26 LRTS 64, no. 1 Notes on Operations Holistic Collection Development and the Smithsonian Libraries Salma Abumeeiz and Daria Wingreen-Mason As part of a larger collections analysis study, this project outlines why a particu- lar, underserved museum unit at the Smithsonian Institution is underutilizing the Smithsonian Libraries’ facilities and resources, and how the library can better support this unit’s unique research needs. Using a holistic methodology that weds quantitative and qualitative approaches, this study highlights the unit’s distinct research profile that includes the various logistical, emotional, and collection- related barriers that impede their usage of the Libraries. Findings from this study signal the utility of a holistic, user-centric methodology to gather pertinent data and facilitate ongoing, interpersonal dialogues between the Smithsonian Libraries and its diverse internal users. As part of a larger collection development study being undertaken by the Smithsonian Libraries (SIL), this project seeks to demonstrate how a holistic collection development methodology can promote stronger, inter-disci- plinary collections while increasing library usage among smaller, “underserved” Smithsonian units. The project proposes alternatives to relying exclusively on quantitative strategies such as checklists or circulation statistics by employing interpersonal approaches that emphasize local research needs.1 Semi-structured research interviews with Smithsonian curators, researchers, and directors at a distinct research and education unit were undertaken, along with subject analy- ses of un-accessioned materials, from which the necessity of micro-level collec- tions assessment was concluded. A holistic methodology, the sum of quantitative and qualitative tools used to develop and assess collections, had the potential to uncover multifaceted findings formerly undetected by singular, data-driven assessment strategies. Historical and contemporary reliance on systemic, data-driven tools among collecting institutions is partly the result of the complex processes of collections assessment. While quantitative findings, such as usage statistics, present a seem- ingly direct and efficient way for research libraries to justify their collections amid ever-shifting technologies and budget constraints, and formal evaluation strategies help circumvent the labor-intensive process of reviewing collections using an item-by-item approach (referred to as the Conspectus method), exclu- sively quantitative systematic approaches fail due to their one-dimensionality when evaluating collecting institutions such as museum library networks.2 With- out discrediting the utility of quantitative tools, this study demonstrates that Salma Abumeeiz (sabumeeiz@gmail .com) is an auxiliary librarian at relying on them solely overlooks what exists at a micro-level, such as the quality the Richmond Public Library and of a collection’s holdings, or weaknesses therein.3 On their own, circulation sta- the BC Electronic Library Network. tistics and checklists are ill equipped to assess collection omissions as they tend Daria Wingreen-Mason (WingreenD@ si.edu) is a branch librarian at Smithso- to focus on the number and use of items that encourage uniformity and overlook nian Libraries. inter-unit distinctions. Manuscript submitted December 28, Macro-level collections assessment challenges are exacerbated when applied 2018; returned to authors for revision to an institutional behemoth like SIL. With twenty-one specialized branches, July 2, 2019; revised manuscript submit- ted September 2, 2019; accepted for each nested within the disciplines of History & Culture, Art & Design, Natural publication September 26, 2019. & Physical Sciences, or Special Collections, SIL’s more than two million items January 2020 NOTES: Holistic Collection Development and the Smithsonian Libraries 27 represent a multitude of disciplines and subjects. SIL’s parts: quantitative assessment—including, but not limited numerous programs and services include: online research to, evaluating circulation statistics and administering struc- tools; K-12 educational outreach; an array of digital collec- tured surveys; and qualitative assessment—including semi- tions; online and physical library exhibitions; interlibrary structured interviews and participant observation. The loan (ILL); and the Smithsonian Research Online (SRO), authors argue that the application of a holistic methodology an aggregate of publication data of works created by Smith- accomplishes the following: it situates qualitative data by sonian staff and affiliates. Across the Smithsonian, each providing a broader overview of the unique institutional physical museum has a dedicated library branch to serve its context in which they exist; it expands on findings outlined research and curatorial needs. However, some Smithson- by quantitative assessment data, which does not account ian units do not fit neatly into this corresponding museum/ for subject omissions; and, finally, it personifies the library, library pairing. While SIL provides some support to these providing an in-person interface that allows library staff units, they do not have the luxury of a dedicated library to engage directly with collection users, which, in turn, space. For units that do not belong to this museum/library enables library staff to better understand and accommodate pairing, quantitative strategies fall short because their users’ research interests. research profiles are complicated by their lack of proximity CFCH was deemed an optimal organization to apply to a staffed physical library. a holistic collections methodology for several reasons. Like One SIL branch that is uncharacteristically multi- SLRA, it is also a cross-disciplinary organization. It produc- disciplinary is the Smithsonian Libraries Research Annex es and manages the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, Smith- (SLRA), out of which this study’s research team is based. sonian Folkways Recordings, and Ralph Rinzler Folklife SLRA is not a branch dedicated to one museum, but is Archives and Collections, and their respective exhibitions, instead dedicated to all. As SIL’s most subject-diverse unit, documentaries, symposia, publications, and educational it houses materials from each of the Smithsonian’s branch materials related to cultural heritage and sustainability. libraries. The Annex, located off-site in Landover, Mary- Further, CFCH is considered a small unit (it employs eighty land, housed over 35,000 monographs and 250,000 peri- members) but still provides an opportunity for several inter- odical holdings when this project was conducted. Originally departmental assessment interactions. Finally, CFCH, like established as an off-site storage facility for legacy materials, SLRA, does not have a typical Smithsonian museum-to- SLRA’s holdings are comprised of materials across all areas library relationship, as it has neither its own SIL branch of study at the Smithsonian: history and culture, applied nor its own physical museum space to serve its research science and technology, natural and physical sciences, and and collection needs. By conducting an analysis of ongoing art. Materials housed there have been culled for fifty years discussions between SLRA and CFCH, this project pro- from the many research-specific museum-branch libraries. motes cooperative collection assessment strategies. It also More recently, due to overcrowded shelf spaces and loss of signals the importance of iterative, sophisticated dialogs physical space due to renovations across the Smithsonian with underserved stakeholders, and illustrates the benefits network, SLRA’s purpose has expanded to include actively of holistic, personified collections assessment (a holistic used collections. As such, SLRA is an inherently cross- methodology) for identifying gaps and areas for growth in disciplinary collection and operates as a library branch, an SIL’s collections, specifically at SLRA. institutional legacy collection, and off-site storage. This project found that CFCH is a diverse organiza- This study examines the benefits of a holistic collection tion in both its staff and research profile. Driven overall development methodology between SLRA, a multi-disci- by the goal of cultural sustainability, its curatorial output is plinary off-site library branch, and the Smithsonian Center the sum of a variety of interrelated fields, such as language for Folklife and Cultural Heritage (CFCH), a research revitalization, ethnomusicology, and folk history. A founda- unit without a dedicated, physical Smithsonian Librar- tional component to CFCH’s research output is that their ies branch. It seeks to demonstrate the efficacy of holistic research goes beyond cultural “preservation,” and moves methodology to bring inclusiveness and representation to “more dynamic and ecological models of sustainability” among disenfranchised library users within a large network whose findings “support individuals, communities, scholars, of research disciplines. The study’s findings promote the policymakers, and other stakeholders around the globe in adaptation of holistic principles by similarly marginalized their efforts to shape cultural futures on their own terms.”5 units in establishing collections that represent the cross- CFCH staff thus require materials—both print and elec- disciplinary interests of their users. tronic—to support their work in these areas. Nearly all staff For the purpose of this discussion, a “holistic method- members consulted for this project noted that SIL collec- ology” refers to a process that “enable[s] a comprehensive tions are lacking in cultural sustainability materials, and that approach to organizing the library,” whereby various per- their existing research affiliations with external institutions spectives are accommodated.4 It is the sum of two composite preclude their engagement with the Libraries. Further, this 28 Abumeeiz and Wingreen-Mason LRTS 64, no. 1 study uncovered an expanding group of uncataloged materi- gradually increased in popularity, particularly in academic als housed within the CFCH offices, gifted by their various institutions. This increase is reflected in recent collections partners and affiliates. Upon assessment, these uncataloged literature, wherein special attention is given to multi-tool materials were deemed essential to the history and research assessment approaches. These studies assert that a holistic output of the organization. Further, the materials begin to collection management approach is an effective means of fill many of the subject gaps in SIL’s collections, and serve weeding and building collections. Despite their context as a foundation for further subject expansion. These find- in academic institutions, considerable overlap in this body ings were uncovered using a holistic methodology. of literature exists with museum libraries, namely in the goals, considerations, and results of collections assessment projects. In particular, the process of acquiring, selecting, Literature Review storing, and refining collections is fundamentally the same between these two collecting bodies.9 As such, this project Compared to the larger body of collections assessment lit- addresses evidence gathered from holistic assessment proj- erature, less inquiry has been applied to museum libraries. ects conducted within select academic institutions. This discrepancy may be a result of their complex structure. As part of its commitment to flexible collection devel- A 1972 collections development study conducted by Smith- opments, the James Madison University (JMU) Libraries sonian visiting researcher Elaine Sloan implies that because implement “collection practices that encompass the variety museums are multi-disciplinary organizations whose col- of forms that constitute today’s scholarly record.”10 This lections are shaped by their individual units, assessment practice is detailed in a 2015 study by Duncan and O’Gara approaches for museum libraries are more complicated who argue that engaging in “collaborative selection” across than assessments geared towards single institutional enti- library departments allows the libraries to better meet the ties. Sloan evaluated how curators at the National Museum needs of increasingly interdisciplinary fields and embody of Natural History and the former National Museum of shifting curricular needs.11 By comparing data-driven tools History and Technology (now the National Museum of to qualitative findings, JMU engages in flexible collections American History) interact with the Libraries’ collections. assessment that allows the libraries to better serve JMU’s Specifically, Sloan outlined user perceptions of the Librar- goals.12 Such qualitative approaches include, “a literature ies and how curators assessed SIL collections in relation to review, internal and external conversations, several col- their specific research needs.6 lections pilot projects, and a variety of other investigative Using multiple approaches, including structured obser- mechanisms.”13 Duncan and O’Gara argue that this com- vations of library operations, administering a self-comple- bined, holistic strategy can help libraries meet the expand- tion questionnaire to curators, and conducting interviews ing range of library users. The approach is flexible, agile, with librarians, Sloan provided a holistic set of findings that and can be adapted to meet the goals of rapidly changing illustrate how opinions of and engagement with the Librar- learning environments. ies can vary among its users. For instance, at the time of the Another example of an academic collections project study, most curators at Natural History used SIL collections that incorporated a holistic approach is Kelly’s 2014 study for their research and relied almost exclusively on their on the strength of George Mason University’s library collec- corresponding museum branch. Conversely, those at His- tions in relation to researcher needs. Kelly emphasizes the tory and Technology consulted more branches outside their necessity of applying holistic assessment strategies in uncov- own, and primarily relied on personal collections and exter- ering comprehensive usage patterns. Within the study, nal institutions.7 This discrepancy, Sloan concluded, reflects Kelly applied a “cumulative or multidimensional approach,” the diverging nature of each research discipline. Natural whereby collections are qualitatively divided based on the History curators who rely exclusively on their branch library subjects represented by its items.14 The identified subjects reflect the centralization of natural science research, which are then systematically assessed using quantitative tools often does not require them to consult outside disciplines. such as peer comparisons, list-checking, and circulation However, for fields like history, research is inherently cross- statistics. Cumulative findings generated from this multi- disciplinary, and necessitates attention to multiple fields.8 It tool analysis uncover usage patterns within a particular col- is thus necessary to recognize the heterogeneity of research lection. Kelly stressed that this cumulative qualitative and needs among Smithsonian units. Furthermore, this study is quantitative approach can be applied to modify collections indicative of the effectiveness of mixed-method collections that better reflect current demands and engagement.15 assessment strategies in uncovering rich, multi-disciplinary Similarly, Zainab and Maidaino proposed a “house perspectives. model” in their 2012 collections study, whereby an instru- Since the publication of Sloan’s pre-integrated library ment was constructed to assess collection security at several system study, holistic collection development strategies have university libraries.16 The instrument was comprised of five January 2020 NOTES: Holistic Collection Development and the Smithsonian Libraries 29 measures, including “collection security governance; opera- subjects that are underutilized and infrequently used while tions and processes; people issues; physical and technical also highlighting those which are used in particular. Data aspects of collection security and the security culture in collected from these strategies indicate areas for growth the libraries.”17 Results from this test indicate that “the or reduction within a collection that reflect its usage pat- assessment instrument is reliable and can be used to assess terns.28 Hibner and Kelly reiterate this notion in Making the collection security management in libraries in a more a Collection Count, wherein they stress the importance of holistic approach.”18 Zainab and Maidabino’s results for applying holistic methodologies in uncovering a collection’s security assessment can be correspondingly mapped to the utilization rates. Cross-checking circulation statistics along governance, process, users, culture, and space of collection with information gathered from research interviews can assessment in research libraries. help pinpoint user attitudes towards a particular collection, Following the merging of two library departments at and indicate the extent to which a collection relates, or not, Loyola Marymount University into the Acquisitions and to a library’s overall vision.29 Collection Development Department, the libraries began Overall, the growing body of holistic assessment lit- to rethink existing workflows.19 As departmental conver- erature advocates for in-depth, comprehensive assessment sations began to examine such workflows, the acquisition strategies, particularly in the context of multi-disciplinary of e-books emerged as a crucial concern. By creating and institutions such as museums. The user perceptions and employing a multi-tier flowchart diagram that visualized unit distinctions indicated by Sloan; the flexible and col- the e-book acquisition process, the library sought to stan- laborative approaches endorsed by Duncan and O’Gara; the dardize the assessment of e-books. As noted by Lewis and cumulative qualitative/quantitative approaches emphasized Kennedy in their 2019 study, by employing this flowchart by Kelly; Zaiab and Maidabino’s stress on the analysis of visualization the e-book acquisition process was presented governance, work culture, and usage patterns; Lewis and from a holistic perspective.20 Staff who created the flow- Kennedy’s recommendation to be mindful of the contribu- chart did so by reviewing pertinent literature, engaging in tions of individual units within a larger network; Griffin, process mapping, and “highlighting the changes currently Lewis, and Greenberg’s reminder that comprehensive, inte- taking place in the landscape of e-acquisitions.”21 In so grated, flexibility is useful when analyzing unit’s research doing, they compartmentalized complex acquisitions pro- treads; and Wiemers, Baldwin, Kautz, Albrecht, and Lom- cesses into more manageable portions. Staff also provided ker’s recommendation to cross-check quantitative data with a broader overview of how their department “contribute to qualitative, are all particularly relevant to holistic museum the whole of the acquisitions process” and the institution at library collection assessment. large.22 Griffin, Lewis, and Greenberg argue that the need to “identify a comprehensive, integrated assessment strategy Method to better focus diminished resources” is necessary in light of shrinking library budgets and reduced staffing, particu- This study consisted of two phases. The first (henceforth larly within the context of special collections repositories.23 referred to as Phase 1) began during a six-week internship Their 2013 study examined the University of South Florida appointment at SLRA in April and May 2017. During this (USF) Tampa Library, wherein Special & Digital Collec- initial stage, the intern, in collaboration with SLRA’s branch tions developed a holistic, systematic, assessment strategy librarian, applied a holistic collection development method- “to improve a range of services in the Department.”24 By ology by combining quantitative and qualitative assessment applying several quantitative and qualitative assessment tools to determine how SLRA, and SIL in general, could tools, including Desk Tracker statistics and Reading Room better support CFCH’s research needs. The research team Patron Surveys, they argued that library staff uncovered determined that CFCH was underutilizing SIL services findings to propose user-centric modifications, including based on a statistical analyses of CFCH borrowing and ILL, shifting reading room hours to meet patron needs, and con- and CFCH’s staff participation in Smithsonian Research tinuing targeted outreach efforts.25 Such findings signal the Online (SRO).30 Lack of use was determined based on potential for holistic assessment to uncover logistical data the frequency and quantity of staff engagement with SIL that hinder user engagement with library resources. proportionate to the Center’s total staff size. For instance, A similar process is echoed by Wiemers et al. who ILL usage was so sparse that data had to be recalled over argue for multi-tool assessment strategies that support an eight-year period (2010 to 2018) to uncover substantive subject-by-subject analyses.26 They refer to this assessment findings. During that time period, about sixteen permanent as the “ultimate test of the quality of a library collection” CFCH staff members of approximately eighty full-time that can detect the extent and mode of its use.27 They staff used the service. To situate this discrepancy, the intern contend that comprehensive methodologies can signal conducted semi-structured interviews with CFCH staff. 30 Abumeeiz and Wingreen-Mason LRTS 64, no. 1 These interviews sought to determine each interviewee’s research needs? Were there other factors that determined unique research needs, how SIL staff and services meet their engagement with SIL? Semi-structured, in-person, those needs, and where SIL services and collections could on-site interviews were selected to apply this interpersonal, be modified to better support them. human approach to data collection. As Bryman notes, semi- Conducted during a second internship appointment at structured interviews allow researchers to fully explore SLRA during April through June 2018, the second iteration the contours of what they need to know and allow for new (Phase 2) amplified the methodologies used within Phase 1 “concepts and theories … [to] emerge out of that data.”32 with additional quantitative and qualitative strategies. The They encourage conversations to flow freely, thereby allow- data collection tool used in Phase 2 was a subject and for- ing the interviewees to interject their own ideas otherwise mat analysis of the many on-site research materials, includ- unprovoked by the question list. This conduciveness to flex- ing a reference collection, songbooks, zines, music guides, ibility reinforces the holistic framework of this project by LP covers, pamphlets, festival programs, and monographs. emphasizing individuals’ perspectives by encouraging them Most of the materials identified were uncataloged and to explore their own expert knowledge.33 lacked finding aids.31 The analyses revealed a broad range Prior to scheduling research interviews with CFCH of research disciplines beyond the findings collected from staff, interviewees were trained on SIL services and col- the Phase 1 interviews, and contributed to a more robust lections, with a focus on research support tools to ensure understanding of the Center’s research profile. Further interviewees were familiar with SIL research presence strategies used during the second iteration included an prior to their scheduled interview. This training, which was analysis of CFCH’s ILL statistics and participant obser- delivered as a general orientation, covered the SIL online vations of CFCH facilities and colleagues. Together, the catalog, SRO, and ILL. The research team sought to ensure tools used in Phase 2 demonstrated the dynamic range of that participants had taken the time to reflect on SIL and its research backgrounds, output, and interests that comprise role in relation to their work at CFCH. Cross-departmental the Center. Phase 2 findings further iterated the benefits staff from the Ralph Rinzler Archives, Folkways Record- of integrating holistic strategies into collections assessment. ings, and Smithsonian Folklife Festival were contacted by email during the latter half of the intern’s six-week intern- Phase 1: The Survey ship appointment. In total, the intern interviewed five staff members from the Archives, five from Folkways, and CFCH was first approached by SIL as part of the Libraries’ two Festival staff.34 Individual and group interviews with ongoing outreach to smaller Smithsonian units. “Smaller CFCH archivists, curators, directors, and researchers were units” within the Smithsonian refers to any unit that employs scheduled. Group interviews did not exceed more than four less than one hundred staff members and/or lacks a desig- interviewees at a time. nated museum space. Units that fall within this category in The twenty-one-question survey used in Phase 1, titled addition to CFCH include the Smithsonian Latino Center “SIL Outreach Survey (April-May 2017)” (see Appendix A), and the Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center. Based was developed specifically for the Center for Folklife and in Capital Gallery, an office building located south of the Cultural Heritage. It sought to address five key areas: back- National Mall, these organizations are physically separated ground information on the organization, including research from the museum operations. Consequently, staff who are interests and project output; research needs of staff, based in Capital Gallery are often excluded from the insti- including engagement with print and digital materials and tution’s oversight, which tends to focus on museum-based institutional affiliations outside the Smithsonian; research units, such as the National Museum of Natural History or materials consulted onsite; engagement with SIL services, the National Air and Space Museum. In Phase 1, quantita- including the Research Tools page; use of external research tive findings on CFCH’s relationship with the Libraries services; and recommendations for SIL, including how reinforced the existence of this chasm. It was discovered the Libraries could help support CFCH’s strategic plan. that CFCH’s ILL usage was so infrequent that the research The research questions were adapted, in part, from the team was forced to recall data over an eight-year period to Smithsonian Libraries Research Tool Survey (2017) devel- uncover usage patterns. This time-period indicated that oped for the Smithsonian Libraries Research Tools and CFCH’s engagement with the Libraries was tepid at best. Subject Guides Feedback Project (appendix B). Because Indeed, this quantitative data was partly what led the the Natural and Physical Sciences Feedback Project sought research team to CFCH. What the statistics omitted were to uncover data including usage patterns, research needs, the local factors that contributed to this usage discrepancy. interviewee profiles, and areas for improvement many of Several research questions emerged from this gap: Were the questions used in their survey were adapted to the SIL CFCH staff familiar with SIL collections and services? Outreach Survey used for these CFCH findings. To what extent did the Libraries’ collections support their The Project, undertaken in early 2017, was created by January 2020 NOTES: Holistic Collection Development and the Smithsonian Libraries 31 the Head of the Natural and Physical Sciences Libraries to into the intent and capacity at which materials were being determine interviewee status (i.e., staff, fellow, intern, etc.); used and by whom. For instance, while the majority of frequency of engagement with the SIL’s Research Tools CFCH staff who utilize ILL are permanent staff, a sig- page; findability of the Research Tools page; and com- nificant portion (approximately one-third) of engagement ments, ideas, and suggestions for the Research Page. The came from temporary staff, including interns, fellows, and adapted SIL Outreach Survey given to CFCH diverged contractors. from the Natural and Physical Sciences Feedback Project Phase 2 continued with an in-depth subject analysis of in its exclusion of multiple-choice questions. Following CFCH’s onsite print, project output, and designated collec- Bryman’s assertion that open questions are conducive to tion spaces. Doing so indicated areas for growth and gap- unique perspectives, whereby “respondents can answer in filling in SIL’s history and culture collections, specifically their own terms,” the research team sought to extend the in relation to SLRA. The assessment revealed thousands of research interviews into conversations by not imposing items including songbooks, folklore dictionaries, encyclope- response choices.35 Unlike the Feedback Project, which dias, songbooks, art books, music guides, zines, LP covers, was delivered in the form of structured interviews and pamphlets, and festival programs. After meeting with SIL’s contained five multiple-choice questions, the SIL Outreach Head of Collections, it was decided that the monograph Survey was delivered as a semi-structured research inter- collection would be analyzed first. A subject analysis of view, and included open-ended questions. The modified CFCH’s in-house research collection was deemed an opti- questionnaire was crafted so that SLRA could obtain an mal collection strategy because it allowed subjects “to be in-depth understanding of CFCH and its purpose, and its viewed from many angles, while gradually developing a pic- staff members and their research needs. Byron’s approach ture of the broader collection as a whole.”36 To achieve this, allowed the research team to better understand the types the identified subject areas represented within CFCH’s of services and materials needed by the organization, and monograph collection were compared to SIL’s collections. was conducive to rich, qualitative findings. Indeed, the The intern conducted an environmental scan of the collec- interviewees’ cumulative, respective responses to the quali- tion in situ, and engaged CFCH staff on the history and tative questions provided a research profile of CFCH that usage of the on-site materials. These conversations sought encompassed a multiplicity of unique interests, disciplines, to confirm the immediate research value of the collection and expertise represented among the staff. on both micro- and macro-levels, and to solicit staff input on the enduring value of the CFCH materials as a legacy Phase 2: Analysis collection. For the published monograph collection, the branch Prior to the onset of Phase 2 collection analysis, SLRA’s librarian and CFCH archivists discerned three classifica- branch librarian conducted a preliminary environmental tions and divided them accordingly. The first classification scan of CFCH to evaluate staff in relation to their collec- consisted of published works that were deemed either tions, additionally noting security, storage, and environmen- uniquely representative of CFCH’s research history, scarce tal conditions as Zainab and Maidabino’s research implied. or valuable publications no longer in print, and canons in Information gathered would inform Phase 2 analysis. Phase the field of folklore and cultural studies. Examples of titles 2 officially began with a quantitative assessment of CFCH’s from these aforementioned categories include Sixty Patri- external ILL usage. Analyzing subject representation and otic Songs of All Nations, Good Old Songs, Kiwi Youth user status through external ILL requests was essential Songs- 1951 Student Labour and Progressive Youth League to understanding the research and curatorial interests of Songbook, and Songs Around the Table Z’Mirot. These CFCH established in Phase 1. Based on ILL usage from a materials would be cataloged as non-circulating and would five-year period (2013 to 2018), subject areas that were rep- remain onsite with restricted use. The second grouping resented included folk art (including architecture, textiles, consisted of general collections materials currently used in and paintings), teaching grammars, cultural sustainability in the field. The last classification consisted of tertiary, ephem- the context of museum studies, and ethnomusicology. The eral, or non-essential publications that could be offered as breakdown of staff statuses indicated in the ILL requests gifts or sold. sample were as follows: 33 percent were temporary staff, including fellows, interns, and a contractor; the remain- Findings: Phase 1 ing staff were permanent. The research team compared recurring subject areas represented within CFCH’s ILL Semi-structured interviews were conducted with CFCH to SIL’s collections to illuminate subject gaps. The findings cultural sustainability experts (three participants), research- also indicated that subject representation could be further ers (four participants), archivists (four participants), and amplified by staff status. Analyzing status provided insight directors (two participants) across three research divisions 32 Abumeeiz and Wingreen-Mason LRTS 64, no. 1 within The Center: Smithsonian Folkways Recordings, 1967 and 1969 respectively. CFCH had operated in relative the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, and the Ralph Rinzler autonomy from their inception, while SIL concentrated its Folklife Archives and Collections. Cumulatively, the inter- efforts serving the museums proper, and then a decade later views revealed that CFCH’s research interests are as to concentrate their efforts on an all-consuming retrospec- diverse as the professional and educational backgrounds of tive conversion. SIL never properly situated itself to serve its staff and various units. Because of their vast research programmatic units such as CFCH. Ultimately, Phase 1 scope, CFCH research staff argue that they require specific revealed that SIL had research services that could benefit research materials directly related to their areas of exper- CFCH, and CFCH had research collections documenting tise from a wide range of disciplines. They noted that they an important facet of Smithsonian research history, making often encounter instances in which SIL collections both it clear that a Phase 2 was needed. met and failed their research needs. Project deliberation and output among CFCH units is Findings: Phase 2 contingent on several factors. In addition to logistical con- straints related to budget, much of their work is “opportu- The ILL statistics pulled for CFCH were not substantial nistic.” For example, while the annual Smithsonian Folklife enough to glean any definite findings. However, the sta- Festival features a predetermined theme, many of the Festi- tistics were indicative of patterns that could be verified val’s featured programs are a result of individuals or groups through interviews. The statistics indicated themes (see approaching CFCH. Consequently, Festival programming table 1) related to language revitalization and education, is determined in the months preceding the Festival, and ethnography, and teaching grammars. These topics, neces- requires significant research preparation prior to the annual sitating external ILL loans, echoed those areas underrep- event. For other units, such as Folkways Recordings, there resented in SIL’s collection noted by Phase 1 interviewees. is also an element of contingency in their output due to Table 1 also reveals a significant research presence of the constantly changing music industry. As noted by the temporary staff, including CFCH interns, fellows, and con- Folkways director, the record label must keep up to date tractors, with temporary staff representing approximately with the state of current music to remain relevant and, in 33 percent of the Center’s total loans during the applied so doing, maintain a sustainable platform for their featured timeframe. folk artists. It is no surprise that the permanent staff interviewed Nearly all CFCH staff interviewed during Phase 1 for this study maintain research affiliations with external identified gaps in SIL’s print and digital collections. Lin- library systems, such as the Library of Congress, and the guists and cultural sustainability researchers identified academic institutions and international research organiza- gaps related to language education, endangered language tions to which they belonged to prior to being employed at communities, bilingual education materials, and sociolin- CFCH. Many CFCH staff members noted that they never guistics. Linguists specifically noted two integral resources ceased using these external systems, and thus never transi- in the teaching grammars of American Indian languages tioned to SIL. This lack of engagement, compounded with were excluded from SIL’s collections at the time of their searching limitations and quirks of the Horizon integrated interviews: International Journal of the Sociology of Lan- library system, accounted for the limited statistical data guages and Bilingualism and Education. Other CFCH available on CFCH’s SIL usage. staff, including those from Folkways, noted that journals Environmental scans of CFCH’s 1,500 monographs in such as Ethnomusicology, Yearbook for Traditional Music, the CFCH onsite research collection revealed that roughly and Oxford Handbooks Online were also omitted from two-thirds of the holdings were unique to SIL’s collections. SIL’s collections at the time that Phase 1 was conducted. Materials housed on site at CFCH include topics that span This further incentivized CFCH members to consult exter- a breadth of genres, time periods, languages, geographic nal research institutions or to purchase their own resources. regions, and formats. This includes folklore dictionaries, Interviewers unanimously expressed interest in SIL acquir- encyclopedias, songbooks, art books, zines, and programs ing pertinent titles, both print and electronic, to CFCH’s from previous Folklife Festivals. Additionally, the Center research needs. accumulates an expanding collection of print materials Perhaps the most important outcome of the interviews provided by other affiliate persons or organizations who was that SIL and CFCH needed each other. In an institu- assist in festival planning. These materials reflect the tion as old as the Smithsonian, relatively newer units like festival’s given themes and are used as resources to bring CFCH got lost amid an institution that was expanding the theme to fruition. After a festival has concluded, these beyond its more formal museum mission with more pro- accumulated materials often remain at the Center as gifts. grammatic units. The birth of CFCH and the centralization Thus, the Center’s body of uncataloged materials grows on of SIL happened within less than two years of each other, in a cyclical basis and serves as a testament to the festival’s January 2020 NOTES: Holistic Collection Development and the Smithsonian Libraries 33 Table 1. Breakdown of Interlibrary Loan Statistics: Titles Borrowed from CFCH Staff over a Five-Year Period and the Position of Those Who Used ILL Status Loan Title Contractor Sauer’s herbal cures : America’s first book of botanic healing, 1762-1778 // translated and edited by William Woys Weaver. Smithsonian Staff Tibetan Paintings: A Study of Tibetan Thankas, Eleventh to Nineteenth Centuries Smithsonian Staff Who’s asking? : Native science, Western science, and science education // Douglas L. Medin and Megan Bang. Smithsonian Staff Ethnography and Language Policy Smithsonian Staff Living languages and new approaches to language revitalisation research / Smithsonian Staff Family Language Policy: Maintaining an Endangered Language in the Home Intern Museums and communities : curators, collections and collaboration // edited by Viv Golding and Wayne Modest. Intern Museums in the Digital Age : Changing Meanings of Place, Community, and Culture // Susana Smith Bautista. Smithsonian Staff The White House chandeliers : my experiences while working for seven U.S. presidents // Stewart “Calvin” Stevens Smithsonian Staff Archival Science Smithsonian Staff Dancing from past to present : nation, culture, identities Intern The participatory museum / Smithsonian Staff Ethnomusicology in East Africa: Perspectives from Uganda and Beyond Smithsonian Staff Watewayéstanih : A Cayuga teaching grammar // Marianne Mithun and Reginald Henry. Smithsonian Staff On the repatriation of recorded sound from ethnomusicological archives : a survey of some of the issues pertaining to people’s access to documentation of their musical heritage / Smithsonian Staff Safundi : the journal of South African and American studies. Smithsonian Staff Psychoanalysis, culture & society Smithsonian Staff Designs of Bhutan // David K. Barker. Fellow Making: anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture Fellow The subversive stitch : embroidery and the making of the feminine Fellow Female and male in West Africa changing themes. zines, LP covers, pamphlets, and festival programs. The These materials are largely centralized in a secured ephemeral materials tend to feature novelty subject areas access reading room in the Center’s Ralph Rinzler Folklife or events, and are typically less than fifty pages in length. Archives and Collections, though many more materials exist Their conditions range from intact to very poor condition. outside of this space in other staff offices. Currently, there Staff members consulted during Phase 2 noted the ambi- is a culture of convenience surrounding these materials as guity of both Asch’s songbooks and ephemeral materials, staff can easily access, use, and move the materials between which could belong in either a special collection or vertical offices and departments. There is no formal method of file. tracking their whereabouts or duration of use. Discussions When Phase 2 was conducted, CFCH Archives staff from both Phases 1 and 2 suggested that the pattern of use divided their uncataloged print materials into three cat- surrounding the materials is deep, but not wide; few staff egories: those integral to CFCH’s current research output, members engage with the items regularly, while those who those that are important to the disciplines represented but do use them do so extensively. no longer reflect CFCH’s ongoing curatorial needs, and Due to the uncataloged materials’ eclectic nature, those that could be given away via gifts and exchange or many of the works present challenges when attempting to sold. Of the works in the former category, CFCH staff indi- determine the kind of collection they could constitute. Two cate a strong desire for the materials to remain on site as a examples are the Center’s body of songbooks, and various non-circulating collection. Converting these materials to a ephemeral materials. The songbooks are formerly part non-circulating collection required them to be moved to a of Moses “Moe” Asch’s personal collection and currently secure, monitored space. For works not deemed essential housed in the Archives, barcoded, and were produced to the Center’s current mission or historically significant, between 1875 and 1967. The other items that complicate CFCH staff are interested in creating an off-site legacy collection categorization are the Center’s music guides, collection housed with SLRA’s cross-disciplinary active 34 Abumeeiz and Wingreen-Mason LRTS 64, no. 1 collections. This body of potential legacy materials is large organization. It would also serve to bridge collection gaps (at the time of the study the Center filled thirty boxes of related to cultural sustainability, specifically materials on items for legacy consideration) and interdisciplinary in anthropology, folklore, ethnomusicology, and endangered scope, featuring subjects that cover both global and local language revitalization. (i.e., United States) folk topics. Since the conclusion of The mutual commitment between the research team Phase 2, the more than 1,500 volumes monographs housed and CFCH to catalog the organization’s materials uncov- on site at CFCH were shipped to SLRA for further con- ered yet another finding. In analyzing the materials, the sideration and processing. Of those, approximately 1,350 research team discovered that many of the unaccessioned will be accessioned into SIL as the Center for Folklife and items are eclectic, ephemeral, or rare, which complicated Cultural Heritage Research Collection. The non-circulating the item assessment process. These materials may consti- volumes to be re-housed at CFCH after cataloging include tute several potential subcollections, including vertical files roughly 450 new titles, and 280 added titles. Circulating or restricted use collections, in addition to the standard volumes to be housed on SLRA include 400 new titles, and print collections. CFCH will require assistance from SIL 220 added titles. Cataloging this collection is considered to disambiguate the formats and types of collections consti- Phase 3 of this project and is not discussed in this paper. tuted by the uncataloged items. Making clear distinctions between these materials was one of the recommendations inspired by this finding. Discussion In response to the possibility of establishing a non- circulating collection for many of the uncataloged items, As the interviews revealed, CFCH’s curatorial output is questions were raised about the management of these items. externally collaborative, requiring outside consultation Specifically, the research team and interviewees speculated with individuals, groups, and institutions. This research on where the non-circulating collection would be housed, practice is in many ways unique to CFCH and explains one how it would be supervised, and how often it would be facet of CFCH’s lack of engagement with SIL’s research made available for use. At the end of Phase 2, the materi- tools and collections. Consequently, SIL must consider als were primarily located in the Archives reading room, how to create incentives to enable CFCH staff to consult though others are scattered among bookshelves and storage SIL services. While much of the work that CFCH conducts units throughout the remaining CFCH offices.37 The col- involves field research, SIL, especially SLRA, can position lection would also require oversight by a SIL staff member itself as a supplementary resource, providing the pertinent who would be responsible for facilitating the organization materials that support this fieldwork. By emphasizing this and use of these items. Depending on the frequency of the supplementary relationship, SIL can encourage CFCH collection’s availability (at this time, it is uncertain if the staff to use its resources, and rely on SLRA staff support, items will be accessible daily or at set times throughout the rather than external rresources from affiliate research week), it may require a part- or full-time SIL staff member institutions. to oversee the collection’s management. These findings, Another variable that the research team had not con- and the considerations emerging therein, will help SIL and sidered was the annual influx of research materials in the SLRA develop the collection’s forthcoming policy plan. months leading up to the Festival. This increase contrib- CFCH’s body of uncataloged materials has been utes to the Center’s growing body of on-site, uncataloged deemed by both the research team and CFCH staff as materials. Gifts from stakeholders serve as a representation integral to the Smithsonian’s research profile. This holds of the many individuals and organizations with which the true for both the on-site items and those sent to SLRA for Center engages. A subject analysis was conducted on these active use or legacy consideration. Consequently, materi- gifted items. This analysis consisted of the research team als belonging to either category are representative of their identifying through background research on the items or mandate and are thus relevant to their current curato- skimming their contents and recording the subjects rep- rial interests. The research team concluded that they must resented by the materials. Upon conducting this analysis, verify that materials in CFCH collections are not already in the research team realized that the materials represent the SIL system. Alternatively, if the items are found to be in an important, encompassing body of knowledge on con- the system, the Libraries must determine if duplicate items temporary cultural sustainability research. This discovery are essential enough to merit multiple holdings. affirmed the team’s commitment to oversee the materials’ While Phase 1 and Phase 2 did not overlap, the addition to SIL’s collections, making the items discoverable results of the former necessitated the latter. The semi- and available to those outside of the Center. The CFCH structured interviews conducted during Phase 1 revealed staff who were interviewed unanimously expressed a desire that CFCH is a subject-diverse, interdisciplinary organiza- that their materials be used by those external to their own tion, with curatorial and research needs that are equally January 2020 NOTES: Holistic Collection Development and the Smithsonian Libraries 35 vast. Furthermore, these initial interviews introduced the one-size-fits-all approach to collection assessment, particu- research team to the collection of uncataloged materi- larly within large research networks like the Smithsonian als that had lingered in the CFCH office. To assess these where the needs of units are distinct and evolving. The materials and determine how SIL in general, and SLRA process of applying a holistic methodology to research col- specifically, could better support CFCH’s curatorial output, lections not only added an interpersonal dynamic to SIL’s the research team determined that ongoing investigations outreach, but also it provided direct engagement with mar- were required. This recognition inspired Phase 2, wherein ginalized library users and collections. Uncovering CFCH’s the team sought to sort through the body of uncataloged research profile also afforded the Libraries the opportunity materials, determine how they relate to CFCH’s research to communicate the extent of their resources to ambivalent mission, and to continue dialogues with staff to determine or disenfranchised users. Conversely, study participants how the Libraries could better support their organization. provided valuable input to the SLRA research team about With the same attention to micro-level distinctions as SIL, indicating collection gaps and potential areas for Phase 1, Phase 2 both reaffirmed CFCH’s diverse research expansion. This dialogue illuminated topics and research profile, while also signaling the areas for growth in SIL’s needs overlooked by strictly quantitative strategies that did own collections. Indeed, CFCH’s cultural sustainability not, for instance, account for collection omissions and ser- materials will serve to enhance SIL’s existing collections vice deficits. In sum, a holistic methodology strengthened by filling gaps related to cultural heritage research and the relationship between the Libraries and CFCH, and sustainability. They also signal a need for ongoing growth. allowed the organizations to identify complementary inter- CFCH expressed hope that the inclusion of these materials ests and opportunities for future collaboration. will inspire the Libraries to build on their collections by The success of this study demonstrates the elastic- continuing to add, manage, and weed collections that sup- ity of the holistic methodology and how qualitative assess- port cultural sustainability research. The close of Phase 2 ment tools can be used in concert with quantitative tools also confirmed that the omission of cultural sustainability to support unique institutional profiles. Iterative holistic materials within SIL’s existing collections was, until then, approaches ensure that collections and services reflect cur- undetectable by one-dimensional assessment tools. rent research needs and trends, especially for units with a dynamic research profile. As Phase 1 and Phase 2 find- ings show, applying multiple indicator measures can reveal Conclusion the multifaceted perspectives of a research unit, and is an optimal strategy in determining the unique needs of library A holistic inquiry of Smithsonian Center for Folklife users in cross-disciplinary research environments such as and Cultural Heritage illustrated that there cannot be a museums. Notes and References 1. The term “underserved” refers to Smithsonian units that do Natural History and the National Museum of History and not have a dedicated library on-site with dedicated library Technology September 1970-June 1971,” Libraries, Smith- staff, and whose primary interface with the Libraries is sonian Institution, Washington (1971): 1–56, https://files through online services. .eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED059732.pdf. 2. Madeline Kelly, “Applying the Tiers of Assessment: A 7. Sloan, “Collection Development and Selection Decision- Holistic and Systematic Approach to Assessing Library Making,” 16. Collections,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 40, no. 6 8. Sloan, “Collection Development and Selection Decision- (2014): 585–91, 586. Making,” 17. 3. Kelly, “Applying the Tiers of Assessment,” 586. 9. Madeline Kelly, “Applying the Tiers of Assessment,” 585– 4. James P. Kusik and Mark A. Vargas, “Implementing a 91, 585. ‘Holistic’ Approach to Collection Development,” Library 10. Cheri Jeanette Duncan and Genya Morgan O’Gara, “Build- Leadership & Management 23, no. 4 (2009): 186–92, 186. ing Holistic and Agile Collection Development and Assess- 5. “Cultural Sustainability,” Center for Folklife and Cul- ment,” Performance Measurement & Metrics 16, no. 1 tural Heritage, https://folklife.si.edu/cultural-sustainability- (2015): 62–85, 63. research-group/smithsonian. 11. Duncan and O’Gara, “Building Holistic and Agile Collec- 6. Elaine Sloan, “Collection Development and Selection tion Development,” 65. Decision-making at the Smithsonian Institution Librar- 12. Duncan and O’Gara, “Building Holistic and Agile Collec- ies. A Survey of The Curators of The National Museum of tion Development,” 65. 36 Abumeeiz and Wingreen-Mason LRTS 64, no. 1 13. Duncan and O’Gara, “Building Holistic and Agile Collec- Theory 8, no. 1 (1984): 65–76, 65. tion Development,” 62. 27. Ibid., 72. 14. Madeline Kelly, “Applying the Tiers of Assessment,” 585– 28. Ibid. 91, 586. 29. Holly Hibner and Mary Kelly, Making a Collection Count: 15. Kelly, “Applying the Tiers of Assessment,” 587. A Holistic Approach to Library Collection Management 16. Abashe Atiku Maidabino and A. N. Zainab, “A Holistic (Witney, Oxford, UK: CP/Chandos Publishing, 2013), xv. Approach to Collection Security Implementation in Univer- 30. Smithsonian Research Online (SRO) is an expanding sity Libraries,” Library Collections, Acquisitions & Techni- “collection of published research from Smithsonian schol- cal Services 36, no. 3 (2012): 107–20, 107. ars. . . . As a discovery tool for Smithsonian Research, SRO 17. Maidabino and Zainab, “A Holistic Approach to Collection has two primary components: a bibliography of publication Security Implementation,” 107. citations and a repository of full online editions” (Smithson- 18. Maidabino and Zainab, “A Holistic Approach to Collection ian Research Online, Smithsonian Libraries, n.d.). Security Implementation,” 3. 31. Since this project began, SIL has collaborated with CFCH 19. Ron M. Lewis and Marie R. Kennedy, “The Big Picture: A to accession their ready-reference and legacy collection of Holistic View of E-book Acquisitions,” Library Resources published monographs. Approximately thirteen hundred & Technical Services 63, no. 2 (2019): 160–72, 171. volumes of the Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage 20. Lewis and Kennedy, “The Big Picture.” Research Collection will be findable in SIRIS, the Smith- 21. Lewis and Kennedy, “The Big Picture,” 171. sonian’s online research catalog in 2020. Catalog records 22. Lewis and Kennedy, “The Big Picture.” will trace the provenance of this collection to inform future 23. Melanie Griffin, Barbara Lewis, and Mark I. Greenberg, research and collection management decisions. “Data-Driven Decision Making: A Holistic Approach to 32. Alan Bryman, Social Research Methods (Oxford: Oxford Assessment in Special Collections Repositories,” Evidence University Press, 2016), 12. Based Library & Information Practice 8, no. 2 (2013): 33. Bryman, Social Research Methods, 492. 225–38, 225. 34. The call for participants had a high response rate. Of the 24. Griffin, Lewis, and Greenberg, “Data-Driven Decision fifteen research staff that were contacted, twelve respond- Making,” 235. ed, making the response rate 80 percent. 25. Griffin, Lewis, and Greenberg, “Data-Driven Decision 35. Bryman, Social Research Methods, 247. Making,” 229–30. 36. Kelly, “Applying the Tiers of Assessment,” 585–91, 589. 26. Eugene Wiemers et al., “Collection Evaluation: A Practical 37. In 2019, the print collections were removed to SLRA for Guide to the Literature,” Library Acquisitions: Practice & pre-processing before cataloging. Appendix A. SIL Outreach Survey (April–May 2017) Background Print Collections 1. What are the main research interests that define 8. Do you have research materials on hand in your CFCH and the work itproduces? offices? 2. How does CFCH decide on which projects (such as 9. How regularly is your current book and print collec- exhibits or workshops) it willpursue? tion used by staff for curatorialprojects? 3. When projects are decided upon, how do you typically 10. How do you currently house this book collection? conduct research and prepare for said projects? Do you ever encounter any issues in finding space to 4. How long have you worked for the Smithsonian? house this collection? Are they kept in a controlled environment? Research Needs 11. Would you be interested in the Smithsonian Libraries 5. Do you perceive print or digital access more valuable cataloguing your collection and housing it at one of its in terms of CFCH’s research needs? branches? Would you be interested in turning it into a 6. Are you currently affiliated with (or utilize the ser- legacy collection if the books are not currently in use? vices of) other research institutions? 7. When you prepare/research forthcoming exhibits or SIL Services other projects, does this research typically take place 12. Users of Smithsonian Libraries are able to recom- while you are physically onsite or offsite (i.e., not mend purchase of additional library materials (with- within a Smithsonianfacility)? in budget constraints). Were you aware of this? Is this something you would be interested in taking January 2020 NOTES: Holistic Collection Development and the Smithsonian Libraries 37 advantage of? the use of library services? If so, which format would 13. What kinds of materials, in terms of both content and you prefer this training to take place through (i.e., format, would you be interested in SIL adding for in-person, newsletters, emails,updated pdf manuals)? your purposes? 18. Did you come across any issues/concerns with the 14. Are you aware of/have you used SIL’s electronic Research Tools page (http://library.si.edu/research) resources that are available to all SI staff on their that hindered your experience on the site? desktop or from home via Citrix? 19. Would video tutorials built into the site that address 15. Do you feel that the Research Tools page meets, both general questions related to the Research Tools exceeds, or fails your research needs? Please explain page and helpful search tips be useful to you? why this is thecase. 20. Having now been exposed to some of the SIL library 16. Is there a particular aspect of the Research Tools page facilities and tools, how valuable do you find them? that you feel is successful in meeting your re- search- Do you plan on using them in the future? Is there needs? anything about CFCH that you feel the Libraries should know? Recommendations/Comments on SIL Services 21. How else can SIL help you fulfill your mission and 17. Would you be interested in receiving annual training in strategic plan? Appendix B. Smithsonian Libraries Research Tools Survey (2017) Smithsonian Libraries Research Tools / Subject Guides Feedback Project Use this form to record answers to the questions below 6. If Yes, how do they reach the Research Tools page? { Through library.si.edu 1. Name of SIL Staff Interviewer { Through their departmental page { Through Prism ________________________________________ { Other (please specify) 2. Name of SIL Branch or Location ________________________________________ ________________________________________ 7. How often does the interviewee use Research Tools? { nearly every day 3. Interviewee Status { weekly { Staff { monthly { Fellow { a few times a year { Research Associate { N/A -- They don’t use it. { Intern { Other (please specify) { Emeritus { Volunteer ________________________________________ ________________________________________ 8. What does the interviewee use the most on Research Tools? (let them point it out) 4. Show the interviewee the Research Tools page (http:// { OneSearch library.si.edu/research). Has the interviewee used the { Siris catalog Research Tools page before? { A-Z lists { Yes { Illiad { No { Smithsonian Research Online { Smithsonian Collection Search Center 5. If no, find out why they don’t use the page, but take { N/A They don’t use it a moment to show them what’s on the page and ask { Other (please specify) them if they use it in the future. _________________________________________ ________________________________________ 38 Abumeeiz and Wingreen-Mason LRTS 64, no. 1 9. If they use the page, what does the interviewee use 16. What would the interviewee put in a subject guide the lastest? Why? that would be the most useful to their work (if any- thing)? ________________________________________ ________________________________________ 10. If they use the page, does the interviewee bookmark library pages? Which ones? 17. Does the interviewee have a similar type of subject guide on their departmental web pages? Do they use ________________________________________ it? 11. What would the interviewee expect to find on the ________________________________________ Research Tools page that they do not find there? 18. SIL has just updated its training pages. Show the ________________________________________ interviewee the new How Do I? section under Learn on the Research Tools page (http://library.si.edu 12. Has the interviewee used Advanced Search in the /research/training). Having they used the SIL training databases? Which ones? pages before? What did they use? ________________________________________ ________________________________________ 13. What would the interviewee improve on the pages 19. What (if anything) would the interviewee use in the if they could? What would be the most important new HOW DO I pages? Would they watch training change? videos? Do they expect to see PDF’s, handouts, etc.? ________________________________________ ________________________________________ 14. For this question, show an SIL subject guide. You can 20. What other comments, ideas, suggestions do they find the guides linked to from the library description have? pages (http://library.si.edu/libraries) or from the How do I? Find XXX Resources in your topic area. Has the ________________________________________ interviewee ever used a Library subject guide at the Smithsonian? If so, why did they use it? ________________________________________ 15. Show a guide at http://guides.library.yale.edu in your subject area or any other university research guide you admire. Ask the interviewee if they would be more likely to use a guide that is more focused on their research needs? What would be in that guide? ________________________________________ Copyright of Library Resources & Technical Services is the property of American Library Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.