria Tammaro obtained her Ph.D. in Information Science from Northumbria University where she also gained Master Information Studies. At the University of Roma she studied Specialisation in Library Science, and received her Degree in Philosophy from the University of Rome.

From 2001 Anna Maria has been teaching in the University of Parma and is the Local Coordinator of the International Master in Digital Library Learning (DILL). She is University Rector Delegate for e-learning.

She has been involved in the Italian research projects ‘Digital Library Applications’ and ‘Access to digital library’ and has collaborated with the European projects ‘Minerva Ministerial Network for digitisation in Europe’ and the Tempus Project NMPLIS.

From 2008 to 2010 she was Researcher Fellow in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science of the University of Illinois.

She is Chair of IFLA Division IV and member of the IFLA Governing Board, and from 2007 to 2011 she was Chair of the Education and Training Section. In 2011 she was awarded by EUCLID the Bobcats of the year for her contribution given to LIS in Europe. From 2011, she is Vice President of the Tuscany Section of the Italian Library Association (AIB).

She has published 6 books and 74 papers on internationalisation of higher education, recognition and quality assurance, digital library. She is on the Editorial Committee of the following journals: Libri, Performance Measurement and Metrics, IFLA Journal, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, New Review of Academic Librarianship and Digitalia.

Acknowledgements

They say it takes a village to raise a child, but this sentiment is true in writing a book. This work is the result of conversations with many international colleagues over many years, and reading the work of others who I have not been fortunate enough to meet, including those who have shuffled off this mortal coil. To all of these innumerable inspirations, my sincere thanks. Anna Maria has been particularly noteworthy in this regard: there was a meeting of the minds in cyberspace after the publication of my first Chandos book (The new information professional) in 2005, and we have had great collaboration and many lengthy conversations since then, often over a glass or two of prosecco. In spite of our quite different lives and cultural backgrounds and professional histories, it has been extraordinary discovering the extent to which we agree on so many issues that we consider important. So, the collaboration on this book has been a great pleasure, even though I have reneged somewhat on my intentions to speak Italian more fluently.

We would also like to thank Professor Vittore Casarosa, Scientific Advisor to the Italian National Research Council, at the Institute for Information Science and Technology in Pisa (ISTI-CNR), where he is associated with the activities of the Multimedia Laboratory in the field of Digital Libraries. Not only have we enjoyed many lengthy conversations, but in addition Vittore kindly undertook to read a draft of this work, and made many useful suggestions. His technical expertise and point of view have been invaluable. Vittore has worked in the education of new digital librarians since the inception of the Masters’ in Digital Library Learning, in addition to the work he has done over many years on the design and construction of digital libraries.

The stimulation provided by the sometimes controversial and avantgarde topics that were brought to my attention by Dr Federico Monaco have also proved invaluable, not only for this book but for looking at the role of technology in society in different and interesting ways. In sharing an office over many months at the University of Parma, Federico remained cheerful and encouraging, even when the work of writing this book hit tedious patches. His invitations to ‘café peperoncino’ across the road were always gratefully received and enjoyed.

While I have perhaps done most of the writing, as English is my home language, this book could not have been written without the engagement and passion in the subject of Professor Dr Anna Maria Tammaro. Anna Maria is something of a human whirlwind, and she balances, with aplomb and great elegance (she is Italian, after all!) a number of hats. She is a teacher and researcher par excellence, and a fantastic team leader, encouraging many of the outstanding scholars in our field to participate in the EU Master’s programme in Parma. She has also been long involved with the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA), holding several offices, not least of which has been as Chair of the Section on Education and Training. It is difficult to estimate her contribution to this work, but suffice to say that without her, this book would not (and could not) have been written.

1

Regeneration of the second oldest profession

Abstract:

The development of information and communication technologies (ICTs) have radically changed the ways in which people try to find the information they need and, as a consequence, what information professionals need to know. A new understanding of the digital information environment, a different professional perspective, and increased interaction and personalisation of services are all required. Libraries cannot be replaced by ICTs and there are several reasons for this, which are discussed here. Instead, ICTs offer the opportunity for regeneration, as digital libraries require digital librarians, who can better achieve the goals of librarianship, by intervening in the cycle of knowledge creation as decoders and information interventionists.

Key words

education for LIS

digital librarians

new approaches to LIS curriculum

Introduction

Every field of human endeavour seems to become increasingly complex over time. In the professions, practitioners are frequently called upon to do things that they were not educated for, as social, political, economic and technological changes occur. Of these, perhaps the most prominent recently has been the development and widespread use of information and communication technologies (ICTs). Now, in addition to their traditional library skills and knowledge, many of today’s librarians and other information workers are expected to possess additional knowledge and skills required for work within the digital information world. Digital Library applications must increasingly be aligned with traditional library collections and services and this requires staff with new expertise. Librarians are faced with the challenge of acquiring advanced knowledge and skills to augment what they traditionally learned in a first professional degree. Educating digital librarians competent to work in the dynamic and complex digital environment has become a high priority.

Like other professionals, information workers (including librarians, records managers, archivists and museologists) must find and solve problems, and involves society’s information problems. Many researchers (such as Chowdhury and Chowdhury, 2003; Tanner, 2001) have described digital librarians’ roles, and have suggested core competencies and skills needed to perform these roles. However, the demands made by changing technologies often create uncertainty and obfuscation, generating an emphasis on solving the technical problems.

Libraries and other information centres can be replaced by ICTs, some believe. The literature of LIS is replete with suggestions, whether at the level of fully-developed research report or illustrative anecdote (e.g. Birdsall, 1994, 1996a; Harris and Hannah, 1993; Herring, 2001; Akerman, 2006; Hambrick, 2005; Hirschey, 2006; Stephens, 2006) that information professionals – the practitioners, the collections of documents they manage, and the programs that educate them – are obsolete, or at the very least will become increasingly peripheral because of ICTs.¹,² Some of those who consider the future of cultural institutions suggest that ICTs have made them irrelevant and redundant (e.g. American Library Association, 2010; Godin, 2010; Inayatullah, 2010; Morrison, 2010; Prinsen, 2001; Rausing, 2010).³ Sadly, libraries and academic departments that educate information professionals are indeed under threat and closing down.⁴ Young summarises this phenomenon:

The argument goes … if commercial on-line services provide seamless, instantaneous access to an increasingly vast array of global digital information resources capable of being accessed and downloaded by individuals for home use, why should libraries continue to serve as repositories for the world’s storehouse of knowledge? Why would patrons continue to need librarians to interpret and guide them through collections and library resources? If access to information resources is made simple by dynamic and intelligent software ‘agents’ functioning as knowledge guides, what need is there for librarians in an information age? (Young, 1996, p. 12).

This threat became a reality in the United Kingdom during 2011, as well as in the United States – both countries which have been traditionally leaders in their support of libraries. A recent entry in a blog was entitled ‘The sound of libraries suffocating’ and contained the sentiment, rather poetically expressed:

The bodies of dead public programs and eviscerated social services litter the American landscape like casualties of a brutal war. It seems, at times, as though the Great Recession is systematically wiping out institutions that were generations in the making. (LISnews, 2011, http://lisnews.org/sound_libraries_suffocating)

Is this the legacy of the Internet, or other economic forces? The general public now have access to a great deal more information (from the Internet, in particular) than has ever before been possible – so much so, that many think that information was invented by the Internet but does this mean the end of libraries and information professionals? Whether people always find what they want, whether the information they find is of the best quality, whether they understand the information they retrieve and what they do with the information once they have located it, are all questions that remain largely unanswered. While librarians are at pains to explain the differences between libraries and the Internet, nobody appears to be listening.

All of this suggests that the LIS area of jurisdiction itself – its academic and professional territory – is on the point of collapse. But while a superficial glance the recent appearance of the Internet and associated ICTs does seem to threaten librarians and others who work with information, documents and cultural artefacts, closer examination reveals the absurdity of such a belief. Why would ICTs (and indeed, how could they?) replace librarians specifically, when they have not replaced many other disciplinary and professional areas where they are used? There has been no suggestion that ICTs will replace accountants, lawyers or doctors – even though their work may be modified. Perhaps librarians and other information workers are singled out because they deal with ‘information’, and thus, purportedly, occupy the same professional space as computer scientists and other technologists. Strangely, LIS is often not even considered among the information professions, while those who deal with (or design, construct, or install) information technologies are considered to be the information specialists. This opinion is sustained by the widespread public ignorance of what librarians actually do inside the buildings called libraries (or archivists within archives, and so on): the similarities and differences between technologies and information work have never been made clear.

But the problem contains the solution. ICTs offer great potential for librarians to execute their roles in more effective ways. For example, while ‘cultural goods’ and ‘intellectual property’ are concerns of the market which have arisen with ICT development, ICTs have also facilitated an enormous number of creative endeavours which are noncommercial, designed to be the result of collaborative effort and to be shared, often using social media. The informal sharing of news of current events around the world is known as ‘citizen journalism’, where reports can be produced without any possible bias from the mass media reporting mechanisms. Social exclusion can be directly addressed: technology can be the means of inclusion. Indeed, the Internet is seen by some as the information space for revolution, as its very structure lends itself to open and public political action, as was seen during the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ of 2011. Of course, this prospect is not cherished by all governments, who make attempts to control or censor Internet-based information sources, or increase fees (as has occurred in China and, more recently, with the Digital Economy Bill of 2010 in the UK).

The development of digital libraries (DLs) has created a similar moment for a radical renovation of the information professions. The development of DLs is the latest in a long chain of technological developments that have changed how information is recorded, communicated and preserved, that began with the invention of speech and language. After the development of these technologies (technologies are understood to be tools which are human-constructed entities that extend our usual abilities), writing, printing, and the other ICTs such as telephones, radio, television, fax machines and the Internet, all appeared in due course. The term ‘digital library’ remains unclear and contested and still has a variety of potential meanings which range from ‘database’ to ‘a digitised collection of material’, similar to that which one might find in a traditional library. The definition used here is the most frequently quoted, and was developed by the Digital Library Federation (DLF).

Digital libraries are organizations that provide the resources, including the specialized staff, to select, structure, offer intellectual access to, interpret, distribute, preserve the integrity of, and ensure the persistence over time of collections of digital works so that they are readily and economically available for use by a defined community or set of communities. (DLF, 2004, online)

The significant features of DLs are twofold: first, they contain selected and described digitised information content, and secondly, because it is digitised, this content can be accessed remotely, using the Internet. The possibility of viewing particular and specialised collections of unique and culturally significant documents and artefacts distinguishes DLs from other types of Internet resources. It should be noted in the definition given above that ‘staff’ are viewed as one of the ‘resources’ of the DL, in a definition that reifies the DL and diminishes the human actors. Another point worth mentioning is that DLs, according to this definition, are not necessarily created in order to make all information accessible to everybody everywhere but, as has been the case with traditional physical libraries, they. are usually only available to identified closed groups of people and their identified information needs.

There are many DLs and DL projects, and Lynch has usefully provided a history of DL development (2005). The early DLs, such as ‘Project Gutenberg’, did try to make available, in networked, digital form, all works which were no longer protected by copyright provisions. This was followed by the ‘Internet Archive’ (founded by Brewster Kahle in 1996), but with the launch of ‘Google Books’ (2004), a different philosophy became evident. Even though vast quantities of documents are being digitised by Google,⁵ it is only those works that are already in the public domain that are freely accessible. For those still under copyright, the user must be a member of a library that has purchased the work. There is a continuing legal and technological debate on these matters, particularly because of the internationally accessible nature of the project. The Hathi Trust Digital Library (2008) provides access to parts of ‘Google Books’ and the ‘Internet Archive’, while other DLs have been developed for explicit communities, or they incorporate materials dealing with specific knowledge areas. Some, notably ‘Europeana’, allow anybody to access the vast store of documents that embody Europe’s rich cultural heritage, including paintings, manuscripts, maps and audio recordings.

‘Digital curation’⁶ is a term closely linked to the DL concept, and as one of the functions of libraries (and records centres and archives) is the selection and subsequent preservation of documents or cultural objects, although the term is often applied to the preservation of digital data (such as might be collected during a research project), or perhaps to the bit streams which constitute the digital format, rather than documents (for example, the research report). Such compilations, digitally recorded, are kept in digital repositories, which are different from DLs in several noteworthy ways. Most importantly, they serve a different purpose: the data can be mined or processed using different techniques in order to answer different sets of research questions, and thus digital repositories constitute a vital part of a country’s cyber infrastructure. The construction and management of digital repositories requires a different approach to that required for the design, construction and maintainenance of DLs. The term ‘digital repository’ is sometimes used synonymously with ‘digital archive’, but this is inaccurate as archives comprise very specific types of documents which are arranged and stored in explicit ways, guided very often by legal requirements.

From books to ideas

It is only since the invention of printing that the information professions have been primarily concerned with the management of physical documents, rather than their intellectual content. Because of the enormous increase in the production of printed objects, libraries essentially became ‘document warehouses’ as the physical characteristics of documents meant they were expensive, took up space, and were difficult to find in large collections, but they could be shared as their contents could not be used up. Ultimately, this came to mean that data, information and knowledge, as well as all of the activities that produce or utilise them, all the systems which carry or store them, all of the debates and concepts which underlie their production, availability, exchange and use, are ‘taken-for-granted’ and epitomised by books (or journals, pamphlets, videos or whatever), even though such physical documents or records constitute only one type of information handling technology. In