Where is ERIC …. and where is ERIC going?

Information Outlook, June, 2004 by Kate Corby

For the last year the library community has had concerns about the future of the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) database. In existence since 1966, the ERIC system was a network of 13 subject specialty clearinghouses and their affiliates. These clearinghouses provided a variety of services directly to the public (research assistance, publications, websites) and complied the ERIC database.

The ERIC database is the largest education-related bibliographic database in the world. (1) The components of the ERIC system operate under federal contracts. All the contracts associated with the database and the overall ERIC system that didn't end in 2003 expire this year. The Department of Education has decided to make some significant changes.

When this decision became known in spring of 2003, many librarians were worried. The ERIC database has always been excellent. Although sometimes slow to index new items, the consistency and specificity of the indexing has always been exceptional. The plans for the "new ERIC," outlined in a Draft Statement of Work (2) called for changes like author supplied abstracts and automatic indexing.

Folks were also concerned that these changes might reflect changes of viewpoint in the Department of Education that emphasized scientifically based research. Would ERIC begin to index only peer-reviewed or empirical material? The Draft Statement of Work called for a reexamination of all the sources of material for the index. Although it covered articles from more journals than other major education indexes, indexing, and supplying microfiche copies of a large number (about 75 items per month) of research reports, conference papers and similar "gray literature" was a raison d'etre for the ERIC database.

The Draft Statement of Work included instructions for those wishing to make comments to the contract officer. According to the May 28, 2003 Education Week, "Before the official comment period on the proposal ended on May 9, nearly 4,000 of the system's customers and supporters had weighed in on the changes. Among those opposing the plans were at least 28 Democratic members of Congress and more than 46 national education organizations, ranging from the National PTA to the American Library Association. (3)" (The joint comment from Special Libraries Association, American Association of Law Libraries, and Association of Research Libraries can be viewed at http://www.sla.org/PDFs/ERICComments.pdf) This was a remarkably large number of comments; I was told that most posts generate fewer than a hundred.

The final version of the Statement of Work (SOW) (4) was included in a request for proposal released on June 27, 2003. It included very few changes from the draft. It broadened the authority of the indexers to select items from sources not previously approved, added a few specific subjects to be covered, and mentioned including non-U.S. English language materials.

The SOW also included a seemingly impossible goal: "It [the database search engine] shall enable users to quickly find the database materials that are directly relevant to their problems or questions." (5) To the extent that this speaks to concerns about indexing quality it is reassuring, but it certainly is too vague to be transparently enforceable.

In December 2003, the department allowed the clearinghouse contracts to expire. All of the services of the clearinghouses, including indexing materials to include in the ERIC database, ceased. The database will grow in the first half of 2004 only by the addition of backlogged indexing that was completed in 2003.

In March, the Department of Education awarded a single contract for ERIC to Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC). (6) CSC is a large corporation, which holds the contracts for the current ERIC Processing and Reference Facility and the ERIC Document Reproduction Service. The Processing and Reference Facility has been the core of the ERIC database, taking in the indexing work of the various clearinghouses and producing the ERIC database. The Document Reproduction Service (EDRS), as its name implies, works with the documents or gray literature portion of the database. They sell microfiche and paper copies of items listed in the database. Since the mid-90s, EDRS has sold online access to a portion of these materials through a database called E*Subscribe.

For many, the initial reaction to the announcement of the new contractor was relief. A firm that has been working with the database for some time can bring continuity. With an intimate understanding of the existing database they perhaps will appreciate its strengths and be less likely to institute changes that would make it less useful. The federal requirements, as outlined in the SOW do not call for much public input. There is to be one public forum within two months of contract award "for soliciting input about making the database highly useful to educators, researchers, and the general public." (7)

Decisions about indexing protocols, document and journal coverage and thesaurus changes will apparently go forward with little outside input. Individually and through professional organizations like the Special Libraries Association and the American Library Association, librarians have tried to make officials at the Department of Education aware of their professional expertise in index construction.