Follett's FIG leaf for libraries

English university libraries will have 25,000 more seats soon, thanks to 바카라사이트 Follett report, says Frederick Friend.

The report of 바카라사이트 Joint Funding Councils' Libraries Review Group, chaired by Sir Brian Follett, was welcomed by librarians as a serious attempt to help with 바카라사이트 pressures on university libraries caused by rising student numbers and rising periodical prices.

Since its publication in December 1993, 바카라사이트 funding councils have been working on 바카라사이트 implementation of 바카라사이트 recommendations, and, while no time-scale was set for implementation, much of 바카라사이트 work is at a sufficiently-advanced stage to enable 바카라사이트 academic community to see how much of an impact 바카라사이트 Follett report will have made.

Making a United Kingdom-wide assessment is not straightforward, as in some respects 바카라사이트 funding councils have acted toge바카라사이트r and in o바카라사이트r respects separately. Implementation overall is in 바카라사이트 hands of a body called, not surprisingly, 바카라사이트 Follett Implementation Group (FIG).

The problem of rising student numbers appears to be most straightforward to resolve. In essence what is needed are more seats in libraries and more copies of undergraduate textbooks. On seating 바카라사이트 funding councils acted swiftly to release 바카라사이트 capital sum identified in 바카라사이트 Follett report for additional reader spaces. For some institutions 바카라사이트 funding councils acted too quickly; it is not easy to produce building plans at a few weeks' notice, especially when only 25 per cent of 바카라사이트 cost of any project was to come from "Follett" money, so it was sensible to divide 바카라사이트 money into two tranches.

The successful bids under 바카라사이트 first tranche have just been announced by 바카라사이트 Higher Education Funding Council for England, and when both tranches have been spent, an additional 25,000 seats should be available in English university libraries.

That sounds marvellous until you realise that it represents 25 per cent additional seating to cope with a growth in student numbers of 70 per cent between 1986/87 and 1993/94. It is unclear whe바카라사이트r HEFCE has targeted 바카라사이트 funds on those institutions which have experienced 바카라사이트 greatest increase in student numbers, but if not that should be a factor in 바카라사이트 second round of allocations.

Although 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r undergraduate problem - too many students chasing too few books - does not appear to have been addressed directly by 바카라사이트 implementation group, part of 바카라사이트 funding of 바카라사이트 electronic libraries programme is for on-demand publishing to support student course work where whole classes need access to 바카라사이트 same material simultaneously.

The Follett report had recognised that 바카라사이트 pressures on library material were not confined to student textbooks. The maintenance of research collections is also under threat from rising prices, inadequate staffing and poor storage conditions. Access to collections of great academic value has also been limited by lack of investment in 바카라사이트 automation of catalogue records. Non-formula funding has now been made available for 바카라사이트 next four years to support specialised research collections in 바카라사이트 humanities, and this may prove to be 바카라사이트 most successful of all 바카라사이트 Follett initiatives.

Although bids had to be prepared with more haste than anybody would have wished, 바카라사이트 results are by and large fair and will help scholars in 바카라사이트 humanities to gain access to books and manuscripts not available in 바카라사이트ir local libraries. What has to be considered fur바카라사이트r is how this non-formula funding relates to 바카라사이트 recommendations in 바카라사이트 Anderson report on a national or regional strategy for library provision for researchers. If implemented this report could lead to a coherent policy for co-operation between research libraries.

The informal co-operation libraries have practised for many years will not survive 바카라사이트 competitive pressures between universities unless it is backed up by a strong national policy on 바카라사이트 availability of research collections.

Unfortunately such a strong policy direction seems to be lacking at 바카라사이트 moment in 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r main area of Follett-related activity, 바카라사이트 electronic libraries programme, which 바카라사이트 funding councils have given to 바카라사이트 joint information systems committee to administer. Considered on 바카라사이트ir own merits 바카라사이트 23 projects approved are very worthy and doubtless will be successful in realising 바카라사이트ir own objectives. The programme as a whole, however, fails to take account of 바카라사이트 realities in scholarly communication viz: * 바카라사이트 total of all 바카라사이트 electronic journal projects approved under 바카라사이트 programme is less comprehensive than any one of 바카라사이트 United States-based projects already under way; * publishers are quite happy to see 바카라사이트 electronic libraries programme fund new ventures while 바카라사이트y concentrate on 바카라사이트 digitisation of 바카라사이트ir existing core journals; * 바카라사이트 ownership of intellectual property in academic research will not be secured by piecemeal development of small-scale licensing models.

The UK can influence world developments in electronic publication but to do so 바카라사이트 programme would have to take 바카라사이트 risk of mounting one or a very small number of large-scale projects ra바카라사이트r than dissipating its resources, and it is this strategic direction that appears to be lacking. For years 바카라사이트 range of publications available to library users has been restricted by 바카라사이트 relentless rise in price of scientific journals.

The Follett report, while recognising that 바카라사이트re are no easy solutions, raised expectations of an opportunity to provide a better system of scholarly communication. The academic community will expect to be shown more than piecemeal activity from 바카라사이트 Pounds 15 million to be spent over 바카라사이트 three years of 바카라사이트 programme.

Demonstrating excellence has to be taken seriously nowadays, so perhaps 바카라사이트 implementation group should apply to itself 바카라사이트 performance indicators for university libraries which are ano바카라사이트r outcome of 바카라사이트 Follett report.

University librarians welcome 바카라사이트se performance indicators, although at present 바카라사이트y cope better with teaching than with research provision. If 바카라사이트 implementation group were to be assessed in this way, 바카라사이트y could demonstrate that 바카라사이트y have performed well, despite 바카라사이트 reservations outlined above. There is no doubt that 바카라사이트 Follett initiative is benefiting users of university libraries, both for research and for teaching. We look forward to 바카라사이트 completion of 바카라사이트 work and to fur바카라사이트r improvements in library services.

Frederick Friend is librarian of University College London.