100 into 2 wont go

402 views

Published on

These slides were presented in July 2010, to academics in the Law and Criminology dept. Taking a quiz-style format, they introduce academics to the challenges of resource provision around lists as a pre-cursor to presenting Talis Aspire.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
402
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Red star and Greenline orders order
  • Sage dictionary total uses for current year 14829 we have 26 copies in print whichare also well used. (Mention editions)
  • Old slide VAT rising
  • 100 into 2 wont go

    1. 1. Whilst we wait to start please visithttp://www.netvibes.com/icjsrssfeeds#General<br />Please look at the reading lists appearing in the left hand column.<br />I would ask you to write any comments on<br />Appearance, structure, size, annotation with an indication of subject of the list <br />on a post it note which you can post to the flip chart at the front. <br />
    2. 2. 100 into 2 won’t go<br />
    3. 3. Teaching with a set text<br />Problems of access OR can we hope to satisfy student demand for access to books?<br />
    4. 4. What do you think is the maximum number of students that one copy of a 7 day loan textbook could reach in one semester?<br />15<br />25<br />45<br />
    5. 5. How many students is one 7-day loan textbook likely to service in a semester?<br />Basedon<br /><ul><li>assignment on topic covered by textbook due at end of week 10
    6. 6. students not aware of reading list till day 5 of semester
    7. 7. students willing to read the book in an early week of semester and make any notes needed in that week, with no further access except perhaps to a 1 day or 4 hour loan copy …</li></li></ul><li>Best case scenario<br />Day 5 book issued to student 1<br />Day 12 due back (Student 2 reserves in this first week) Book is returned on time<br />Day 13 reservation staff deal with book and place note on catalogue<br />Email to Student 2 generated overnight <br />Day 14 Student 2 receives email and collects book <br />Day 21 Student 2 returns book<br />Day 22 staff deal with reservation <br />Day 23 Student 3 collects book  <br />Day 30 student 3 returns book<br />And so on until<br />Day 68 Student 8 picks up book<br />
    8. 8. Worst case scenario<br />Day 29 staff deal with book<br />Day 37 – Student 3 picks up book on last possible day<br />Day 44 Student 3 returns book<br />Day 45 staff deal with book<br />Day 53 –Student 4 does not pick up book until last possible day<br />Day 60 Student 4 returns book <br />Day 61 Staff deal with book<br />Day 69 Student 5 picks up book on last possible day<br />Day 5 book issued to student 1<br />Day 12 due back (Student 2 reserves in this first week) Book is returned on time<br />Day 13 reservation staff deal with book and place note on catalogue<br />Email to Student 2 generated overnight <br />Day 14 Student 2 receives email but collects book on last possible day – Day 21 <br />Day 28 Student 2 brings back book <br />
    9. 9. Seems unlikely?<br />What about part-time students who only attend once a week?<br />What about when the due date is a Friday? – in practice with a skeleton staff at weekends, the reservation will not be dealt with until Monday<br /> What about students who do not return the book on the due date? Many seem willing to regard a fine as a rental payment<br />In practice greatest demand for books 2-3 weeks before assignment due date<br />
    10. 10. Collection development<br />Planned or happenstance?<br />Reactive or proactive<br />Print/electronic balance<br />
    11. 11. For a book order categorised as “non-urgent “ how long do you think it normally takes from ordering for the book to reach the library shelves?<br />20 working days<br />50 working days<br />70 working days<br />
    12. 12. Where do you think Portsmouth students come in a league table of Ebrary users?<br />2nd<br />8th<br />15th<br />
    13. 13. Ebrary Usage Stats<br />38,485 books available to UoP Cost per user session=16p<br />Total pages viewed was 1,700,002 in 2007/08<br />15,221 pages viewed on 8 December 2008 alone<br />
    14. 14. Ebrary Use within UoP 2007/08<br />
    15. 15. Which do you think is the cheaper format for an institutional subscription to a typical journal?<br />Print<br />Electronic<br />Print & Electronic combined<br />
    16. 16. 2009 prices for Human Relations<br />Print Only<br />Electronic<br />Only 1999-<br />Electronic Only<br />Complete Back<br /> File<br />Print and <br />Electronic <br />Access 1999-<br />Print and<br />Electronic<br />Complete Back<br />File<br />$1880<br />$1918<br />$2110<br />$1726<br />$1918<br />£1319<br />£1451<br />£1187<br />£1319<br />£1293<br />Jan ‘09<br />£964<br />£984<br />£1082<br />£885<br />£984<br />Jan ‘08<br />
    17. 17. But, there is VAT to pay on electronic subscriptions<br />Print Only<br />Electronic<br />Only 1999-<br />Electronic Only<br />Complete Back<br /> File<br />Print and <br />Electronic <br />Access 1999-<br />Print and<br />Electronic<br />Complete Back<br />File<br />$1880<br />$1918<br />$2110<br />$1726<br />$1918<br />£1293<br />£1319<br />£1451<br />£1187<br />£1319<br />17.5% VAT<br />17.5% VAT<br />VAT<br />VAT<br />£1395<br />£1550<br />proportion varies based <br />on publishers calculation<br />
    18. 18. But watch the trend!<br />Sample e and print journal usage over 9 years<br />
    19. 19. Do you think we should be buying more e-only books even for campus based courses?<br />Yes<br />No<br />
    20. 20. Do you think we should move towards buying e-only journals?<br />Yes<br />No<br />
    21. 21. If we have a stable archive of e-journals such as JSTOR, do you think we should remove the equivalent print journals and re-use the space?<br />Yes<br />No<br />
    22. 22. References<br />S. Bartlett. Resource list management: a system based approach. Library and Information. Library & Information Update June 2010.<br />J. Chelin, M.McEachran, & E. Williams. 500 into 4 won’t go how to solve the problem of reading list expectations. SCONUL Focus 36 Winter 2002<br />A. J. Head and M. B. Eisenberg. Lessons Learned: how college students seek information in the digital age. 2009 (http://projectinfolit.org/pdfs/PIL_Fall2009_Year1Report_12_2009.pdf).<br />H. Jones. Reading Lists in Cambridge: a standard system? Arcadia Project, 2009<br />(http://arcadiaproject.lib.cam.ac.uk/docs/readinglist_Report.pdf).<br />Publihers Association. Open books: open minds. P.A. 2006.(http://projectinfolit.org/pdfs/PIL_Fall2009_Year1Report_12_2009.pdf).<br />J. Stamenkovic. Has the core text had its day? University of Portsmouth Briefing Paper. 2006.<br />

    ×