As far as I can tell, there is no way of seeing which journals and articles are actually included. If you could search at home at least you'd know if it was worth the trip to the nearest participating library. But as it is if you find a paper you're interested in you won't know whether it is one of the 1.5 million included in the scheme until you've gone to the Special Magic Building. Alternatively, you could use CORE to search almost 20 million papers and access them all from the comfort of your own home - http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/search

I think there is potential in this initiative. Of course it would be great if these resources were available from my home. I also wish valuable business databases were free from home but I have to go to the public library to use them. I agree that CORE and BASE (and Google!) are great for finding free resources. Nevertheless as someone who does research but doesn¡¯t have an affiliation with an academic institution I hit ejournal paywalls all the time and would appreciate what I see as a potential service improvement. Like thousands of others in my town I live within walking distance of my local public library and visiting it is a genuine pleasure. Moreover if we think of this initiative in combination with a broader opportunity for public libraries to re-energise their old role as ¡®The People¡¯s University¡¯ there is, I think, rich opportunity. Many academic libraries have re-engineered buildings and have seen massive increases in use as learning spaces. Public libraries could do more along similar lines. They advocate themselves as ¡®community hubs¡¯ and there is a vital role for such public spaces in our communities. Strengthening their learning dimension with an offer of free ejournals alongside exploiting MOOCs in attractive learning spaces looks to me to have potential. Learning is increasingly a social activity and just as many public libraries support reading groups I see they could do more to foster ¡®Learning Groups¡¯. That might do something to improve the retention rates of student engaging with MOOCs. The main issue I see is the capability and capacity of public libraries to adequately seize this opportunity

DING DING DING As David says "Alternatively, you could use CORE to search almost 20 million papers and access them all from the comfort of your own home - http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/search "

¡°PUBLIC (LIBRARY) ACCESS¡± ¡ª PREDICTABLE PUBLISHER SOP The primary intended beneficiaries of research are the public that funds the research. The primary way in which the public benefits from the research it funds is if all researchers can access, use, build upon and apply it. Research is pubished in journals to which researchers¡¯ publicly funded institutions (mostly universities) subscribe. But institutions can only afford to subscribe to a small fraction of those journals. because of the high price of journals and the scarcity of research funds. That means that researchers are denied access to a large fraction of publicly funded research. That means the public is losing a large fraction of the potential returns on its investment in the research in has funded. Publishers not only overcharge for access to the publicly funded research that researchers give them for free and that researchers peer-review for them for free¡­ Publishers also deny (embargo) non-subscriber access for 6 months, a year, 2 years, or even longer to the researchers who can use, build upon and apply it if their institutions cannot afford to subscribe to the journal in which it is published. And what do publishers offer as a remedy to the researchers, institutions and funding councils who have been calling for access to publicly funded research for all its potential users, not just subscribers? Public library access: Let researchers from institutions that cannot afford subscription access betake themselves to a public library whenever they need to access research published in any journal to which their institution cannot afford to subscribe. And this munificence is offered in an online era when all of research could be at the fingertips of all researchers whenever and wherever they are doing their scientific or scholarly research. Meanwhile, let the public console itself by reading the research it has funded, while the researchers who can use, build upon and apply it are denied access unless they hightail it to the public library whenever they need to use anything to which their institutions cannot afford to subscribe. Good job they didn¡¯t propose that it be made accessible at their houses of worship instead¡­