In the July Chronicle of Higher Education the article by Katherine S. Mangan, "Packing Up the Books: U. of Texas becomes the latest institution to clear out a main library to make room for computers" details dramatic changes occurring at the library. "Nearly all of the 90,000 volumes contained in the undergraduate library are being carted off this summer to other libraries on the campus to make room for an 'information commons' -- a growing trend at colleges and universities around the country."

The idea is to create an information center where students meet in groups, download digital information (just like they can at their dorms), have tech support, rent lap tops, and perhaps bring lap tops in for repair. Critics complain that the days of scholars could wandering and browsing the stacks to find interesting books might be coming to an end.

What is interesting is the The Chronicle asks the question:
"Colleges are increasingly clearing books and journals out of their libraries to make room for information commonsi -- digital information centers stocked with computers, technical-help desks, comfortable chairs, and even coffee shops. Do digital libraries, as their fans suggest, help students take a more active role in learning? Is anything wrong with moving books off-site as long as they can still be obtained digitally or overnight through interlibrary loan? Or are librarians too quick to embrace a passing fad?"

My thoughts:
I don't think we are in the midst of a passing fad. I have no problem dedicating a portion of the library to an online information commons. I think the idea of having tech support and lap top repair is brilliant. Why should students to their research at one place (library) and create their presentations elsewhere (dorms or computer lab)?
However, I do have concerns about transforming almost the whole library into the information commons. 90,000 books is A LOT of books, only 1,000 reference books will remain. While there is a great deal of information online, sometimes the best information isn't available online, it is only in the printed word.

The big question is who is going to teach these students about information retrieval and evaluation. How will the students know that Google is not the answer to everything? How will students know what databases to search to find those online articles? Finally how will students know when they really need to get something from the storage area because it won't be available full text online?

Libraries, colleges, and hospitals give their users a lot of credit and assume these users were "born" with the skills. I can't tell you how many meetings I have attended where the administration described the new crop of medical students as being really tech savvy, so much so that they won't need Medline searching classes or information evaluation classes. When the new crop comes in I am then inundated with teachers frustrated that their students are finding all their information on Google or Wikipedia!
Additionally people are lazy. How many medical students and doctors have you dealt with who just wanted a few quick full text articles? What about some of the articles that aren't available online? Are patrons going to wait around to get their ILL book or they just going to find the next best online article that might sort of answer the question? Do we need another instance similar to the death at Johns Hopkins' before our patrons realize that their is valid and necessary information not on the Internet?

I have no problem removing some books and creating an information commons area, but not at the expense of 90,000 books. To eliminate books completely is to almost give them no importance at all.