From Scraps to Reams: A Survey of Printing Services in Academic Libraries
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
342 College & Research Libraries July 2002
From Scraps to Reams: A Survey of
Printing Services in Academic Libraries
Beth Ashmore and Sara E. Morris
The growing number of electronic resources available in libraries has
led to the adoption of printing as an integral part of library services.
However, the high costs associated with providing printing have led many
libraries to charge a printing fee. This article explores how academic
libraries in the Southeastern United States are grappling with providing
printing services both economically and equitably. The research finds
that nearly half of the libraries surveyed are currently charging for print-
ing, with another quarter considering charging in the future. Although no
institutional characteristics appear to accompany a printing fee, the re-
search finds that extensive planning and campuswide collaboration are
essential components for the successful implementation of a fee-based
printing system.
he personal computer has citation on a dot matrix printer. Increas-
brought numerous changes to ingly, electronic formats became both a
the academic library. Comput- popular and advantageous means of de-
ers have taken up residence in livery for all kinds of resources. Database
the space that card catalogs once called citations, which once were as small as a
home and have brought with them a catalog record, evolved into ASCII full-
wealth of primary and secondary sources. text articles. The ASCII forms of full text
Yet, just as scraps of paper once were used grew to include embedded photographs
by patrons to transport information from and illustrations. Highly graphical docu-
the card catalog to the shelf, libraries still ments required a new format—portable
need to provide a way for patrons to take document files, or PDFs. In addition to
the information from the computer and databases, e-journals and Web sites be-
out into the world. When the computer came legitimate sources for research and
replaced the card catalog, it was only a thus found a home in the academic
matter of time before the printer moved library’s reference room. Dot matrix print-
in as well. ers were no longer able to print with the
The OPAC, one of the first public elec- speed or the quality required by these
tronic resources, required little paper. new formats, and printing on quicker and
Patrons could either write the call num- costlier laser printers became a larger part
ber on scrap paper or simply print out the of libraries’ services. Scraps of paper no
Beth Ashmore is an Instruction Services Librarian and Assistant Professor at Mississippi State Univer-
sity; e-mail: bashmore@library.msstate.edu. Sara E. Morris is a Reference Services Librarian and Assis-
tant Professor at Mississippi State University; e-mail: smorris@library.msstate.edu.
342From Scraps to Reams 343
longer were sufficient; libraries now re- ness of not only providing information
lied on reams of paper to satisfy patron to users, but also giving them the tools
demand. This change has taken place very necessary to take the information with
quickly and has left academic libraries them. Patrons have come to expect to be
with little time to prepare. Instead, librar- able to check out materials and make pho-
ies have been left to cope with a full recy- tocopies, and librarians struggle with
cling bin and the high cost of toner. how they can meet this patron demand
Any librarian or library patron will ac- in the most efficient and fair way possible.
knowledge that printing is an essential Printing has been added to the library’s
part of patron services in the modern aca- list of essential services. The major print-
demic library due to the prevalence of e- ing problems faced by libraries can be
journals, e-books, and other full-text divided into three categories: finance,
sources. Librarians have accepted this ser- ecology, and access.
vice as just as necessary as properly
shelved books. Yet, the topic of printing Finance
has made few appearances in the litera- The cost of providing printing to patrons
ture. The few articles that do exist relate is much greater than just purchasing a
the experiences of one particular library printer. Software and hardware issues
and how it has come to handle charging make it necessary to have additional
for printing. Other articles simply give products just to make the printer work,
guidance on why and how to charge; thus, particularly when implementing a copy
many questions remain. Who is charging? card or account system to manage print
How much? Why are they charging? fees. In addition, as electronic resources
change, printers must be upgraded to take
Any librarian or library patron will full advantage of the new technology. For
acknowledge that printing is an example, some databases are adding color
essential part of patron services in PDFs, thus raising the question: Will li-
the modern academic library due to brary patrons soon expect color printers?
the prevalence of e-journals, e- If so, libraries will need to make another
books, and other full-text sources. transition in printing services or face user
dissatisfaction. After a printer is installed,
This article seeks to recognize the cur- there are many additional costs. The cost
rent trends in academic library printing of paper and toner can add up quickly.
and to give guidance to those currently Although it is possible to make predic-
grappling with the how and why of pro- tions of what these items might cost and
viding printing services. The main prob- budget accordingly, the final expenditure
lem this research seeks to solve is the lack depends on patron usage.
of information on how libraries of all sizes, Besides the obvious financial aspects,
funding sources, and academic levels are there are a number of hidden costs. Staff
dealing, both successfully and unsuccess- take time away from more productive
fully, with the high cost of printing ser- tasks to remove a paper jam, change toner,
vices. Using a survey of SOLINET librar- or add paper. This loss in productivity
ies as a representative group of academic causes other areas of the library to suffer.
institutions, this article demonstrates the Reference staff, for example, could spend
varied approaches currently being used to more time answering questions if they did
provide printing services to library users. not have to deal with printer problems.
Maureen A. Lindstrom and Andrew J.
What’s the Problem with Printing? Dutcher wrote that the most popular
Modern academic libraries are a far cry questions at Buffalo State College’s E. H.
from the paperless society that many pro- Butler Library in the late 1990s requested
jected the personal computer would help in fixing printer problems. The li-
bring. As always, libraries are in the busi- brarians in that same library also felt that344 College & Research Libraries July 2002
they spent 60 percent of their time taking make allowances for fees, printing may
care of printing issues.1 Clearly, librarians be a more complex issue than charging
and library staff can lose valuable time for photocopies.
dealing with printers.
Advantages of a Printing Fee
Ecology In the literature on this subject, no single
Although the financial issues caused by advantage stands out as the overwhelm-
printing are a major concern to librarians, ing reason to implement a printing fee.
so too are the ecological effects. Walking Institutions that have chosen to charge a
by most printers in an academic library, fee usually cite multiple factors that con-
one will see a number of unclaimed sheets tribute to the need for, and the advantage
of paper. In 1997, Betsy Park concluded of, implementing a fee. The following rep-
that patrons probably do not intend to be resent the most common reasons for
wasteful but simply print far more than charging a fee and are often the rationale
they need.2 In addition to the environmen- behind bringing such a fee into an aca-
tal impact of paper, toner cartridges are demic library.
an ecological concern. Technology has
made some recycling possible, but even Cost Recovery
with this ability, cartridges represent a Cost recovery is a primary motivation for
formidable presence in a landfill. These charging a printing fee. Many libraries no
ecological issues are particularly signifi- longer can afford to subsidize printing in
cant because library staff must consider light of the wealth of resources that are
them in their own day-to-day printing only available via electronic format. The
habits, in addition to encouraging ecologi- income generated from a fee also can
cally conscientious printing in the user work toward paying the day-to-day pa-
population. per and toner costs as well as freeing up
funds to keep equipment up-to-date and
Access functioning properly. Dale J. Vidmar,
Whereas financial and ecological issues Marshall A. Berger, and Connie J. Ander-
deal with the waste that printing can son rationalized that if the money cur-
cause, there are ethical issues that make rently allocated to subsidizing printing
this decision difficult. Libraries have been were used to enhance other services, such
charging for photocopies since photocopi- as database access or increased materials
ers arrived. Patrons know this and will- and staff budgets, the benefits could far
ingly pay the fees necessary to take an outweigh a small per-page fee.4
article home. Since printers first arrived
in libraries, many have charged from the Equalizing Print and Electronic Resources
beginning, viewing this service as Users’ desire to take the path of least re-
roughly the same as photocopying; oth- sistance is a disturbing trend that is only
ers feel that printing fees can create bar- made more troubling by the double stan-
riers to access. In “Questions and An- dard between printing and photocopy-
swers: Access to Electronic Information, ing. By charging for photocopying of
Services, and Networks: An Interpreta- noncirculating materials such as journals,
tion of the Library Bill of Rights,” the ALA reference materials, and microforms, but
stressed that all services should be pro- not charging for these same types of ma-
vided free of charge, if possible, with ac- terials in electronic format, the library cre-
cess to the resource being the primary ates an inadvertent supremacy of elec-
goal. In this interpretation, making infor- tronic resources over print, regardless of
mation available on the screen, but requir- actual content. Park summed up this ar-
ing patrons to pay to have a paper copy gument perfectly: “If a library provides
is acceptable in this technological age.3 free printing from electronic resources,
Although the Library Bill of Rights does but charges for photocopies, it encouragesFrom Scraps to Reams 345
users to select information based on for- these arguments can prove to be enough
mat rather than quality or relevance.”5 to make printing fees untenable for an
academic library.
Combating Waste
Although some studies have found that Barring Access
many students are very concerned and Most discussions of this issue address the
conscientious in their printing habits, possible violation of Articles I and V of
most of the literature discusses printer the ALA Library Bill of Rights, which are
abuse as a major concern for libraries.6 A interpreted to state that libraries should
study at George Washington University remove all potential barriers to provid-
found that 25 percent of the paper in the ing equitable access to information. Al-
computer labs was recycled immediately.7 though the comparison to photocopying
Even though this study dealt with uni- costs is often made, the ethical consider-
versity computer labs rather than library ation becomes whether the printing fee
reference labs, it makes a strong argument can actually be seen as an equitable bar-
in favor of using a fee to make patrons rier.10 In the library setting, photocopy
more careful before they choose to print. fees are fairly evenly borne by users. With
many electronic resources available from
Implementing the hardware and anywhere Internet access is provided,
software necessary to charge for users with access to personal computers
printing is not without its own costs and printers are less subject to this bar-
and presents yet another system with rier than those who have less technology
which staff must be familiar to at their disposal and thus are more at the
troubleshoot and maintain, even mercy of the library’s resources and fees.11
when services are outsourced.15
With equal access for all users being one
of the library’s primary missions, serious
Managing Resources thought regarding a printing fee is nec-
Some of the literature on this subject ad- essary.
vocates the use of a reserve model, pro-
viding users a reserve of free printing Dissatisfying Users
each semester. This system affords the li- Probably the greatest concern with imple-
brary the ability to set limits on free print- menting a printing fee is that of justify-
ing while still offering students a subsi- ing charging for something that was once
dized service. 8 This type of system free. Even when users do not expect the
encourages users not only to think care- service to be free, a library must consider
fully before they print, but also to man- the animosity that charging for printing
age consciously their printing resource, can generate, especially if other campus
just as they would their time or money. labs offer free printing or if a technology
As one participant from the EDUCAUSE fee is assessed for students.12 Even the
CIO Constituent Group stated, “They do Association of College and Research Li-
get something free, so they will benefit. braries (ACRL) advocates that students
We are an educational institution, so why consider printing fees when evaluating
not help teach prioritization, cost-benefit, libraries at prospective universities and
and resource management skills?”9 colleges.13 The need to establish a good
relationship with users may outweigh the
Disadvantages of a Printing Fee need to recover printing costs.
The disadvantages of charging for print-
ing are formidable and range from driv- Discouraging Library Use
ing users away from the library to violat- Another concern associated with the pro-
ing the aforementioned ALA Library Bill liferation of electronic resources is the
of Rights. Unlike the advantages associ- decreasing use of physical library re-
ated with implementing fees, any one of sources in favor of remote access. Some346 College & Research Libraries July 2002
studies have shown or predicted dramatic and Lindsey Wess described the process
decreases in the use of printing services that Colorado State University (CSU)
after fees were implemented.14 The con- went through in order to recoup costs and
cern is that the added barrier of a print- discourage excessive printing. The CSU
ing fee will push users further away from example underscores the need for plan-
the library and toward other personal and ning and publicity when attempting to
campus resources. start a successful fee-based program.18
Additional articles examine the benefits
Funding More Infrastructure and drawbacks of outsourcing printing
Implementing the hardware and software services to vendors.19
necessary to charge for printing is not Park, unlike many authors, has taken
without its own costs and presents yet a theoretical approach to printing in aca-
another system with which staff must be demic libraries. Many libraries, she has
familiar to troubleshoot and maintain, argued, have no idea how much they
even when services are outsourced.15 spend on printing because of the way
Most studies agree that before implement- budgets are created. The ambiguity of the
ing a fee-based printing service, a cost- total money spent makes justifying the
benefit evaluation is necessary to deter- implementation of a pay-for-printing sys-
mine how long it will take to recover the tem difficult. For this reason, adopting
initial start-up costs, taking into account such a system is not something to rush
the fact that printing may decrease with into. Park also has stressed that the print-
the fee in place.16 ing problems faced by libraries will not
go away. Like photocopiers, printers are
Review of the Literature going to be around for a long time and
The current literature dealing with print- libraries and their administrators must
ing issues in libraries is fairly limited. come up with policies and plans for their
Many articles deal with specific libraries’ effective use.20
experiences with implementing a fee- The actual establishment of a pay-for-
based system. These articles provide prac- printing system has been the topic of the
tical information on the tools necessary majority of the literature. Murray S. Mar-
to adopt such a system and some discus- tin and Betsy Park, in Charging and Col-
sion of the planning process. Authors lecting Fees and Fines: A Handbook for Li-
such as Park approach the issue from a braries, provide practical advice. This
theoretical and practical standpoint, giv- handbook contains such useful tools as a
ing background on the issues that librar- checklist and a worksheet that libraries
ies currently face. The research on print- can use to organize a charging system.21
ing falls into two categories: surveys such Research on user perceptions of print-
as the 1999 Association of Research Librar- ing fees is slight. Richard L. Hart, John A.
ies (ARL) SPEC Kit 254, Managing Print- Olson, and Patience L. Simmonds exam-
ing Services and articles dealing with user ined students’ feelings about the possi-
perceptions of fee-based systems. In ad- bility of charging a fee for new laser print-
dition to the literature dealing specifically ing services at Pennsylvania State Univer-
with library printing services, there are sity-Erie. In the end, a fee was not charged
articles on the best way to manage public because of an existing computer fee and
printing resources in an academic setting. a strong student response that a fee would
Vidmar, Berger, and Anderson docu- be seen as excessive.22
mented the implementation process for Although all of these articles talk about
Southern Oregon University. This ex- how and why a library might implement
ample demonstrates a selective charging printing service charges, only one current
structure, where only full-text printing is source deals with data on how libraries
subject to fees as opposed to catalog cita- overall are actually handling the problem.
tions and index records.17 Tom Moothart The 1999 ARL SPEC Kit 254, ManagingFrom Scraps to Reams 347
Printing Services, contains details dealing The survey was mailed in the summer
with printing in ARL libraries, but this of 2001 to all Southeastern Library Net-
source is limited in scope to the largest work, Inc., (SOLINET) academic mem-
academic research libraries.23 Another bers that grant degrees equaling a
survey published on the Internet by the bachelor’s or higher. Libraries serving
University of Richmond Law Library institutions that grant bachelor’s degrees
sheds some light on the variety of sys- or higher were seen as having communi-
tems and structures being used to track ties with the greatest research needs and
and charge for printing. However, this those likeliest to have the most access to
survey too is limited because it deals with electronic resources and the printing of
a very specialized group of users, namely, those resources.
law students and lawyers.24
The overall need for printing resource Libraries at all levels and sizes are
management in academic environments is implementing or contemplating fees
another important aspect of the library for the future.
printing issue. The amount of wasted pa-
per on college campuses has been a topic in SOLINET is a regional library coopera-
printing literature. Steven Gnagni reviewed tive with members from Alabama, Florida,
a number of different printing solutions for Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi,
University Business. Like Park, Gnagni indi- North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee,
cated that few schools really know the prob- Virginia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Is-
lems plaguing their current printing situa- lands. Currently, it is the largest organiza-
tion.25 EDUCAUSE, an association of higher tion of its kind in the United States.27 The
education institutions working to promote authors targeted SOLINET libraries because
information technology, had an electronic of the diversity within this large group. A
discussion about printing in 1998. Although number of public and private institutions
this discussion focused on campuswide are members, including eighteen Associa-
printing, the issues and solutions brought tion of Research Libraries’ (ARL) members.
forward gave librarians a glance at the in- The states in the cooperative also are repre-
formation technology professionals’ per- sentative of the variance in economic sup-
spective. This discussion stressed the poli- port that exists for higher education. In ad-
tics of a system and the different models dition, the sizes of these institutions range
used to charge students.26 from very small colleges of five hundred
students to large research institutions with
Methodology more than 30,000 students. Overall, the aca-
The authors created a survey instrument demic libraries that hold membership in
to find out how academic libraries are deal- SOLINET provide a good cross section of
ing with printing in reference computer the various kinds of academic institutions
labs. The survey asked for quantitative in the United States.
data on the number of computers and The authors mailed a total of 329 sur-
printers in reference areas as well as the veys. The surveyed population consisted
amount of fees charged, if any. Questions of 188 private institutions (57%) and 141
also sought to learn the reasons for fees, public colleges or universities (43%). The
how fees were collected, and, for those not response rate was 57 percent (189 re-
charging, whether fees were being consid- sponses), with 111 responses from private
ered for the future. Libraries also were institutions (58%), 73 from public colleges
asked how long they had been charging and universities (39%), and 5 from un-
and whether fees had reduced the amount specified institutions (3%).
of printing being done. Other questions
included the use of limits, e-mail, software, Results
reserve systems, policies, and cost studies The results of the survey shed some light
to alleviate printing problems. on what are currently the most popular348 College & Research Libraries July 2002
TABLE 1
Type of Printing Services by Funding Source
Charging Considering Not Considering
All respondents (n = 189) 93 48 48
Public institutions (n = 73) 45 17 11
Private institutions (n = 111) 46 28 37
Unspecified (n = 5) 2 3 0
solutions for printing but also indicated charging and fifty-five not charging (table
that no division of this community is 2). Of the fifty-five libraries not charging,
embracing any single method. As shown thirty are considering doing so in the fu-
in table 1, ninety-three of the libraries ture. Every grouping of institutions with
surveyed are charging for some form of more than 5,000 full-time students has a
printing (laser, inkjet, or dot matrix). Of higher percentage of both charging librar-
those currently charging, forty-five are ies and those considering it for the future.
public institutions, forty-six are private The level of degree programs at a par-
institutions, and two are unspecified. Of ticular institution also appears not to be a
the ninety-six institutions that are not factor in predicting whether libraries are
currently charging, forty-eight responded charging. As shown in table 3, the statis-
that they are considering charging in the tics for institutions granting bachelor’s
future. Fifteen percent of public institu- degrees, master’s degrees, and doctorates
tions and 33 percent of private institutions break down similarly to the public and
either currently have no plans to charge private institution statistics in table 1, with
for printing in the future or are unsure. approximately half of each group already
Institution size did not appear to play having implemented a fee and approxi-
a large role in dictating whether a print- mately one quarter of each group consid-
ing fee was used. The most notable trend ering it for the future.
is that the larger the university, the greater The per-page fees being charged for
the certainty that a fee is being consid- laser printing vary widely, with the most
ered or is currently in use. The largest common being $0.10 and $0.05 (table 4).
group of respondents, those institutions A small number of libraries indicated that
with 1,000 to 5,000 students, is almost they charge for the use of dot matrix (1%)
evenly divided, with forty-one libraries and inkjet quality printing (5%). Many
TABLE 2
Type of Printing Services by FTEs of Responding Institutions
FTE Enrollment Number of Charging Considering Not Considering
Institutions
0500 10 4 3 3
5011000 32 16 3 13
10015000 96 41 30 25
500110,000 18 10 6 2
10,00120,000 15 7 5 3
20,00030,000 8 7 1 0
30,00136,000 3 3 0 0
Unspecified 7 5 0 2
Total 189 93 48 48From Scraps to Reams 349
TABLE 3
Type of Printing Services by Highest Degree Granted
Degree Charging Considering Not Considering
Bachelors 20 15 16
Masters 39 22 22
Doctorate 34 11 10
Total 93 48 48
institutions rely on copy card (35%) and nessed a reduction in printing after they
student accounts (24%) to handle the col- implemented the fee. Very few libraries
lection of fees, and a good number of li- have used cost-effectiveness studies (11%)
braries (57%) still use personnel at the or policies (34%) to investigate or govern
reference desk or other service desks to printing, and even fewer are part of a
collect these fees (table 5). campuswide initiative to standardize
Multiple factors influenced the deci- printing (17%). Another approach, the
sion to implement a fee. Cost recovery reserve model, was used by only fourteen
(61%) was the reason most often cited, libraries.
with deterrence for exhaustive printing
(53%) a close second. Many respondents Discussion
remarked that deterring printer abuse The printing issue has clearly catalyzed
was extremely important because it was academic libraries into taking action to
a source of frustration for both staff and minimize both cost and waste, while pro-
other users (table 6). viding the best access possible. This can
Most charging libraries have been do- be seen when comparing these results
ing so for less than five years, with 17 with those from the 1999 ARL Printing
percent indicating they have charged Services Survey. In that survey, more than
since the library began to offer printing. half of those responding were charging
Of those who switched from free print- fees (60%), but far fewer were consider-
ing to fee-based printing, 44 percent wit- ing it for the future (6%).28 Although the
TABLE 4
Amounts Charged Per Printout
$0.15 2
Between $0.10 and $0.15 1
$0.10 38
Between $0.05 and $0.10 10
$0.05 23
Less than $0.05 4
0 10 20 30 40
Note: These prices are only for those libraries that charge for laser printing.350 College & Research Libraries July 2002
TABLE 5 the fee is necessary
Fee Collection Methods
and how it will ulti-
mately benefit the li-
Location Number of All Charging Percentage of All brary by allowing it to
Libraries (n = 93) Charging Libraries provide increased ser-
Reference desk 16 17
vices in other areas.
Other service desk 38 40
The respondents
Copy card 34 35
who spoke most favor-
Accounting system 22 24
ably about their current
Other 4 4
situation were those
who had worked with
Note: Respondents were allowed to check all methods used. vendors and campus
labs to organize a plan.
Some respondents re-
percentage of charging institutions found plied with a sense of gratitude for other cam-
by ARL and this survey is roughly simi- pus units that facilitate the printing process:
lar, the increase in the percentage of in- “the library staff appreciates the card center
stitutions considering a fee for the future for all the work that they do to maintain a
from 6 to 25 percent suggests that print- system that mostly runs smooth through the
ing issues have become an even greater year. We also do what we can to troubleshoot
concern. some of the common maintenance prob-
Another trend clearly visible in the lems.” A library that outsources its printing
data is that printing issues do not dis- services spoke to the ease that enlisting a
criminate. Libraries at all levels and sizes vendor’s help can provide: “We use a com-
are implementing or contemplating fees mercial vendor who services the copy card
for the future. The number of libraries machines, the laser printers, etc. The vendor
(nearly half) currently charging, along provides the machines and collects all the
with another 25 percent of respondents money. After years of doing it ourselves we
considering implementing a fee, suggests finally got smart. Now it’s virtually hassle
that a per-page fee is a common solution. free…. All queries and complaints are di-
What appears to make the difference be- rected to students who are hired by [the ven-
tween success and failure are planning dor] to service the machines and patrons. A
and collaboration. supervisor comes daily to check for special
The lack of institutions using cost-ef- problems. If we have problems with print-
fectiveness studies to investigate charg- ing, we page the supervisor.”
ing a per-page fee suggests that printing Even for those libraries that are not
issues are victims of a lack of time to de- charging a per-page fee, planning to share
vise a solution. This, combined with a lack the financial burden of printing is impor-
of policies to govern
printing services,
TABLE 6
Reasons for Charging a Per-Page Printing Fee
leaves libraries with-
out an overall plan,
which is necessary for Number of All Charging Percentage of All
success in providing Libraries (n = 93) Charging Libraries
Cost recovery 57 61
any service. Sufficient
Breaking even 15 16
planning also is help-
Campuswide policy 20 22
ful in easing users into
Deterrent for printing abuse 49 53
the fee-based process.
Other 3 3
Users must be given
time to adjust to this
process and all the in- Note: Respondents were allowed to check all applicable reasons
formation about whyFrom Scraps to Reams 351
tant: “Paper is purchased by the univer- far, we have been unsuccessful in seeking
sity (not the library) through a technol- a campuswide solution to printing. We are
ogy fee paid by the students. Certainly unlikely to seek a library-only solution that
works well for us.” Many of the would make us different from other units
noncharging libraries indicated that their on campus.” With the growing number of
institutions’ overall plan to streamline campus computer labs located within the
fees for the benefit of both students and library facility, it becomes imperative that
staff has helped handle this issue: “The the separate entities present a united front
administration decided recently to elimi- for both their benefit and that of their us-
nate as many ‘small fees’ as possible and ers. By providing one cohesive service, stu-
compensate by raising the activity fee per dents become acquainted with a single
semester. We decided to include printing policy that can govern their printing prac-
fees in the list of eliminated charges. Over- tices, regardless of where they are work-
all, it has worked very well—saves library ing.
staff a lot of hassle.” Finally, a compre- Planning and collaboration are particu-
hensive planning process will allow staff larly useful when contemplating a reserve
to become familiar with any new systems model system. The previously mentioned
and will better prepare them to explain reserve model system appears to be a
fees to users. rather underused and advantageous op-
An essential part of the planning pro- tion for both charging and noncharging
cess is collaboration. Many of those sur- libraries as well as for those libraries with
veyed who were unsatisfied with their technology fees that still do not seem to
current situation said it was due to the lack cover the cost of printing. The reserve
of a campuswide solution. The fear of system requires the same infrastructure
charging and driving away users as well as an account-driven, fee-based system
as the fear of being the only one not charg- but provides users with a predetermined
ing and thereby encouraging abuse are real number of free pages before charging a
issues that libraries must consider and per-page fee. This system rewards con-
work to remedy. Patrons are already in- scientious users and deters printing abus-
clined to use the resources in the comfort ers. All campuswide technology fee rev-
of their own homes and offices, so when enues can be used to pay for infrastruc-
they do seek out a public lab for services ture costs and initial allocations of print-
and assistance, the library needs to present ing. The concern over the barrier to ac-
as few barriers as possible. One library cess for those without personal printing
appeared to find this out the hard way: resources is less immediate. This system
“We used to charge for printing, but we still encourages the use of electronic re-
stopped when students began using com- sources over print but makes it far more
puter labs with inadequate support, but difficult for users to complete their edu-
free printing.” Other libraries are currently cation without consulting a single print
waiting to implement a printing program: resource. Although those responding li-
“[The] Information Technology depart- braries currently using a reserve system
ment is actually responsible for funding made no specific comment as to its suc-
free printing. Eventually, they hope to cess, the literature on the topic suggests
implement the use of some sort of ‘smart that this option should be closely consid-
card’ system that will charge students for ered by libraries looking for a solution to
printouts…. In the meantime, tons of pa- their printing woes.
per are needlessly wasted each year!!!”
Even though the frustration caused by Conclusion
waiting for a campus infrastructure to be The printing problem is far from being re-
put in place may be overwhelming, the solved. Many areas for further research are
alternative of creating a library-specific available. Technological changes may pro-
policy is not seen as very favorable: “So vide greater allowances for charging for352 College & Research Libraries July 2002
specific types of material and may offer but, undoubtedly, many libraries that have
increased capabilities in terms of manag- implemented creative funding of these
ing how printing services are integrated services are not charging. A survey of non-
into the overall campus infrastructure. fee-based programs would be another area
Partnering with vendors and outsourcing of research that could provide further
many of these services appears to be an- guidance for those for whom a fee is not
other viable solution that allows libraries an option. Overall, although the printing
to focus on other areas of operation. This problem is not resolved, there is much to
article concentrates on the trend toward be learned from the successes and failures
charging a fee and the concerns associated of other libraries in finding the best way
with implementing a fee-based system, to make a library’s resources portable.
Notes
1. Maureen A. Lindstrom and Andrew J. Dutcher, “A Marriage Made in Heaven: How We
Chose Good Partners to Improve Our Printing Services,” Computers in Libraries 21 (Jan. 2001): 44.
2. Betsy Park, “Charging for Printouts,” The Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances 10, no. 4
(1997): 148.
3. American Library Association, “Questions and Answers: Access to Electronic Informa-
tion, Services, and Networks: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights” (Nov. 17, 2000),
available online from http://www.ala.org/alaorg/oif/oif_q&a.html (read 2 Jan. 2002).
4. Dale J. Vidmar, Marshall A. Berger, and Connie J. Anderson, “Fee or Free? Printing from
Public Workstations in the Library,” Computers in Libraries 18 (May 1998): 27.
5. Park, “Charging for Printouts,” 150.
6. Richard L. Hart, John A. Olson, and Patience L. Simmonds, “Laser Printing at
Public Workstations: User Behaviors and Attitudes,” Information Technology and Libraries 20
(Mar. 2001), available online from (read 2 Jan. 2002).
7. Steven Gnagni, “The Paper Chase,” University Business 2 (Jan. /Feb. 1999): 60.
8. Ibid., 61.
9. EDUCAUSE, CIO Constituent Group, “CIO Digest on Printing Fees in Student Labs”
(June 15, 1998), available online from
(read 2 Jan. 2002).
10. Park, “Charging for Printouts,” 149.
11. Vidmar, Berger, and Anderson, “Implementing a Cost Recovery System for Printing,”
Reference Services Review 25 (fall/winter 1997): 98.
12. Hart, Olson, and Simmonds, “Laser Printing at Public Workstations.”
13. Association of College & Research Libraries, “A Student’s Guide to Evaluating Libraries
in Colleges and Universities” (June 29, 2001), available online from (read 2 Jan. 2002).
14. Vidmar, Berger, and Anderson, “Implementing a Cost Recovery System for Printing”;
Tom Moothart and Lindsey Wess, “Popularity Has Its Costs,” Colorado Libraries 25 spring 1999).
15. Moothart and Wess, “Popularity Has Its Costs,” 17.
16. Park, “Charging for Printouts,” 151.
17. Vidmar, Berger, and Anderson, “Implementing a Cost Recovery System for Printing.”
18. Moothart and Wess, “Popularity Has Its Costs.”
19. Lindstrom and Dutcher, “A Marriage Made in Heaven”; Ralph M. Daehn, “Launching a
Public Printing Program with Built-in Cost Recovery,” Computers in Libraries 20 (Oct. 2000).
20. Park, “Charging for Printouts.”
21. Murray S. Martin and Betsy Park, Charging and Collecting Fees and Fines: A Handbook for
Libraries (New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers, 1998).
22. Hart, Olson, and Simmonds, “Laser Printing at Public Workstations.”
23. Julia C. Bilxrud, Managing Printing Services: A SPEC Kit (Washington, D.C.: Association of
Research Libraries, 2000).
24. University of Richmond Law Library, “Law School Printing Survey” (Nov. 15, 2001), avail-
able online from (read 2 January 2002).
25. Gnagni, “The Paper Chase.”
26. EDUCAUSE, CIO Constituent Group, “CIO Digest on Printing Fees in Student Labs.”
27. SOLINET, “About SOLINET” (July 27, 2001), available online from (read 2 Jan. 2002).
28. Bilxrud, Managing Printing Services.You can also read
