Serials: Issues and Techniques Fall 2007 Position Paper Presentation Mike Rybak
<ul><li>“Your director has returned from a meeting where she heard a presentation from a library which no longer checks-in...
Rick Anderson and Steven D. Zink “ Implementing the Unthinkable: The Demise of Periodical Check-in at the University of Ne...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada Reno Library : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>15,000+ journal titles </li></ul><...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Is routine journal check-in  really  necessary? </li></ul>
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Why check-in journals? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Record whether an issue has arrived </li></ul><...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Record whether an issue has arrived </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Status vs. Availabilty </li></ul><...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Monitor changes in publication frequency </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Documenting changes in freque...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Detection of title changes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>More significant to patrons than frequency ...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Claiming </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Is routine claiming of all missing issues really necessary? <...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Claiming </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Is routine claiming of all missing issues really necessary? <...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Claiming </li></ul><ul><ul><li>At U of Nevada Reno, print makes up about 20% of the journal ...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Binding </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Expensive </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Disruptive </li></ul></ul...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada’s alternative procedures: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Incoming print periodic...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada’s alternative procedures: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>4. Select list of high-...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada’s Results: </li></ul><ul><li>Patron reaction </li></ul><ul><ul><li>None...
Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada’s Results: </li></ul><ul><li>Bindery savings </li></ul><ul><li>Shift in...
Is check-in worth the trouble? <ul><li>Anderson/Zink’s conclusion: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Close management of information t...
Is this approach appropriate for every library? <ul><li>Anderson and Zink concede that it is not </li></ul><ul><li>Overdue...
Is this approach appropriate for every library? <ul><li>Collection size and composition </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ratio of e-j...
Is this approach appropriate for every library? <ul><li>Users </li></ul><ul><li>How collection is used </li></ul><ul><li>S...
Is this approach appropriate for every library? <ul><li>It is not a “one size fits all” solution. </li></ul><ul><li>Howeve...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Serial collections: Do we really need routine check-in?

465 views

Published on

Check-in and Claims: Are they worth the time and effort?

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
465
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Serial collections: Do we really need routine check-in?

  1. 1. Serials: Issues and Techniques Fall 2007 Position Paper Presentation Mike Rybak
  2. 2. <ul><li>“Your director has returned from a meeting where she heard a presentation from a library which no longer checks-in their current periodicals. They simply shelve them and deal with any missing issues when it comes to bind. What do you think of this idea?” </li></ul>
  3. 3. Rick Anderson and Steven D. Zink “ Implementing the Unthinkable: The Demise of Periodical Check-in at the University of Nevada.” Library Collections, Acquisitions & Technical Services , Vol. 27 (Spring 2003).
  4. 4. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada Reno Library : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>15,000+ journal titles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2,700 in print </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Approx .5 reshelvings per issue for print </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>12,500 items checked in per quarter </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2,200 claims per quarter (including 2 nd and 3 rd claims) </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Is routine journal check-in really necessary? </li></ul>
  6. 6. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Why check-in journals? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Record whether an issue has arrived </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Monitor changes in publication frequency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Detection of title changes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allows routine claiming of missing isues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Management mechanism for binding process </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Record whether an issue has arrived </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Status vs. Availabilty </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Process vs. Impact </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Process centered or patron centered? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Any status other than right here, right now does little to help the patron…” </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Monitor changes in publication frequency </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Documenting changes in frequency does little to enhance patron access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Frequency decreasing in significance as journals move into online formats </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Time and effort not justified </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Detection of title changes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>More significant to patrons than frequency changes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other less time consuming processes can be implemented to track title changes </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Claiming </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Is routine claiming of all missing issues really necessary? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“The eighty-five percent” calculation </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Claiming </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Is routine claiming of all missing issues really necessary? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ The eighty-five percent” calculation: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>About 85% of expected items arrive on time </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Out of the remaing 15%, some will eventually arrive regardless of claiming </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Some will never arrive despite repeated claims </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The remaining number represents the benefit of claiming </li></ul></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Claiming </li></ul><ul><ul><li>At U of Nevada Reno, print makes up about 20% of the journal collection </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Usage declining in favor of e-journals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Is it logical to use staff time to claim the least used 20% of the collection? </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>Binding </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Expensive </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Disruptive </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Most items do not require the protection </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada’s alternative procedures: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Incoming print periodicals are shelved immediately in the Current Periodical stacks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Any issues without a spot in the stacks are quickly checked by a clerk for title changes,etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Remaining titles checked by selectors </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada’s alternative procedures: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>4. Select list of high-use titles processed for security </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A few high-use/high-value titles are claimed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Most titles are not bound, back issues are labeled and placed in a box </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enhanced document delivery procedures </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada’s Results: </li></ul><ul><li>Patron reaction </li></ul><ul><ul><li>None. Online check- in status does not appear to have been commonly used by patrons </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Speed to stacks </li></ul><ul><ul><li>48 hours or more, down to same day </li></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Zink/Anderson article <ul><li>University of Nevada’s Results: </li></ul><ul><li>Bindery savings </li></ul><ul><li>Shift in staff time and focus </li></ul><ul><ul><li>75% of one full-time employee shifted to e-journal and database management </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. Is check-in worth the trouble? <ul><li>Anderson/Zink’s conclusion: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Close management of information that is not useful to patrons </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Check-in can be replaced with faster, less exacting processes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Staff time can be shifted from low-use to high-use resources </li></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Is this approach appropriate for every library? <ul><li>Anderson and Zink concede that it is not </li></ul><ul><li>Overdue for careful consideration </li></ul>
  20. 20. Is this approach appropriate for every library? <ul><li>Collection size and composition </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ratio of e-journals to print </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>More appropriate for large library? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Institution </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What type of library? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Archival requirements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Complete runs of titles </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Is this approach appropriate for every library? <ul><li>Users </li></ul><ul><li>How collection is used </li></ul><ul><li>Staff size </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How much time spent on check-in </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How can this time be redirected? </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. Is this approach appropriate for every library? <ul><li>It is not a “one size fits all” solution. </li></ul><ul><li>However, there may be an alternative to “the way we’ve always done it”. </li></ul>

×