It is also important to note that we kept an “exceptions” spreadsheet of items that resisted mapping to a FUND. These items amounted to less than 1% of all items and the list was made available to all of the selectors.
The threshold of more than 1 circ per year was selected based on the general rule of thumb that, especially for items available within our consortia, the Triangle Research Libraries Network (TRLN), borrowing through ILL up to once per year would cost less than acquiring, storing, and preserving a copy of our own.
Transcript of "Looking forward by looking back: Books at the end of the book"
XXX Annual Charleston Conference
Looking forward by looking back:
Books at the end of the book
Diminished fiscal resources
Rapid shift towards digital formats
Last opportunity to capture use-data from a primarily
print monographic world
Can historic use of print
books predict e-book use?
How might electronic
availability change use
patterns within different
How might historic use data
with regard to new models?
Examined 10-year period from 1997-2007
Date book added to catalog
Date the item last circulated
LC call number
Price (total and unit)
Firm order/approval order/gift
Binding (cloth or paper)
Current status (checked out, stacks,
Library (branch or main) that holds
Circulation total and last date circulated included --
no other dates tracked
Broken into out
by LC range into
all 10 years of
items from the
last 2 ½ years
We color-coded the spreadsheets in the following way:
RED denoted an item that averages more than 2 circs per year
over its life in the collection.
YELLOW denoted an item that averages more than 1 (and up
to 2) circs per year over its life.
WHITE denoted items not fitting a color category (see below).
LIGHT BLUE denoted an item that has circulated only 1 time
DARK BLUE denoted an item that has never circulated.
_1 _2 _3 _4 _5 _6 _7 _8 _9 _10
Am I Hot or Not?
No one right way
Sheer use only a starting point
Approval plan should catch “must-
Many call number ranges were not obvious
candidates for slip or approval and then selectors
had to determine why.
Many many other reasons?
Funds (the money)
Each selector determined cuts of 20% and 40%
from their funds.
Approximate money saved based on previous 2
Estimate cuts from approval and firm
Net amount “saved” subtracted from approval plan
Balance work of selecting--not simply move
wholesale to an item-by-item selection
We were able to…
20% and 40% cuts
Only had to take 20%!
Identify Themes !
Humanities circulation tends to rise over time
Science and math tend to circulate more heavily initially
OVERALL non-circulating items are likely to circulate after 5 years
Purchase on demand program
If an electronic title is opened 5 times NCSU Libraries
automatically purchases it
Catalog titles are not removed
Some schools are dropping titles that aren’t requested or
“opened” within 6 mos.
Our study indicates that, across disciplines, this will leave
users without access to needed titles, if print use is indicative
of e-book use
Can monographic use patterns predict e-use
Not enough data yet!
Sample data trends towards yes in some disciplines
In QA call ranges for the subject area math, with use counted
as pages viewed, high use and low use ranges line up closely
with ebrary use since 2005
In B and BJ ranges for the subject area philosophy no
discernable pattern is recognizable
Comprehensive examination of use via publisher
Use data to select efficiently
Baseline for studies to examine change in use
patterns as e-titles increase
(Continue to) examine, across disciplines, whether
or not print use predicts e-use