0
Maria Savova, The Claremont Colleges
Terese Heidenwolf, Lafayette College
Kevin Butterfield, University of Richmond
CNI Sp...
SHOULD WE BE BUYING
PRINT BOOKS
OR
E-BOOKS
FOR THE LIBRARY?
SPRING 2013 FALL 2013
94%
2%
4%
Print CABs
E-book CABs
Both print and e-book CABs
88%
5%
7%
Print CABs
E-book CABs
Both pr...
 Titles from the Course Adopted Books list:
 Excluded from the study:
 titles in the public domain;
 multiple print co...
 Do students tend to use print or e-
books for their course readings?
(looking to identify trends, but not to explain the...
Print books:
 # of circulations
 # of renewals
 # of times the book is
re-shelved – i.e. internal
use
 length of the l...
1. Has the title been used at least once?
[yes or no]
2. How many times per average each
title has been used? [number of u...
Q1: Has the title been
used at least once?
[yes or no]
SPRING 2013
(P+E SAMPLE OF 96 TITLES)
28%
20%
37%
15%
Not usedE- only
Print onlyBoth formats
19%
10%
47%
24%
Not used
E- o...
71% 66%
54% 57%
29% 34%
46% 43%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
electronic print electronic print
Spring 2013 Fall 2013
used ...
Q2: How many times
per average each title
has been used?
[number of uses
(checkouts, renewals, online access
sessions, dow...
3.90
14.68
7.71
12.28
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
Print uses E-uses
Spring Fall
63 titles
used
246 ti...
1.59
2.20
1.77
11.80
5.28
1.59
6.17
2.10
10.99
3.48
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
Checkouts Renewals Link+ re...
Q3: Average scope of
the usage per title
[length of the
loan/download, length of the
online session, number of pages
acces...
8.4 6.3
24.92
15.68
344.56
5.6 3.8
56.58
30.36
297.65
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Reserve (h) Time read online
(h)
CA...
 How does being a CAB affect the usage
of a print book in comparison with
other print books?
 Does the fact there is an ...
 How does being a CAB affect the usage of
an e-book in comparison with other e-
books?
 Does the fact there is a print b...
411
155
323
290282
524
311
44 50 43
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Spring EBL Spring Ebrary Fall EBL Fall Ebrary
Pages viewed
p...
 Course Adopted Books are a good investment
for the Library – in both formats
 The data does not show clear preference t...
 More data – including titles from syllabi and
reading lists, and including data from other e-book
providers.
 More data...
 ~50,000 DDA titles from EBL (updating profile +
manual additions)
 5 Months: Oct 2013 – Feb 2014
 Autopurchase on 5th ...
2598
(40%)
57 (7%)
2866
(44%)
526
(8%)
478 (7%)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Free browses STLs Autopurchase
Paid Fr...
 1 STL – 1594 titles (78%)
 2 STLs – 237 titles (12%)
 3 STLs – 66 titles (3%)
 4 STLs – 83 titles (4%)
 Autopurchase...
149
1247
53
544
5783
177
Faculty Students Staff
# of unique users # of uses
20% of all faculty on campus and
18% of all st...
470
(17.52%)
1648
(61.42%)
565
(21.06%)
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
AH SS ST
Unique titles by d...
30 53
11
68
523
19
73
206 179
28
123
183
1 22
94
24 27 2
124
50
257
142
444
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
Unique...
5 2 4 5 3 8 9 13
859
1108
1610
2762
137
3 2 3 2 1 2 4 6
352
449
669
1337
76
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
2001 2002 2003 ...
Average number of uses per title varies between 2 and 3 for most publishers.
Notable exception – NYU Press with 5.57 avera...
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
8-9
am
9-10
am
10-11
am
11 am
- 12
pm
12-1
pm
1-2
pm
2-3
pm
3-4
pm
4-5
pm
5-6
pm
6-7
pm
7-8
pm
...
Terese Heidenwolf
Director, Research & Instructional Services
CNI spring membership meeting
April 1, 2014
Lafayette College profile:
2,478 undergraduates (liberal arts and engineering)
217 faculty
Library print collection profil...
ebrary Academic Complete (100,000+ titles)
Subscription since 2010
ebrary patron driven acquisitions (37,000+ titles)
• co...
paper (83%)
online (4%)
no preference (13%)
Ithaka local survey results
Ithaka local survey results
Academic Complete:
1442 unique titles with at least 5 pages viewed
ebrary PDA:
349 unique titles used by Lafayette since N...
Academic Complete:
Price per title based upon use of unique titles: $3.71
Ebrary PDA:
Our price per title based upon use b...
1 trigger (79%)
2 triggers (13%)
3 triggers (5%)
4 triggers (3%)
8 months of data: 814 STLs
1021 unique titles use in 12 months.
12% used by more than one institution:
109 used by two institutions
6 used by three i...
Print is default format.
Duplicate formats only upon request.
Selectors use discretion in purchasing titles that might
bec...
Terese Heidenwolf
heidenwt@lafayette.edu
Lafayette College Library
http://library.lafayette.edu
Kevin Butterfield, University Librarian
University of Richmond
 4,249 professional and undergraduate
students
 250,000 eBooks available
 142,000 “uses” recorded in 2012-2013
 Review...
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Jan-Mar 2012
Apr-Jun 2012
Jul-Sep 2012
Oct-Dec 2012
Jan-Mar 2013
Apr-Jun 2013
Jul-Sep...
• Use driven primarily by Ebrary and Safari Tech Books
• Changes tied to curricular fluctuations and first year seminars
-...
 DDA program led to drop in firm orders
 Increased “uses” following discovery layer
implementation
 Changing student at...
 Content determines value
 Access determines use
 Curricular need determines adoption
QUESTIONS?
Maria Savova - maria_savova@cuc.claremont.edu
Terese Heidenwolf - heidenwt@lafayette.edu
Kevin Butterfield - kb...
Assessment of e-book strategies - CNI Spring 2014
Assessment of e-book strategies - CNI Spring 2014
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Assessment of e-book strategies - CNI Spring 2014

646

Published on

What do we know about the use and acceptance of e-books by students and faculty? At the December CNI Executive Roundtable, “E-book Strategies,” several institutions reported on data collection efforts to assist them in better understanding the use of and satisfaction with e-books among their constituencies. In this session, findings from three institutions provide insight into the kinds of information collected, what the data revealed, and the impact of these studies on policies and strategic directions.

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
646
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Don’t have approval plan; librarians and faculty collaborate on selection.
  • Not all of our offerings, but largest and those that have most affected our policies.Academic Complete:Large pool of leased titles from wide variety of academic publishers.Pricing based upon FTE, so economical way to get e-books at low price per use.Titles from recent year are rarely included; pool of titles not stableLVAIC PDAPooled fund, with contributions from all six members of consortium. Initial contributions varied with library budgets (total initial $30K); additional contributions roughly based upon use.Required a lot of negotiation as ebrary had to work out the details with each publisher individually.Any triggered titles are available to all institutions with 3 simultaneous users allowed.Triggers: 10 min, 10 pages, any printing or downloading Duplicates from Academic Complete package removed.Pricing for STLs: 10% of list price for one-day STL; purchase is 1.5 list.
  • Small sample, but asked at point of need and for particular title. (Some users have different preferences depending upon title.)No preference = no preference indicated.2013:236 book requests from 56 individuals 155 fac requests from 26 fac 51 stu requests from 19 stu 30 staff requests from 11 staffPrefer paper: 196 requests (83%) 127 fac requests (82%) 46 stu requests (90%) 23 staff requests (77%) Prefer online: 10 9 fac requests 1 stu request No pref indicated: 30 19 fac requests 4 stu requests 7 staff requests
  • But use preferences don’t tell whole storySpring 2013, one of 12 institutions piloted a local version of the Ithaka S+R faculty survey, designed to capture a picture of faculty members’ research and teaching practices. About half of faculty responded. In chart above n=98.Depends upon how faculty (and students) are using the book: searching v. reading in depth.
  • Very small compared to overall circulation in a year, but enough to pay attention to.1238 unique titles triggered throughout life of LVAIC PDA program.Circ of all items: ~59,000Student: 34,582Faculty: 14,934Other: 9,544
  • Academic complete: 12 month subscription: $5346 (actually less b/c of LVAIC discount)LVAIC PDA: Laf paid $22,000 Bowker average price for hardcover, 2012: $94.09Bowker average price academic, 2011: $93.26Bowker academic e-book, 2011: $115.86Bowker average price of print: $76.52The 2013 Choice College Book Price: the overall average price for books in the four major sections of Choice—Humanities, Science & Technology, Social & Behavioral Sciences, and Reference—was $73.78. Excluding reference books, the 2013 average price was $69.30.
  • If most titles don’t generate multiple triggers, then STLs make sense.814 STLS; 614 titles483 one use83 two uses = 16628 three uses = 8420 four uses = 8010 triggered by more than one institution, including 1 that was triggered by 3.Will see how data changes as time period extends.
  • Yes if titles are used by multiple institutions. No if not a lot of overlap between sets of titles each institution is using.Total consortial FTE: ~16,800; began with $30,00012% used by more than one institution(Title used by 5 of 6 institutions is on fracking. Institutions not far from Marcellus Shale region.)Desire for cooperative enterprise.
  • Want to be agile in experimenting with new purchasing models but still judicious in how we spend our budget.Selectors know which presses in PDA plans (but can’t know just which titles will be available).My selection: less likely to buy high-priced commercial publishers (e.g. Palgrave, Brill) but also affecting university press purchases for topical titles.Packages: usually contain significant number of titles that aren’t relevant to our curriculumOther questions: Do books used heavily in e-format also circulate a lot in print?Do books in certain disciplines see high use as e-books?
  • Transcript of "Assessment of e-book strategies - CNI Spring 2014"

    1. 1. Maria Savova, The Claremont Colleges Terese Heidenwolf, Lafayette College Kevin Butterfield, University of Richmond CNI Spring meeting – April 1, 2014
    2. 2. SHOULD WE BE BUYING PRINT BOOKS OR E-BOOKS FOR THE LIBRARY?
    3. 3. SPRING 2013 FALL 2013 94% 2% 4% Print CABs E-book CABs Both print and e-book CABs 88% 5% 7% Print CABs E-book CABs Both print and e-book CABs 96 titles 123 titles
    4. 4.  Titles from the Course Adopted Books list:  Excluded from the study:  titles in the public domain;  multiple print copies;  available e-books, no MARC records in the catalogue
    5. 5.  Do students tend to use print or e- books for their course readings? (looking to identify trends, but not to explain them) Decision regarding format purchases for the CAB service.
    6. 6. Print books:  # of circulations  # of renewals  # of times the book is re-shelved – i.e. internal use  length of the loan period o in days o in hours (for reserve) E-books  # of online sessions  # of downloads  # of section requests  # of unique users  # of pages viewed  # of pages copied/printed  length of online session in minutes  length of downloads in days
    7. 7. 1. Has the title been used at least once? [yes or no] 2. How many times per average each title has been used? [number of uses (checkouts, renewals, online access sessions, downloads) per used title] 3. Average scope of the usage per title [length of the loan/download, length of the online session, pages accessed]
    8. 8. Q1: Has the title been used at least once? [yes or no]
    9. 9. SPRING 2013 (P+E SAMPLE OF 96 TITLES) 28% 20% 37% 15% Not usedE- only Print onlyBoth formats 19% 10% 47% 24% Not used E- only Both formats Print only FALL 2013 (P+E SAMPLE OF 123 TITLES)
    10. 10. 71% 66% 54% 57% 29% 34% 46% 43% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% electronic print electronic print Spring 2013 Fall 2013 used not used
    11. 11. Q2: How many times per average each title has been used? [number of uses (checkouts, renewals, online access sessions, downloads) per used title]
    12. 12. 3.90 14.68 7.71 12.28 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 Print uses E-uses Spring Fall 63 titles used 246 times 77 titles used 594 times 74 titles used 1086 times 67 titles used 823 times
    13. 13. 1.59 2.20 1.77 11.80 5.28 1.59 6.17 2.10 10.99 3.48 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 Checkouts Renewals Link+ requests Online sessions Downloads Spring Fall
    14. 14. Q3: Average scope of the usage per title [length of the loan/download, length of the online session, number of pages accessed]
    15. 15. 8.4 6.3 24.92 15.68 344.56 5.6 3.8 56.58 30.36 297.65 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Reserve (h) Time read online (h) CAB loan (days) Download length (days) Pages viewed Spring Fall E-BOOKS PRINT BOOKS PRINT BOOKSE-BOOKS E-BOOKS
    16. 16.  How does being a CAB affect the usage of a print book in comparison with other print books?  Does the fact there is an e-book available for the same title affect the usage of a print CAB?
    17. 17.  How does being a CAB affect the usage of an e-book in comparison with other e- books?  Does the fact there is a print book available for the same title affect the usage of an e-CAB?
    18. 18. 411 155 323 290282 524 311 44 50 43 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Spring EBL Spring Ebrary Fall EBL Fall Ebrary Pages viewed p+e CABs e-CABs All e-books
    19. 19.  Course Adopted Books are a good investment for the Library – in both formats  The data does not show clear preference to one format vs. the other across the disciplines  We have no justification to prefer neither print nor e- across the board and need to drill down into the data on a subject level
    20. 20.  More data – including titles from syllabi and reading lists, and including data from other e-book providers.  More data analysis – on a subject level  More detailed analysis on the not used titles  Correlating the usage data with other sources – surveys, qualitative data, anecdotal evidence – to try and figure out the “why”
    21. 21.  ~50,000 DDA titles from EBL (updating profile + manual additions)  5 Months: Oct 2013 – Feb 2014  Autopurchase on 5th short term loan (STL)  List price of titles used $347,600  Spent $32,650 (9.3%):  57 autopurchases @ $ 5,764  2598 STLs @ $ 26,888
    22. 22. 2598 (40%) 57 (7%) 2866 (44%) 526 (8%) 478 (7%) 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 Free browses STLs Autopurchase Paid Free
    23. 23.  1 STL – 1594 titles (78%)  2 STLs – 237 titles (12%)  3 STLs – 66 titles (3%)  4 STLs – 83 titles (4%)  Autopurchased (on 5th paid use) – 57 titles (3%)  47 titles used again after autopurchase: ▪ 28 titles used between 1 and 10 times ▪ 13 titles used between 11 and 20 times ▪ 5 titles used between 25 and 73 times  Of the 10 titles not used again after autopurchase, half were purchased in Feb.
    24. 24. 149 1247 53 544 5783 177 Faculty Students Staff # of unique users # of uses 20% of all faculty on campus and 18% of all students have used a DDA e-book at least once. 89% of all use comes from students, 8% from faculty, 3% from staff. The average number of uses per individual user is: 3.65 for faculty, 4.64 for students, 3.34 for staff
    25. 25. 470 (17.52%) 1648 (61.42%) 565 (21.06%) 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% AH SS ST Unique titles by discipline
    26. 26. 30 53 11 68 523 19 73 206 179 28 123 183 1 22 94 24 27 2 124 50 257 142 444 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% Unique titles by subject
    27. 27. 5 2 4 5 3 8 9 13 859 1108 1610 2762 137 3 2 3 2 1 2 4 6 352 449 669 1337 76 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Titles and number of uses by year of publication Uses by year of publication Titles by year of publication
    28. 28. Average number of uses per title varies between 2 and 3 for most publishers. Notable exception – NYU Press with 5.57 average uses per title 1854 742 694 322 310 301 195 162 159 143 142 132 125 123 85 902 389 295 115 189 123 35 60 48 47 70 41 37 44 37 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 Titles and number of uses by publisher Uses by publisher Titles by publisher
    29. 29. 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 8-9 am 9-10 am 10-11 am 11 am - 12 pm 12-1 pm 1-2 pm 2-3 pm 3-4 pm 4-5 pm 5-6 pm 6-7 pm 7-8 pm 8-9 pm 9-10 pm 10-11 pm 11 pm - 12 am 12-1 am 1-2 am 2-3 am 3-4 am 4-5 am 5-6 am 6-7 am 7-8 am Dec 24 - Jan 20 (Winter break) 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00% 9.00% 8-9 am 9-10 am 10-11 am 11 am - 12 pm 12-1 pm 1-2 pm 2-3 pm 3-4 pm 4-5 pm 5-6 pm 6-7 pm 7-8 pm 8-9 pm 9-10 pm 10-11 pm 11 pm - 12 am 12-1 am 1-2 am 2-3 am 3-4 am 4-5 am 5-6 am 6-7 am 7-8 am Sep 27 - Dec 23; Jan 21-Feb 25 (During the semester)
    30. 30. Terese Heidenwolf Director, Research & Instructional Services CNI spring membership meeting April 1, 2014
    31. 31. Lafayette College profile: 2,478 undergraduates (liberal arts and engineering) 217 faculty Library print collection profile: 590,000 volumes 8,000+ print books added in 2013
    32. 32. ebrary Academic Complete (100,000+ titles) Subscription since 2010 ebrary patron driven acquisitions (37,000+ titles) • consortial effort with 5 other institutions • began Nov. 2012 with all triggers leading to purchases • after 6 months, switched to 3 one-day STLs before purchase • now: • 27 publishers • Only titles allowing STLs
    33. 33. paper (83%) online (4%) no preference (13%)
    34. 34. Ithaka local survey results Ithaka local survey results
    35. 35. Academic Complete: 1442 unique titles with at least 5 pages viewed ebrary PDA: 349 unique titles used by Lafayette since Nov. 2012
    36. 36. Academic Complete: Price per title based upon use of unique titles: $3.71 Ebrary PDA: Our price per title based upon use by Lafayette: $58.67 Our price per title based upon titles purchased across consortia: $46.71
    37. 37. 1 trigger (79%) 2 triggers (13%) 3 triggers (5%) 4 triggers (3%) 8 months of data: 814 STLs
    38. 38. 1021 unique titles use in 12 months. 12% used by more than one institution: 109 used by two institutions 6 used by three institutions 4 used by four institutions 1 used by five institutions 0 used by six institutions
    39. 39. Print is default format. Duplicate formats only upon request. Selectors use discretion in purchasing titles that might become available as PDA. Avoid purchasing publisher packages of all e-books.
    40. 40. Terese Heidenwolf heidenwt@lafayette.edu Lafayette College Library http://library.lafayette.edu
    41. 41. Kevin Butterfield, University Librarian University of Richmond
    42. 42.  4,249 professional and undergraduate students  250,000 eBooks available  142,000 “uses” recorded in 2012-2013  Reviews conducted by Assessment Team, Library Fellows and Ethnographic Research Team
    43. 43. 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 Jan-Mar 2012 Apr-Jun 2012 Jul-Sep 2012 Oct-Dec 2012 Jan-Mar 2013 Apr-Jun 2013 Jul-Sep 2013 Oct-Dec 2013 Ebrary Safari Tech Books ACLS Humanities Ebooks Gale EBSCOhost SAGE Publications Springer-Verlag Brill American Psychological Association Elsevier Wiley-Blackwell Cambridge University Press Salem Press, World Bank, and JHU Press
    44. 44. • Use driven primarily by Ebrary and Safari Tech Books • Changes tied to curricular fluctuations and first year seminars - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec CY2012 CY2013 Average
    45. 45.  DDA program led to drop in firm orders  Increased “uses” following discovery layer implementation  Changing student attitudes toward technology / BYOD  Heavier adoption in the social sciences, computer science and business  Lighter adoption in the humanities, sciences, law
    46. 46.  Content determines value  Access determines use  Curricular need determines adoption
    47. 47. QUESTIONS? Maria Savova - maria_savova@cuc.claremont.edu Terese Heidenwolf - heidenwt@lafayette.edu Kevin Butterfield - kbutterf@richmond.edu www.slideshare.net/mariasavova3
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×