Steve Ely

On Public Access to Subscription Databases

I just created a new page on this site entitled “Everyone’s License” that I anticipate revising often enough that it seems to warrant life outside the flow of blog posts. It’s to examine how widely access to subscription databases is offered through public libraries. It may require original research to address some of the questions raised below or maybe these answers are already out there (seems very plausible) and easily found. Beyond analysis of the situation, though, the page will collect web pages providing the resources described. If I realize this totally duplicates what exists somewhere else, I’ll be happy to give it up. In the meantime, I don’t expect to put up a blog post every time I revise the page, but it seemed worth mentioning to begin with. There’s a bit more, including some of the links in question, that I didn’t copy over, but the following paragraphs are all from that page directly.

I imagine a tiny fraction of the public realize they have access to some very good subscription databases through their public libraries websites. I wonder what proportion of Americans really have that access. The number of databases available from even a good public library will never match an ARL school’s or most colleges otherwise. But people in decent-sized cities do have access to a lot more resources than they may know. I’ve most recently lived in Houston and Pittsburgh. Each of those library systems has subscriptions to a number of research databases that exceeded my expectations. Anyone with a library card can use those databases over the web, and, of course, any resident within their local area can get a library card. It increases access wonderfully.

Of course, it raises the question of information literacy in a significant way. While in pursuing my MLIS in Pittsburgh, I worked part-time with at an office downtown and discovered that the highly intelligent, educated professionals I worked with never went to the library. It had no appeal, and they had no interest. I wonder, then, how many are apt to care about or effectively use such resources when they do know of them. Other relevant questions come to mind, though. I wonder if the research is out there already addressing them. Specifically:

1. What are the public library systems, or consortia, with web access to research databases from vendors such as EBSCO and ProQuest/CSA?
2. How many public libraries don’t offer such access?
3. What are the total populations of people within the areas served for groups 1 and 2 above?
4. How many people within group 1 (and for that matter group 2 and the nation altogether) even hold library cards at all?
5. How many library cardholders within group 1 know about those research databases? And/or how many use them?

For all I know so far, most of America may have be in group 1 above, or perhaps only a small minority. This seems like the sort of thing someone’s already looked into and is keeping an eye on. Organizations I’m going to look to first are ALA’s Public Library Association (PLA) and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). If the research has been done and the answers are out there somewhere, I’d think the PLA should have it. It seem like something the IMLS might be interested in, though, too, so they’re worth a look. While I’m very much of the opinion that the PLA ought to point to the research if it’s out there, it’s plausible that they don’t but it’s nonetheless written up in some scholarly LIS journal. In that case, I may, somewhat ironically, be hampered by a lack of database access. One sort of research databases that’s unsurprisingly absent from public libraries is the LIS variety. I’ll confront that difficulty as I exhaust other options. I’m curious enough to do original research here, but of course I don’t want to waste effort duplicating what’s already out there.

Update: Actually, while Pitt spoiled me with three different LIS databases and Houston Public Library doesn’t have three, it does have one, which is better than I thought. So that helps.

2nd Update: I’ve improved the syntax in the first sentence a bit.