I am at the point in my career where it is more common to sort through a pile of papers and throw out at much as possible versus filing things away.  When it comes to books, I check to see if there is one on the actual library shelves before I either put it on our giveaway shelves or recycle it.  A shelf that I reviewed last week had the following titles on it:

The MacCrate Report; Building the Educational Continuum (1993)

Toward a Renaissance in Law Librarianship (1997)

Beyond the Boundaries: Report of the Special Committee on the Future of Law Libraries in the Digital Age (2002)

I also sorted through some old American Association of Law Libraries Newsletters – yes, some of you may remember that information-laden publication – from 1995 that predicted the outsourcing of library services.

As I reviewed the writers of these predictors, I found many to be retired or near retirement with some of the more influential in our field sadly having passed away.  When these participants were in their 40s or 50s, I wonder what they thought about predicting the future of law libraries? Having worked another two decades or more, were any of their predictions accurate?  Do they regret saying what they did back then?

I have never been much of a prognosticator.  I look at the facts I know and can clearly predict and try to develop something that seems believable and possible.  It’s never exciting and certainly not print-worthy.  But, my hope is to always come up with something somewhat accurate.

So, what did these mentors of many of us have to say?  Were their statements believable?  Moreover, were they accurate?  Let’s look at a few statements from these publications to see where how they stood against time.

“Reading the new survey [an American Bar Foundation survey] reinforces my belief that American legal education has organized itself to serve the large corporate law firm and has largely neglected the training of lawyers who will provide services to the poor and middle-class citizens of this country” (McCrate Conference Proceedings, Talbot “Sandy” D’Alemberte, former ABA president, page 17, 1993) 

Some among the legal education crowd would say this is mostly still true today.  Top-rated law schools, however, you define them, continue to produce graduates that work in large law firms that often have large corporations as their clients. The growth of DEI initiatives and practical approaches to legal education is changing that, although ABA law school standards move slowly through the process to reflect the reality.

“As the shock waves traveled through the profession, it seemed clear the tranquility and security of law firm library jobs was gone forever” (American Association of Law Libraries Newsletter, Donna Tuke Heroy,(1996) page 1)

This is mostly true from my perspective.  Law firm librarian jobs have changed drastically since 1995.  Many librarians are also knowledge managers or technology supervisors or record management directors.  They still perform essential library functions, but have taken on new, often technological roles.

“As tasks are spread out among a greater variety of staff, technical services librarians will need to play stronger roles in fiscal management and library planning.  There is a critical need for strategic thinking in the technical services and collection development arenas.”  (In Toward A Renaissance In Law Librarianship, I’m Dancing as Fast as I Can: Life In The Fast Lane Of Technical Services, Margie Maes Axtmann, (1997) page 119.)

This has happened in many law libraries. Lines are blurred and those who are tied to maintaining only traditional roles in any library structure will not succeed in the coming years.

“Law schools and law librarians will work with the ABA to revise the ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools and Interpretations to reflect the library’s integral role in the legal education process and to suggest some qualities of measures of evaluation.”  (Beyond the Boundaries, Redefining Traditional Roles of a Law Library in the Digital Age, (2002) page 27.)

Well, at least there are still ABA standards relating to academic law libraries.  However, since the ABA Annual Questionaire to law schools has dropped compiling any library information related to those standards, except general funding and staffing numbers, there is a lot that still needs to be done to make this prediction come true.

What are your predictions today?

The crystal ball is hard to read.  In 1995, when I used a Magic 8 ball as a prop in a presentation for a head of public services position, the crystal ball worked well.  You could reasonably predict what would happen in three to five years.  The 21st century with a major recession and worldwide pandemic has completely upended that ability.  It is helpful to plan for the future, but keep these truths in mind:

  1. Librarians continue to serve as both guides on the side (explaining and teaching) as well as sages on the stage (performing reference when faculty and students are stymied in their research paths).
  2. Library staff will continue to evolve to reflect the need of the law school.  Maybe the need for books and traditional services will change drastically, but the need for excellent service will not.
  3. Librarians will need to embrace change.  While that has always been our mantra, in today’s world, you really need to mean what you say.  As a change agent, you can be successful in meeting the needs of what both the students and law school administrators expect.

So, as much as the reports of the late ’90s and early ‘00s heralded the change (and sometimes the demise) of the law library, the reality is much different.  Change is inevitable.[1] Change challenges us to be the best version of ourselves.  Libraries that embrace change will continue to play an essential role in the lives of today’s modern law schools.

[1] John C. Maxwell is an American author, speaker, and pastor who has written many books, primarily focusing on leadership. He is one of many people who have written this phrase.  It is usually not cited or attributed to anyone.