First, thank you very much for the background, Michael. I really didn’t know any more about the Syracuse situation than I read in Inside Higher Ed., so this was enlightening.

I hope that you are in the minority in reading this as a screed against clueless, Luddite faculty, or a vote against browsing and stacks. The “clueless” in the title (along with the “uppity”) is supposed to be a parody of how each side sees the other. My overall idea is that we need less of this extremism. As for “self-righteous indignation,” I was thinking mostly of some of the comments on Inside Higher Ed. Here’s a great one: “This current trend by librarians to destroy real education is appalling and must be resisted at all costs.”

I don’t dismiss browsing cavalierly. It’s quite possible that if I were at Syracuse and knew all the facts, I’d be on the side of the students who oppose the changes. But I do think that browsing the stacks increasingly misses larger and larger amounts of valuable material that either the library isn’t buying or simply doesn’t exist in paper at all.

As for preparing students for libraries with fewer holdings–well, that’d be difficult among ARL libraries, as SU ranks near the bottom in nearly every category (volumes held, budget, acquisitions, and–after significant layoffs last year–trained librarians on staff). These facts have been apparent for years, and are now coupled with diminishing space and resources dedicated to arts/humanities collections (down 73%) and increasing designated lounge and cafe space (up 350%, according to the published ‘master plan’). This situation is not something that can only be opposed by those that do not understand the value of online archives or new media technology. Far from it.

Members of the SU community are of course concerned with the ability to browse (and outre though that might seem there are far too many advantages to that to dismiss it so cavalierly), but we’re also interested in community investment, resource allocation, labor issues, and the long-term function of the university to the students, faculty, and the city of Syracuse. It is one of the ironies of this situation that skeptics of SU’s library plans are criticized for not acknowledging the future, when it was a lack of long-term planning and investment on the part of the administration that got the university into this position in the first place.

I understand your post above is more directed to the general state of libraries, and it’s done with tongue in cheek at times. In that regard it is admirable and well done. But as far as the SU situation goes, it misses the mark in many ways. The situation is ‘tabled’ but the master plan, as of today, remains unchanged.

That said, I take the point about listening to the users. And so did Syracuse: they’ve “tabled” their plan to move those books offsite: http://library.syr.edu/blog/news/archives/001644.php

I think it entirely depends on the library and its users. Maybe browsing isn’t a core research strategy at general undergraduate libraries, but it certainly is at art schools and arts libraries (often ignored or glossed over in library-land since they are a small minority). There are different kinds of users and one answer is never going to fit all.

That said, I love your idea about interface design that toggles back and forth been visual-based browsing and text. Those are exactly the kinds of flexible tools that could be put to use across many different libraries for many different patrons.

The kerfuffle over the rudeness of making too many assumptions (on both sides) has been interesting but also quite startling in terms of seeing such a lot of buried hostility surfacing. And how.

Stalk people in the stacks, on the couches, in the common rooms. Where it makes sense, approach them, introduce yourself, and say “I’m doing some research on how people use the library (or resource X). Would it be OK if I just sat here and watched you work for a little while, and occasionally asked you questions?”

The data you get from this kind of research will probably be richer and more useful than a gazillion surveys.

That is, to date, the most useful reading I’ve seen of that particular commonplace. Congratulations.