CRIV CONNECTION

Author: Mary Jenkins, Library and Research Services Manager, Devine, Millimet & Branch, PA

At the 2025 AALL Annual Meeting & Conference, the “Selector School Next Gen: Building and Curating Your Library’s Future Collection” program featured collections experts as they looked into the future and discussed questions that law librarians should ask as they imagine next gen collections and service as well as the impact of today’s selector decisions on our future libraries. This program was not recorded but the key points noted here offer guidance to directors and managers charged with collection development-related duties.

Program coordinator Jennifer Mart-Rice posed a series of questions, all addressing the core question: “What impact will present-day collection development strategies, tactics, and technologies have on our future library collections?”, to speakers Elisabeth Umpleby (University of Connecticut School of Law), Wendy Moore (University of Georgia School of Law, Alexander Campbell King Law Library), and Allison Reeve Davis (Littler).

The speakers first addressed knowing how and when to pivot in the context of an evolving legal and educational environment and its impacts on collection development. One panelist noted the importance of being articulate and specific in discussing collections and needs with stakeholders. Libraries’ physical footprints and the American Bar Association (ABA) standards have changed, but there are times when the previous standards still offer useful guidance. Another speaker commented that the ABA is not a driver for library collections now, creating some negativity toward or doubt about allocation of physical space for materials. While it is useful to have standards that accommodate collecting in newer formats, law libraries can also justify important historical collections, like state-specific materials and secondary sources. Still, if standards do not expressly support the retention of those resources, and if stakeholders do not acknowledge the value, it could lead to the movement of collections to repositories or state institutions. Public institutions often house materials that are important to firms, academics, and courts, but those collections may also be at risk if the demonstration of value is not sufficiently compelling. 

Next, speakers were asked how they are branding the library and otherwise justifying the utility and value of collections. Speakers reflected on the necessity of constant, flexible, and creative visibility of library resources and services. Examples included newsletters and blogs, recorded interviews and demonstrations, and opportunities at the point of need. Research questions and stakeholder inquiries are opportunities to showcase resources and to establish trust. Information professionals can also make a splash highlighting new products and features. Budget constraints diminish available resources and force granular evaluation of collections and acquisition decisions. Libraries need to consider their multiple audiences, including public patrons and their needs. Questions like, “What can we afford? and “What do we have to cancel?” should be driven by organizational priorities and thoughtfully considered, but the outcomes will still impact near-term and future curricular support, reference desk interactions, and support for allied communities.

Beyond primary curricular considerations, one speaker noted drivers have shifted to a greater emphasis on building community and developing practice-ready, well-rounded students. Impacts of that change include, for example, just-in-time support for faculty scholarship and more holistic programming and materials. Selection today is much more responsive to the specific materials users want than anticipation of future needs.

Attention then turned to the law firm environment as information professionals attend to the rollout, promotion, and adoption of digital resources. As has been the case for years, “collection” in firm libraries means predominantly digital resources. It is common for private law librarians to enforce a deduplication policy, eliminating print titles if the resource is available in digital format. As one speaker remarked, the introduction of digital materials and tools requires lots of outreach, demonstrations and training in partnership with information vendors, and the use of champions: attorneys inspiring others to use the tools and adapt to new ways of using resources. Because of the diversity of digital collections, it is important to create curated e-libraries (smaller collections that are practice area-specific) and to use the firm’s intranet and newsletter to make frequent promotional and informational posts about rollouts, capabilities, and efficiencies.

Selectors are challenged in very practical ways to choose the right materials when faced with budget cuts. The speakers pointed to creative approaches to subsidize funds and acquire resources, including alternative funding sources. Grants, private funds, and student technology fees all present possible opportunities. Study aid packets via tech fees and digital packages via endowed funds were offered as examples. Speakers also pointed to the importance of allyship with the academic dean and other offices to generate support and resources for funding special needs. One panelist underscored the fact that savings from cuts are not realized instantly due to contract terms and duration, necessitating frank conversations with stakeholders. It is clear that discovery layers and other means of surfacing digital materials are always critically important, but especially when collection budgets are diminished.

This summary does not do justice to the scope of the speakers’ experience and future gazing. Philosophical and practical collection and selection considerations abound, given the evolution of collections, physical spaces, material types, and even, fundamentally, the ways that users access and interact with information.