the effects of electronic legal sources on collection development and information use in government...

This article was downloaded by: [Uniwersytet Warszawski]On: 28 October 2014, At: 07:03Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Acquisitions LibrarianPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wzze20

The Effects of Electronic LegalSources on Collection Developmentand Information Use in GovernmentAgency Law LibrariesGlenda G Thompson aa Ravena, NY, 12143Published online: 05 Nov 2010.

To cite this article: Glenda G Thompson (1997) The Effects of Electronic Legal Sources onCollection Development and Information Use in Government Agency Law Libraries, TheAcquisitions Librarian, 9:17-18, 177-191, DOI: 10.1300/J101v09n17_13

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J101v09n17_13

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. Theaccuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liablefor any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wzze20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J101v09n17_13

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J101v09n17_13

Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

SPECIAL REPORTS

The Effects of Electronic Legal Sources on Collection Development

and Information Use in Government Agency Law Libraries

Glenda G. Thompson

SUMMARY. Given the popular notion in this age of instant information that "everything" is available online, coupled with the fact that the ever-changing mass of legal information lends itself to the electronic format, i t would seem logical that many law libraries would be turning toward electronic information sources more and more, and thus replacing and cancelling their print sources. This survey was designed to examine the validity of this assumption by in- vestigating the impact the electronic age has had on the collection development and information use in law libraries run by and/or for government agcncies. In addition, i t will also look at the ways in which these libraries are utilizing electronic sources and their future plans for further automation, and also compare these aspects with those of a small'sample of law firm libraries. [Ar~icle copies available

for a fee fiom The Howor111 Documenf Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-moil oddttss: ge~info@awor~h.comJ

Glenda G . Thompson, Oakbrook Manor Aprs. #27D, Ravena, N Y 12143.

O 1997 by The Haworth Press. Inc. All rights reserved. 177

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

178 Arquisitiot?s and CoIlecrion Developnrenr O r Ae Humanities

INTRODUCTION

The world of legal information changes at an overwhelmingly fast pace and is constantly being updated and appended. For this reason, legal information lends itself to the electronic format, most notably to online pay services such as Westlaw or Lexis, since changes and additions may be made almost immediately upon notification and the user may have virtual- ly instant acccss to the latest case mlings, laws, bills, and other timely legal or governmental information. With this in mind, it would seem logical to suppose that law libraries would be abandoning their print sources for those electronic sources that are more current.

To address this supposition, this survey was developed to examine the effect electronic media has had on government agency law libraries. The survcy consists of thirteen questions covering the types of electronic sources available and their usage, the usage and disposal of print materials in the library, and the present and future electronic environment of the library.

METNODOLOGY

Twenty-eight surveys, along with personalized letters to listed librarians, were mailed to State Attorney General's Libraries and State Law Libraries located in the 1995-1996 edition of the AALL Directory and Handbook, from the American Association of Law Libraries. Twenty-four surveys were returned, for a response rate of 85.7%. Additionally, the survey was posted to a law librarian's discussion list called Law-lib (law- [email protected]), from which came 16 responses, for a total of 40 responses from government law libraries, as well as 15 responses from law firm libraries and 4 responses from law school libraries. The law firm library responses will be used for comparative purposes, while the law school library responses will not be utilized, due to the small number of replies. A copy of the survey is included in the Appendix.

RESULTS

Electronic Sources: Avo i lab i l~ and Usage

Of the forty government agency law libraries responding, thirty-eight (95%)' subscribe to or utilize some form of electronic resource. Of these

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

Special Reporrs 179

thirty-eight, thirty-five (92%) subscribe to online pay services, thirty-three (87%) utilize CD-ROM information, thirty-six (95%) are connected to the Internet and World Wide Web, twenty-one (55%) have an online library catalog, and thirty-eight (100%) use e-mail. Ten respondents also noted that they also utilized online dial-up catalogs of others libraries. In com- parison, of the f i b e n Law Firm libraries that responded, fifteen (100%) utilized online pay services and Internet, fourteen (93%) used CD-ROM and E-mail, and twelve (80%) had online library catalogs (see Table A).

Online Pay Services

Of the thrty-five government law libraries that subscribe to online pay services, thuty-four (97%) subscribe to Westlaw, twenty-four (68%) to Lexis, fifteen (43%) each to Dialog and OCLC, and two (6%) to Legislate. When asked which service was used the mosl twenty-five (71%) said Westlaw, five (14%) said Lexis, and LegisLate and OCLC each received one response (3%). Six libraries did not answer which service was used the most. Thus, Westlaw seems to have an advantage over the other online services in government agency law libraries. Conversely, of the fifteen law fm libraries, 100% subscribed to both Westlaw and Lexis, with thirteen (87%) subscribing to Dialog, five (33%) subscribing to OCLC, and two (13%) subscribing to Legislate. Five (33%) of the Law Firm Libraries stated they use Westlaw the most, while six (40%) preferred Lexis and two (13%) chose Dialog. The law fum libraries, then, seem more equally divided between their usage of West- law and Lexis than do the government agency law libraries. Additional online sources mentioned by both type law libraries include: PACER, Datatimes, CDB Infotek, WLN, and Firstsearch, among others (see Table B).

When asked who is allowed to access these online pay services, the

TABLE A. Electronic Sources Utilized

Gov't Agency Libraries (40) Law Firm Libraries (1 5)

Online (pay) 35 15 CD-ROM 33 14

Internet 36 15 OPAC 21 12 E-mail 38 14

Other 10 2 No Access 2 0

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

180 Acquisilions and Colleclion Developmet~l in the Humaniries

thirty-seven government agency libraries that subscribe to online services replied (see Table C). All thirty-seven libraries (100%) give access to librarians, thirty (8 1%) allow attorneys access, sixteen (43%) give access to library staff, and twelve (32%) allow interns access. Nineteen (51%) also mentioned others who were allowed to use the online pay services, including law clerks, judges, legislative staff, paralegals, secretaries, and the pub- lic. Some also mentioned limitations, such as access to certain databases only and access only after receiving training. Others mentioned that anyone with their own account or anyone willing to pay their own fees may use the online systems. The fifteen law fum libraries' numbers were quite similar. One hundred percent of both librarians and attorneys were allowed access, while 66% permitted library staff and 40% permined interns to use the online resources. Seventy-three percent mentioned others allowed access, including law clerks, paralegals, and secretaries.

TABLE B. Online (Pay) Subscriptions

Gov't Agency Libraries (40) Law Firm Libraries (15)

Westlaw 34 15 Lexis-Nexis 24 I5 DIALOG 15 13 Legislate 2 2 OCLC 15 5 Other 14 5 DO NOT Subscribe 3 0

TABLE C. Persons Allowed Online Access


Librarians 37 15 Library Staff 16 10 Attorneys 30 15

Interns 12 6 Others 19 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

Special Reports 181

Interne?

The primary uses of the lnternet among the thirty-six government agency libraries that have access include E-mail (78%), Listservs and Newsgroups (72%), and federal information (69%). The numbers fall to 50% for State and Local information and to 47% for subject searching, and even lower for information from other states (30%). Four libraries noted other uses for the Internet, including distributing information and accessing other libraries' catalogs. The fifteen law firm libraries, on the other hand, claimed their primary uses of the Internet to be accessing federal information and subject searching (73% and 66%, respectively). Listservs and E-mail followed, both with 53%, followed by state and local information (47%) and information from other states (27%). Other uses mentioned by law firm libraries included business research and access to pay services. Thus, it seems that law firm libraries are getting more information from the Internet, while government law libraries are utilizing the Internet more as a communications tool (see Table D).

When asked if any particular search engine of the Internet was preferred, Alta-Vista was the hands-down winner with both the government and law firm libraries. Forty-four percent of government law libraries and 66% of law firm libraries chose Alta-Vista as their favorite search engine. Yahoo! followed with 30% of government libraries and 13% of law firm libraries choosing it as their search engine of choice. HotBot, Lycos, and Galaxy appeared less favorable with both types of law library. Metacrawler (not a choice on the survey), however, was most frequently mentioned in the "other" category choice. Additional-

TABLE D. Uses of the lnternet


State & Local Info 18 7 Federal Info 25 11 Info from Other States 11 4

Listsews or Newsgroups 26 E-Mail 28 Subject Searching 17

Other 4 No Access 3 0

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

182 Acquisitions and Collection Development in fhe Humanities

ly, several of the government law libraries (22%) and a few of the law firm libraries (13%) had no preference for a particular Internet search engine (see Table E).

A great variety of responses came from the question regarding the regular use of any particular Internet sites. Although thirteen (36%) of the government law libraries with Internet access claimed they had no sites they utilized regularly, a list of twenty-eight sites was composed from the remaining twentv-three libraries. Those sites mentioned more than once include ~ H O M X ~ (thomas.loc.gov), GPO Access (www.access.gpo.gov/ su-docs), Cornell (www.law.cornell.edu), Washlaw (law.wuacc.edu/), and Washburn (no address given). The law firm libraries chose THOMAS and GPO Access as well, but also included EDGAR (www.sec.gov) as a popular site.

PRINT MATERIALS: CANCELLATIONS, EXPENDITURES, ILL, AND DISPOSAL

Given a list of a variety of major legal print sources, libraries were asked which, if any, they had cancelled in favor of their electronic counterparts. Thirteen (32.5%) of the government agency law libraries had not

TABLE E. Preferred Search Engines (some preferred more than one)


Yahoo! 11 2

Aka-Vista 16 4 0 HotBot 0 1

Galaxy 4 0 Lycos 3 1 "Other" Metacrawler 4 1

lnfoseek 2 0 Webcrawler 1 0 No preference 8 2

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

Special Reporls ' , 183

cancelled any of the listed items, leaving twenty-seven (67.5%) who had cancelled at least one print source. Similarly, four (27%) of the law firm libraries had not cancelled print sources, leaving eleven (63%) who had cancelled at least one print source.

Shepardl Citafions was the biggest print loser with those libraries that made cancellations, with 81% (22 of 27) government law libraries, and 100% (1 1 of I I ) law firm libraries opting to cancel in favor of online or CD-ROM versions. This is not surprising, given the time-consuming method of "Shepardizing" by hand. What can take several minutes to several hours using the print source may be done in seconds electronical- ly. The number of cancellations of the other sources were much lower and are included in Table F. Other print sources cancelled in favor of electronic sources mentioned by the government law libraries include:

TABLE F. Print Sources Cancelled in Favor of Electronic Counterpart

Print Source: Gov't Agency Libraries (40) Law Firm Libraries (15)

West3 Reporters: Regional Bankruptcy Federal Federal Supplement Supreme Court Shepard's Citations CCH Looseleaf Services ALR AmJur u s M. Bender Looseleaf Svcs. 4 3 State Digest 1 1

CLI or ILP 6 2 Federal Digest 0 0 Law Review Periodicals 2 3 uscs 4 0 USCA 1 0 NONE 13 4

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

184 Acquisitions and Collecrion Developmenr in the Humanities

State legal newspapers, BNA, CFR, and Statutes from other states. One law firm library also mentioned BNA publications. Additionally, two government law libraries responded that they were replacing their second print copies only, and intcnded to retain their subscription to one copy of the print sources.

When asked the reasons for cancelling the print sources in favor of electronic, the leading reasons with both government and law firm libraries were cost and space constraints. Thirty of the forty government libraries responded to this question, with eighteen (60%) citing cost as a major factor, and sixteen (53%) citing space constraints. Twelve of the law firm libraries answered the question, with nine (75%) citing cost and six (50%) citing space constraints as major factors of cancellation. ConvenienceIEase of use was thc next most frequently cited reason, with seven (23%) of the government law libraries and three (25%) of the law firm libraries choosing this reason. Spced was also chosen by five (16%) of the government law libraries and two (16%) of the law firm libraries as a reason to choose electronic sources over print. User request was given by only one law firm library (8%) (and none of the government libraries) as a reason to cancel the print sources. Three of the government libraries also added upkeep, source little used but nec- essary, and the progressive movement to keep the Library up-to-date as justification for dropping print sources for CD-ROM or Online versions (see Table G).

Budget

In terms of monetary expenditures, print sources still dominate most budgets in both government and law firm libraries. Sixty-five percent of

TABLE G. Reasons for Cancelling Print Sources

Gov't Agency Libraries (40)

Cost 18 Space Constraints 16

ConvenienceIEase of use 7 User Request 0 Speed 5 Other 3 No Answer 10

Law Firm Libraries (1 5)

9 6

3 I 2 0

3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

Special Repow 185

the government law libraries claim that their print budget is either much higher or somewhat higher than their electronic budget. Likewise, 53% of the law firm libraries make the same claim. Comparatively, only 10% of government law libraries and 33% of law firm libraries state that their electronic budgets are either somewhat higher or much higher than their print budgets. Five percent of government libraries and 6% of law firm libraries say that these budgets are about equal. Three (7.5%) of the government libraries and three (20%) of the law firm libraries did not answer this question, while five (12.5%) of the govemmcnt law libraries stated that they only have one budget and do not distinguish between print and electronic budgets (see Table H).

Interlibrary Loan

When questioned about utilization of interlibrary loan in the past two years, 45% of government agency law libraries said that their use of ILL has increased, while another 42.5% said that it has remained the same. Only 2.5% said that their use of ILL has decreased, and 7.5% claim they do not use ILL at all. Surprisingly, only 13% of the law firm libraries stated that their interlibrary loan had increased in the past two years, while the majority (60%), said that ILL use had remained the same, and 20% had actually decreased utilization of ILL. Six percent of the law firm libraries do not use ILL.

One government agency library also commented that their ILL has increased for some items, but has decreased for'others (see Table I).

TABLE H. Print vs. Electronic Budgets


Print much higher 22 4

Print somewhat higher 4 4 About equal 2 1

Electronic somewhat higher 2 4 Electronic much higher 2 1

No Answer 3 1

Other (i.e., only one budget) 5 0

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

186 Acquisitions and Collecfion Development in the Humanities

Disposal

Considering that space constraint was a major factor in many of these law libraries' decision to cancel print sources, a question of the means of disposal of these cancelled print sources is a logical follow-up. Many libraries gave more than one answer to this question, with "trash" and "kecp on the shelf" sharing equally the highest billing in the government law libraries with 37.5% choosing these methods, while "recycle," "donate," and "keep on shelf" each received 33% of the law firm libraries disposal choice. In government law libraries 32.5% recycle, 12.5% donate, 5% put print sources in storage, and 17.5% gave no answer. Twenty-six point six percent of law firm libraries trash their replaced materials, while 20% put them in storage, and 26.6% chose not to answer. Two government agency law libraries mentioned surplusing to other state agencies, and one law firm library mentioned selling cancelled items as additional methods of disposal (see Table J).

ELECTRONIC ENVIRONMENR PRESENT AND FUTURE

Present: Networking

When asked about participation in networking, 72.5% of government agency libraries said they were part of a Local Area Network (LAN), and 20% were part of a Wide Area Network (WAN). (Some were connected to both types of network). Twenty percent were not part of a network. Of those that were connected to a network (32 libraries), 59% made CD- ROM sources available on the network, and 44% said that Online (pay) sources were available on the network. Twenty-eight percent said that

TABLE I. Interlibrary Loan Utilization


Increased 18 2

Decreased 1 3 Remained the Same 17 9

Do not use ILL 3 1

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

Special Repor~s 157

neither CD-ROM nor Online services were on the network. Eighty-six point six percent of the law firm libraries questioned were part of a LAN, while 40% were part of a WAN. Seven percent were part of neither. Of the fourteen networked law firm libraries, 43% had CD-ROM sources available on the network, and 86% had Online sources available. Fourteen percent made neither type source available (see Table K).

The Future: What's Next?

When asked about the future automation of the library, the most frequently cited next step of government agency libraries was the creation of an OPAC (mentioned by 8 libraries), followed closely by the networking of CD-ROMs or the OPAC (mentioned by 7 libraries). Adding or improv- ing Internet services and adding more CD-ROMs and CD-ROM equip- ment were each mentioned by 5 libraries, while creating a webpage and

TABLE J. Disposal of Print Materials (may choose more than one)


Trash 15 4

Recycle 13 5 Storage 2 3 Keep on Shelf 15 5 Donate 5 5 Other 2 1 No Answer 7 4

TABLE K. Networking and Networked Sources


LAN 29 13 WAN 8 6 Neither 8 1 CD-ROM Available 19 6 Online Sources Available 14 12 Neither Available 9 2

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

188 Acquisiiiorls atld Collecliot~ Developmeni Dr (he Humaniiies

automating circulation or technical services were chosen by 4 and 3 libraries, respectively. Many other plans were indicated as well, including fiber optic wiring, adding Windows 95, and upgrading to Pentium proces- sors. Four of the govcmment agency libraries chose not to answer this question.

The law firm libraries gave similar responses. Two will be adding more CD-ROM sources, two will be adding an online catalog, and five will be networking CD-ROMs, the library catalog, or the Internet. Other future automation for the law firm libraries include building an Intranet, convert- ing from MAC to IBM, and upgrading to new software.

OBSERVATIONS: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Although few libraries made additional comments in the space pro- vided, those who did had some thoughts worth mentioning. A couple made comments as to how "backward" or "stone-age" their libraries may seem to some who have a great deal of electronic access, while they have little or none. But thcy also adamantly defended their print sources, saying that they work well with what they have. Some who had a variety of electronic formats felt the same. Although the survey was not intended to make any assumptions, they seemed almost offended that the survey would assume that they would be utilizing electronic formats andlor cancelling print sources in favor of electronic ones.

Another librarian was struggling with cutbacks, agreeing on the need as a taxpayer, but facing the loss of her library, which she helped develop, as a law librarian. Hopefully, her state government will not buy into the "everything is available online" myth and retain her library and her librarian position.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this survey clearly show that, although many law libraries are cancelling print sources in favor of their electronic counterparts, print legal sources are far from extinct. In fact, the majority of the respondents in this survey sample indicate that print sources make up the majority of their collections and consume the more significant portions of their budgets. The steady and even increasing rate of interlibrary loan for thc majority of those surveyed points to the survival of print sources as well.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

Special Repom 189

Additionally, the Internct, although gaining respect as an information tool, seems to be used more by law librarians as a communication device to gain information from other law librarians. The popularity of listscrvs, newsgroups, and e-mail on the Internet for those surveyed leads to this conclusion. Obviously, for many, having access to a group of dedicated law librarians is as good, or better, than having access to Internet information, which may be difficult to search, out of date, or just plain wrong!

Finally, with cost as the major factor in choosing print or electronic sources for the libraries in this survey, only time and usage will tell which format will dominatc in years to cornc. Even though cheaper is not always better, in many libraries today it is the only feasible option.

FINAL THOUGHTS: THE SURVEY REVISITED

Although I was very happy with my response rate, a larger number of surveys mailed would have greatly increased the validity of my results. Additionally, the need for a change of wording in questions 2 and 6 (see Appendix) is indicated. Rather than asking "which do you use the most" regarding online services in question 2, which seems to indicate the librarian only, it should read "which is used the most?" Similarly, there was some confusion due to the use of the word "budget" in question 6. Instead of asking "how the print budget cornparcs to the electronic budget," I should have asked how expenditures for each compared. This way, if two budgets are not distinguished in a library, the question may still be answered. These changes would have made my data more reliable and less subjective.

NOTE

1. Percentages throughout this paper are usually rounded to the nearest whole number.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

190 Acquisirions and Collecfion Developmeni in the Humaitiries

APPENDIX

Library Name Completed by (name) (title)

Library Address

1. Which electronic resources do you utilize in your library? (Check all that apply):

A Online (Pay) Services ~esaaw. caw, -.I -CD-ROM -Internet - Online Library Catalog -E-mail O t h e r

2. To which of the following Online reference services (if any) do you subscribe? (Check all that apply):

- Westlaw -Leis-Nexis D i a l o g (Knight Ridder) -Legislate -0CLC -Other Which do you use the most?

3. Who is permitted to access your online (pay) services? (Check all that apply): - Librarians -Library Staff Attorneys -Interns O t h e r s -

4. Have you cancelled any of the following major legal print sources in favor of the online or CD-ROM versions? (Insen o for repla~emenlwith on~ ine . '~ tor replacement

with CDROM). West Reporters- Region& Banhptcy- Federal- Fed Supp_ Suprpme Ct. - Shepard's Citations -CCH Looseleaf Services -ALR A m l u r - CJS -Matthew Sender Looseleaf Selvices -State Digest - Current Law Index (or ILP) -Federal Digest .-Law Review Periodicals -USCS-USCA - Other(s)

5. What is your primary reason for cancelling of print sources in favor of electronic?

- Cost -Space Constraints -Conveniencelease of use -User Request - Speed -Other

6. How does your print sources budget compare with your electronic sources budget?

- Print budget much higher -Print budget somewhat higher - Almost equal -Electronic budget somewhat higher - Electronic budget much higher

7. What are your primary uses of the Internet? - State and local info (bills, news, etc.) -Federal Info-Info from other States -Listsews andlor Newsgroups -E-mail -Subject searching -Other

8. Do you prefer a particular Internet search engine? -Yahoo1 -Aka-Vista -HotBot -Galaxy -Lycos O t h e r

9. Do you have any Internet sles that you use regularty? lpease povlde sne nams and

1. 2.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

Special Reporrs 191

10. Is your library a part of a -Local Area Network (LAN) or -Wide Area Network (WAN)? If so, are C D - R O M sources or -Online (pay) services available on the network?

11. Has your utilization of interlibrary loan -Increased -Decreased -Remained the same in the past two years? (-We do not utilize ILL)

12. How do you dispose of the print materials that are replaced with electronic sources?

- Trash -Recycle -Storage -Keep them on the shelf -Donate Other

13. What is the next step you plan on taking toward further automating your library?

Additional Comments:

THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING MY SURVEY!

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

wer

syte

t War

szaw

ski]

at 0

7:03

28

Oct

ober

201

4

the effects of electronic legal sources on collection development and information use in government...

Documents