Successfully reported this slideshow.

All For One and One For All!


Published on

Subtitle: Consortial PDA and Other Collection Development Adventures of the CTW Library Consortium

Elizabeth Hansen, Connecticut College
Patricia Tully, Wesleyan University
Lorraine Huddy, CTW Consortium

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

  • Be the first to like this

All For One and One For All!

  1. 1. All for One and One for All! ACRL-NEC Conference May 14, 2010 Consortial PDA and Other Collection Development Adventures of the CTW Consortium
  2. 2. Presenters Lorraine Huddy, CTW Librarian for Collaborative Collection Projects  Beth Hansen, Director, Information Services, Connecticut College, New London, CT   Doris Kammradt, Head Librarian for Collections, Research and Instruction, Trinity College, Hartford, CT   Pat Tully, University Librarian, Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT
  3. 3. CTW Consortium                                                                                                                      Connecticut College Wesleyan University   Trinity College
  4. 4. CTW Mellon Proposal April 2007 "CTW is requesting a three-year grant from the Mellon Foundation to provide the resources necessary to undertake an in-depth analysis of the three existing collections and to move forward with a well developed plan for collaborative collection building, de-accessioning, and possible storage of duplicate titles. "
  5. 5. Collection Analysis 2008
  6. 6. CD Policies <ul><li>  </li></ul>
  7. 7. And then ... the crash! <ul><ul><li>2008 economic downturn </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Acquisitions budget cuts  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Less emphasis on saving space or increasing titles purchased </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>More on maintaining access to resources </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. <ul><li>CTW's Collaborative  </li></ul><ul><li>Book Pilot Project </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Built on failure of an earlier project </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lessons learned: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Keep the process simple </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Avoid secondary workflows </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Establish clear guidelines </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>The New Project </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Started in late January 2009 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Purpose:  Expand advanced study or research level titles within CTW </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Set up a CTW fund of $25,000 for each library </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developed criteria for its use </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>  Aided by transition to online selection </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. <ul><li>Criteria for use of CTW Fund </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Unique copy at time of order </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Anticipated need: Only 1 copy in CTW </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Long-term value for all three schools </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Substantial publications by academic publishers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Price at $85 or above </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Advanced academic content level </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Preference for English language titles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Part of circulating collection </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Use of CTW Funds - Year 1  <ul><li>      CCD Titles purchased with uniqueness levels </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>                      </li></ul>Total Unique Duplicates Triplicates CC 64 52 11 1 TC 181 130 42 7 WU 247 210 31 6 CTW 492 392 84 14 % of Total   80.1% 17.1% 2.8%
  12. 12. Use of CTW Funds - Year 2 February – April 2010 Total Unique Duplicates Triplicates CC 102 99 3 0 TC 64 53 9 2 WU 83 81 2 0 CTW 249 233 14 2 % of Total   93.6% 5.6% 0.8%
  13. 13. Issues affecting desired outcomes <ul><li>Criteria: Unique title in CTW at time of order </li></ul><ul><li>26 of 98 titles (26.5%) </li></ul><ul><li>now held in duplicate or triplicate </li></ul><ul><li>were owned at the time of order </li></ul><ul><li>    </li></ul><ul><li>But ... this represents only 5% of </li></ul><ul><li>ALL CTW Fund titles purchased in Year 1   </li></ul><ul><li>(26 of 492 titles)     </li></ul>
  14. 14. Issues affecting desired outcomes <ul><li>Criteria: One CTW copy should be enough </li></ul><ul><li>20% of CTW Fund titles are now owned  </li></ul><ul><li>in duplicate or triplicate across CTW </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Criteria: Reserve CTW Funds for titles $85+ </li></ul><ul><li>Of the 492 titles purchased in Year 1: </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>31% (152) titles cost below $75 </li></ul><ul><li>  14%  (68) titles cost below $45 </li></ul>
  15. 15. Benefits of this Project <ul><ul><ul><li>Augments our acquisitions budgets </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Intentionally focuses upon increasing </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>unique content </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Encourages selectors to </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>think and act consortially </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fits established workflows </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Easy accounting and stats </li></ul></ul></ul>
  16. 16. CTW's Shared E-book Pilot   <ul><li>Liaisons ask, “Why limit it to just print?” </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>  Ease of sharing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>  Faster access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>  24/7 access anytime, anywhere </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Multiple users </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>  Cost savings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Patron-driven purchases </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>  Space needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>  Workflow  </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
  17. 17. Where's the Adventure? <ul><li>YBP Pilot = Successful Shared Purchasing Model </li></ul><ul><li>vs. </li></ul><ul><li>Patron-Driven Acquisitions </li></ul><ul><li>Leads to…  </li></ul><ul><li>Skewed collections </li></ul><ul><li>Irrelevant content </li></ul><ul><li>Limited audience </li></ul><ul><li>“ Bananas” </li></ul><ul><li>  So why tamper with success?! </li></ul>
  18. 18. Patron -Driven Acquisitions <ul><li>The Old Model  </li></ul><ul><li>&quot;Just in Case&quot; acquisitions model  </li></ul><ul><li>Perceived need vs. actual need </li></ul><ul><li>Balance of resource and need </li></ul><ul><li>Ownership vs. access </li></ul><ul><li>The New Model </li></ul><ul><li>&quot;User Centered” acquisitions complements &quot;Just in Case” </li></ul><ul><li>Patron use indicates need </li></ul><ul><li>Anticipates ILL and resource sharing alternatives </li></ul><ul><li>May or may not preclude purchase of print     </li></ul>
  19. 19. A New Direction: CTW’s Expectations for PDA <ul><li>PDA selections will complement our </li></ul><ul><li>existing print collection development </li></ul><ul><li>program </li></ul><ul><li>PDA will result in efficiencies for selection and acquisitions </li></ul><ul><li>A shared PDA e-book program will result in significant cost savings </li></ul><ul><li>PDA will reduce the physical handling of materials </li></ul><ul><li>User demand for e-books will continue to grow </li></ul>
  20. 20. Approval of the CCD E-book Pilot  Mellon supports expansion of project into ebooks <ul><li>  Collaborative approach to collection development </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Means for implementing & evaluating an alternative model of e-book acquisitions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Potential cost savings </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved access and support of </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>scholarship </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. And We're Off ... <ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluating and Selecting a Vendor </li></ul><ul><li>Implementing the PDA Program  </li></ul><ul><li> Monitoring and Assessment </li></ul>Original photo from: Gravityx9 All rights reserved.
  22. 22. Vendors Evaluated:
  23. 23.   CTW's Evaluation Criteria ...the Details! <ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>CTW Ebook Demos </li></ul><ul><li>Winter / Spring </li></ul><ul><li>2009 </li></ul>
  24. 24. CTW’s Primary Objectives … and why we chose MyiLibrary / Coutts <ul><ul><li>Multi-user access to ALL titles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perpetual access and ownership </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Established relationship with publishers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Patron-Driven Acquisitions with detailed profiling   </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Print–on–Demand </li></ul></ul>
  25. 25. Overview of MyiLibrary‘s PDA program <ul><li>Books purchased on 2nd view/session </li></ul><ul><li>MARC URL opens description page (free) </li></ul><ul><li>Entire book accessible during first session   </li></ul><ul><li>Print / download 10 pages at a time </li></ul><ul><li>Multi-user access = </li></ul><ul><li> 3-4 users at a time/title </li></ul>
  26. 26. Implementation of the PDA Program <ul><li>Collection Development:   </li></ul><ul><li>           Getting PDA titles that &quot;fit&quot;    </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Technical Services & Systems:    </li></ul><ul><li>           Holdings >> Records >> Access </li></ul><ul><li>  Acquisitions:   </li></ul><ul><li>Invoices based </li></ul><ul><li> on Usage </li></ul>
  27. 27.   Getting titles that &quot;fit&quot; <ul><ul><li>- Content Areas - Specific Publishers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>- Types of Materials - Price Limit </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
  28. 28. MiL’s De-Duplication Service               <ul><li>Option to remove titles owned in print </li></ul><ul><li>from PDA record loads </li></ul><ul><li>CTW holdings sent to Coutts </li></ul><ul><li>PDA Titles pulled </li></ul><ul><li>based on profile, </li></ul><ul><li>then culled.   </li></ul>
  29. 29. Implementation Issues <ul><li>  </li></ul>
  30. 30. Monitoring Usage and Assessment <ul><li>Data so far:   </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Record loads  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Usage: purchases vs. views </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment:  </li></ul><ul><li>Promises vs. Reality </li></ul><ul><li>Issues related to the Vendor, </li></ul><ul><li>Interface and Pricing </li></ul>
  31. 31.   Usage Statistics Jan 15 – Apr 28 <ul><li>PDA title records received:   3,280 </li></ul>ALL Titles Titles Purchased Titles Viewed Total Titles Accessed 153 62 92 Total Sessions 365 273 92 Avg Sessions / Title 2.4 4.4 1 Highest # Sessions 22 1 Total Pages 3,978 3,238 740 Avg Pgs / Session 11 12 8 Highest # Pages 73 99
  32. 32. Time Spent in Each Title <ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Pages Viewed and # Sessions   </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>1 page:      78 </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>2 - 5 pgs:    122 </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>6 - 10 pgs:    50 </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>11 - 20 pgs:   48 </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>21 - 99 pgs:  71* </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>(*avg pgs / session = 35) </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>*Indicative that acceptance of ebooks is increasing? </li></ul>
  33. 33. PDA Titles Purchased <ul><li>  Titles purchased:   62  </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Total spent:   $7,781.76 </li></ul><ul><li>  Average cost per title:  $125.50 (Mean price = $147.02) </li></ul><ul><li>  Price Range:  $9.85 to $250.00 </li></ul><ul><li>      </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
  34. 34. PDA Titles Viewed <ul><li>Titles viewed once:   92 </li></ul><ul><li> Total Cost:  $0 </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Total Pages viewed: 740  </li></ul><ul><li> Average: 8 pages / session </li></ul><ul><li>Title viewed once with highest usage:   </li></ul><ul><li>Costa Rica: A Global Studies Handbook   </li></ul><ul><li>99 pages viewed! </li></ul>
  35. 35. Assessment of PDA Pilot <ul><ul><li>MiL's model vs. new options that become available </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li> MiL Platform/Interface  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>anticipating users’ needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>and preferences </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>CTW user survey </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Pricing: was the promise a reality? </li></ul>
  36. 36. Consortial / e-book issues <ul><li>• Ownership/How to count </li></ul><ul><li>in statistics? </li></ul><ul><li>• Copyright and licensing </li></ul><ul><li>• E-book devices, software </li></ul>
  37. 37. After the grant ... Ensuring faculty, administration support <ul><li>The Sopranos problem </li></ul><ul><li>•   Ownership v. access </li></ul><ul><li>What standard of </li></ul><ul><li>measurement? </li></ul>
  38. 38. Any Questions?