Journal Review Benefits Beyond the Budget: Dollars and Sense at Wayne State University


Published on

Thursday, November 4, 5:45 PM

Beth A. Callahan - Wayne State University
Cynthia H. Krolikowski - Wayne State University

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Bc
  • bc
  • BC
  • Timeline fleshed out by Team, translated to website for public
  • bc
  • sounding board for Review
    create advocates back to departments, gave us additional credibility due to their buy-in
    focus group for Journal list
    changed the name from Serial to Journal
    suggested “bundle” rather than package or “Big Deals”
    use stats: reshelving stats instead of use stats
  • Provided a variety of opportunities that each person could choose
  • bc
  • Bc How much was saved?
  • Ck
  • Ck
  • ck
  • ck
  • ck
  • ck
  • Ck
  • ck
  • ck
  • ck
  • Journal Review Benefits Beyond the Budget: Dollars and Sense at Wayne State University

    1. 1. Journal Review Benefits Beyond the Budget: Dollars and Sense at Wayne State University Beth A. Callahan Assistant Director for Acquisitions & Serials Cynthia H. Krolikowski Public Services Librarian
    2. 2. Wayne State University • One of the nation’s leading urban research universities with a demonstrated commitment to teaching and learning excellence; 350 schools, colleges, & programs • Carnegie-ranked Research University with Very High Research Activity • Library System includes 5 libraries: undergraduate, 2 graduate, Law & Medicine plus School of Library & Information Science • All libraries participated in the Review
    3. 3. WSU Collections in General • Volumes in Library 3,660,642 • Current Serials 45,400 • Microform 3,896,048 • Manuscripts & archives 74,000 • Graphic materials 2,159,539 • Film & video 30,565 • Expenditures (total) $9,007,142 • Monographs $1,181,664 • Current Serials $7,495,718 • Total electronic budget (88.5%) $7,971,488 ARL Statistics 2007-8
    4. 4. Journal Review Beginnings • Team began meeting in Nov 2008 • New President was just elected • Before the housing market collapse • Before Wall Street’s “bailout” • Before automakers’ bailout
    5. 5. Serial Review Team • Team composition • Department representation • Subject representation • Data & survey savvy • Acquisitions – all levels • Serials – all levels • Helped by: • Library Communications/PR • Electronic Resources Librarian • Acquisitions Librarian • Website support • Access staff (gathered shelving stats)
    6. 6. Team’s Goals, Outcomes & Implementation • Spring 2009 • Review and align current serial and standing order subscriptions to support the teaching and research missions of Wayne State University • Develop procedures for future serial and standing order subscription review and alignment • Timeline
    7. 7. Journal Review Plan • Plan for the evaluation of all journal subscriptions that would involve as many of the stakeholders on campus as possible • Stakeholder identification • Team held brainstorming session • University Library Committee • Faculty • Students (while identified as important stakeholders, were not actively solicited for this review)
    8. 8. Serials Review Team’s Plan • Highlights • Length of time: November completes 2 years, predict completion by end of 1st quarter 2011 • Brainstorming sessions, lots! • Liaison buy-in, everyone participated • Butcher paper circled the room with the timeline during meetings as reminder • Where are we now • Liaisons have final list for review & distribution • Liaison Survey to guide recommendations for future Reviews to the Dean • Acquisitions and Serials implementing decisions
    9. 9. Activities Supporting the Review • Dean presented at Academic Senate • Dean discussed Review at Council of Deans • Provost openly supportive • Dean’s encouragement and visible support by meeting with Liaisons • Meeting with Library committee (composed of appointed faculty of University at large)
    10. 10. Training for Liaisons Team recognized Liaisons might benefit from training opportunities before meeting with faculty • Immersion Day • Communication skills and strategies to convey information to faculty • Creating customized journal list – Training offered in Excel and other software as needed – Group and individual consultations
    11. 11. Communication Tools Team recognized Liaisons would need multiple ways of effectively communicating and tried to provide flexible tools to help • Introduction letter to departments • Handouts • Why the Library Buys Bundled Packages of Journals • FAQ • 4 Things You Need To Know About Journal Price Inflation • 4 Things You Need To Know About ILL • PowerPoint: complete version for web, Liaison could select slides most appropriate to their circumstances • Website Letter from the Dean Goals & Objectives Team Members Timeline Handouts PowerPoint slides Links to Liaisons Industry reports Cost History Grouped by LC chart Link to fulltext Library Journal article Link to CPI Final list
    12. 12. WSU Journal List • List of journal titles for reviews • 6,053 titles including bundled titles, e.g., Sage • Journals defined - current subscription, no standing orders, includes all bundled orders, Big Deals as well as small packages, e.g., AARP • Canceled • 1,114 individual titles • 18% of titles on list; 25% of available titles
    13. 13. Journal Review List • Complete list with all Data sent to Liaisons • Liaisons used a variety of indicators to create customized ranked lists for faculty • Lists were not driven by current or historical funds codes • Extremely interdisciplinary • Much less restrictive than previous reviews • Data will be retained for future Reviews
    14. 14. Journal Review List • Advances in technology contributed to the creation of the Journal Review list • Tagging allows Liaisons to “own” titles, transcends LC subject headings and historical fund codes
    15. 15. Initial Liaison Contact with Faculty • Promoted coming Review in informal situations and conversations with faculty and other Liaisons • Introduction letter • Majority of Liaisons set up formal appointments with departments
    16. 16. Faculty Input • Agree or disagree with Liaison rankings • New titles suggestions were encouraged • Review of Liaison selected interdisciplinary titles was encouraged • Faculty knowledge of state of the discipline
    17. 17. Limitations of Customized List • Need a better way to communicate journal package information • Need to find a better way to include aggregator use data • Guessed what data Liaisons and faculty needed to make decisions • Chose to not attach subject headings to encourage unrestrained selection
    18. 18. Limitations of Customized List • Incorporate document delivery statistics & information • Incorporate journal use data from student and faculty written output • Faculty publications • Dissertations and theses • Capstone class papers
    19. 19. Unintended Consequences A cadre of Librarian Liaisons who possess more than just superficial knowledge about the departments for which they are responsible.
    20. 20. Unintended Consequences Be mindful of the technological capabilities of users when involving departments in library-related surveys or projects & when purchasing or recommending electronic resources!
    21. 21. Unintended Consequences Be mindful that each department is unique & old labels may not be relevant anymore.
    22. 22. Unintended Consequences Liaison activities need to be tailored to the tolerance level of the department.
    23. 23. Unintended Consequences The old model of impersonal title list transfers to faculty has seen its day. The review of data rich journal title documents with interested faculty seemed to go better when small groups were assembled (faculty meetings, appointments with interested faculty) and face to face contact was made.
    24. 24. Unintended Consequences Liaisons agree: Technical Services People Rock!
    25. 25. Thank You! Cindy Krolikowski Public Services Librarian Beth Callahan Assistant Director for Acquisitions