Something's gotta give 10312011


Published on

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
  • At the University of South Florida Tampa Library in 2004-5, $2,092,304 was spent on print monographs and serials and $2,566,404 on their electronic counterparts. Fast-forward to 2008-9 and that figure has gone through an accelerated transition; $1,662,524 is now spent on print monographs and serials and a drastically higher number of $4,236,350
  • Kennedy, 2005Douglas, 2009Biblarz, 2001
  • quite common method of purchase across multiple formats (including e-books) and libraries (p. 5, 2010). Libraries are often “forced” into large group or consortia purchases by economic realities or deals too good to pass up. If this efficiency may be effectively harnessed, these practices may become an important part of new collection policies.
  • Reasons to assess the collectionMeasure of an institutions commitment to a program is viewed by accrediting bodiesUnfortunately, numeric matrices are used as a measure of quality
  • The environments that require examination in the new world of CD policies include both internal and external. The comparative information is much more prevalent and accessible than ever before, allowing for extensive goal setting...something a policy document can and should (if used) continue to embrace
  • Using InfoCenter, grants databases, class offering matrices, etc.
  • Need to plan for iPad, Kindle, etc. New textbook they become part of the public services librarian’s responsibility (and part of the policy?)
  • Tech minded – internet savvy, not afraid to chase down an elusive article on unfamiliar websitesMobile users – need apps and mobile friendly websitesSciences are early adopters of open access, although some still more concerned about IF/tenureVideo – Journal of Visualized Experiments, Protocol video databases, VADLO
  • Do we need to look at student requirements (computer, iPads, etc.) as we build new policiesVideo projects…not just painting and art historyStreaming video for music, theater, and dance (some open access, some not)Robotic wheelchair (moving dance chair) – danceResearch is collaborative across disciplinesDance is working with the department of health on hand-washingInterdisciplinary, collaborative, and international…funding opportunities more and more linked to these concepts
  • How can these principles shape new types of policy documents
  • Increasing importance of these links and lists...helping maintain integral and core items for balanced collection, but specialty lists to help with collections of particular emphasis
  • It was so time consuming and with little reward. New tools make “low hanging” fruit even lowerFaculty love the responsive nature and the ability to “make their case” for new materials/collectionsTried to pass more selection ability along to constituents, but with little rewardSome faculty are opposed to doing this type of collection-building work (this is our/the library’s job)
  • How much can we promise (we can’t buy everything they ask)?What type of information do we provide about how we make PDA purchases? Do we risk someone “buying” things disproportinally for their area?How do ILL departments balance buy/borrow in these new times?Can we write “rentals” into a new policy structure?
  • Pilot project at University of ?Numbers from USF
  • “Living Framework” concept from the new philosophiesDo we even want gift books? Impossible in some environments…depends on staffingMegan – old science book example
  • Why are they all in medicine? What’s unique about certain disciplines that help drive new policies and policy formats. Will this work as an over-arching format?
  • Do the changes in format and economics require policies that address these shifts?If policies remain integral to building collections, does the continued effective use of this type of document require minor tweaks, or massive changes?Is the conspectus model relevant/upgradeable?Can we use new and other tools to supplement, or replace current policy formats (i.e. comparative tools, such as WorldCat Collection Analysis and GoldRush)What types of policies or methods are needed for balanced collections? For collections of distinction?
  • Something's gotta give 10312011

    1. 1. IS THERE A FUTURE FOR THECOLLECTION DEVELOPMENTPOLICY? Charleston Conference 2011 Matt Torrence Megan Sheffield Audrey Powers University of South Florida, Tampa Library
    2. 2. The Changing Face of LibraryCollections Continuing shift to new/electronic formats The’s all about the money More with less  People, resources, and flexibility of purchase Increasing large-scale packages
    3. 3. The Literature “Preservation Implications” Does the conspectus model provide enough flexibility The 2001 IFLA model...a product of the “good” times?  Does have an eye for the future  Can we use the “depth indicators”?
    4. 4. The Conspectus Model First mention of “just in time” metaphor (IFLA, 1991?) Great at planning for print and approval platforms Does allow for flexibility, but how much? Depth of collections still easily measureable?
    5. 5. New Motivations for Policies For “clusters” and hybrid departments The increasingly electronic nature of materials Meeting the needs of our clients  Emphasis on currency and immediacy Patrons driving the collections  PDA and POD
    6. 6. The Call to Continue PolicyDevelopment For archival and platform considerations Collections still need guidance! The pros and cons of “macro-selection” (Nabe)  Efficiency, but at what cost?  What about uniqueness?
    7. 7. Motivations for Planning Fiscally responsible plan for collection growth Develop a balanced collection (or not!) Build a collection of lasting value Measure institution’s commitment Determine quality of collection with numeric matrices
    8. 8. The Environment(s) Both internal and external Peer and aspirant institutions Target areas of programmatic growth Subject areas where collection building could pause due to budget constraints The information needs of the moving user
    9. 9. Assessing Departmental Needs Current and future research / creative activities (surveys & interviews) Current and future teaching needs Analyze faculty publications and dissertations Review departmental web sites Future growth areas of the institution
    10. 10. Collecting in the Sciences &Engineering The needs of the engineering patron...  Desire for seamless and self-guided access  Using web tools to locate and access materials (both in and out of our collections)  Addressing their needs with e-books  Textbook models for the future
    11. 11. Collecting in the Sciences &Engineering The needs of the natural science patron...  Technically minded - not afraid to follow a trail of links  Mobile users  Interested in open access  Increasing requests for video
    12. 12. Collecting in the Arts The multiple needs of the arts…  Faculty sometimes more print-centric  Depending on the discipline  Electronic images limited by equipment  Video projects and collections  Streaming video  Partnerships with science and engineering
    13. 13. Assess the collection forspecific disciplines Using WorldCat Collection Analysis to shape collection Compare your collection to peers and aspirants Determine weak and strong areas (and how to be “unfair”)
    14. 14. Looking at WCCA Results Total number of items in the collection (Total) Total number of items in Art (Art Total) Number of items unique to each institution (Art Unique) Number of items unique to USF compared to institution being reported (USF Art Unique) Number of items both institutions own (Art Overlap)
    15. 15. WCCA Authoritative ListsSelection sources included: Books for College Libraries Library Journal Outstanding Academic Titles Publishers Weekly Different lists for different subjects
    16. 16. Benefits Develop a customized strategy Prioritize needed titles and develop an acquisitions timeline Advanced budget planning (good in these times!) Identify a collection baseline Set realistic benchmarks for growth Drill down to title level
    17. 17.  Identify collection gaps Compile a list of needed titles Distribute collection work Identify needed funds  Calculate dollar amount for remediation Be ready if funds become available Re-run analysis to measure growth
    18. 18. Growing the Collection Use WCCA in tandem with WorldCat Select If moving toward e-only, identify weak areas and select e-titles in the catalog Fiscal challenges may continue…
    19. 19. User-Driven CollectionBuilding Purchase on demand  Always been a part of our lives... Patron Driven Acquisitions  How much do we allot?  How much do we tell our patrons? Expanding ILL departments and budgets Mobile users Pay per view
    20. 20. New Modes of Acquisition Patron-Driven Acquisition (PDA)/Demand-Driven Acquisition (DDA) Purchase-on-Demand (POD) Print-on Demand  Espresso Machine Still some “old school” activities (especially in certain disciplines)  New modes of analysis lead to other new forms of acquisition
    21. 21. New Directions in CollectionDevelopment Patron-centric collection Access and timeliness A “Living Framework” Selection, de-selection, and retention  What about gifts? Plethora of e-Resources
    22. 22. Collection DevelopmentPhilosophies Vanderbilt University Medical Center University of Virginia Health System Northwestern University Health Sciences Library
    23. 23. Questions for Discussion Change in format = new policy? Minor tweaks or massive changes? Can we continue with the conspectus as the base? What about new tools that help us to compare/grow? Balanced vs. unbalanced
    24. 24. Thanks for your time! Other questions or comments? Charleston Conference 2011 Matt Torrence Megan Sheffield Audrey Powers University of South Florida