Kristin Calvert, Electronic Resources Librarian, Western Carolina University
William Gee, ILL & Document Delivery Libraria...
Early Studies
Studies consistently showed marginal impact to ILL after
cancellation projects:
 1981 University of North D...
Concerns about ILL Demand
“Selling” ILL to faculty as alternate means
of access to materials in cancelled journals
Timelin...
Factors Influencing ILL Demand
(or) Criteria for Cancellation
 Available FT through aggregator database (to current)
 Av...
Three North Carolina Schools
Carnegie
Classification
Enrollment
UG
Grad
Library Budget
Serials

WSSU
WCU
ECU
Master’s
Mast...
WSSU – Cancellations
 Budget Increase of approximately $250,000
 Cancellation of 110 subscriptions
 Reviewed subscripti...
WSSU – ILL Demand
 For 110 cancelled subscriptions

there were 3 article requests from 2
journals

 Total article reques...
WSSU – Notes
 Very few requests for the cancelled subscriptions

because of extensive format duplication
 Publication da...
WCU – Cancellations
 Budget reduction of approximately $350,000
 Cancellation of 799 subscriptions
 Reviewed subscripti...
WCU – ILL Demand
 For the 626 cancelled journals

there were 50 article requests
from 29 journals

 While total article ...
WCU – ILL Demand
ECU – Cancellations
 Budget decrease of approximately $205,000
 Cancellation of 350 subscriptions
 Reviewed subscriptio...
ECU – ILL Demand
 For the 348 cancelled journals

there were 18 article requests from
13 journals

 Total article reques...
ECU – ILL Demand
Is the ILL demand new?
 Reviewed requests for

cancelled journals in the
years prior to cancellation
 Noted whether the
...
Summary Data
Cancellations
Cancelled Journals w/ ILL
requests
Number of requests
Percent of total requests
Requests per jo...
Other Factors
 Cancellation date may not be the same as the date that

access ceases
 Increased ILL requests may be due ...
Aggregator Access
WCU Demand: Article requests per journal
What does it mean?
 Re-confirms earlier research findings
 Confirms review criteria

 More core journals across all lib...
Defining Need
 Need for any material versus need for specific

materials (satisficing)
 What this means for collection d...
Lending and ILL Providers
 Who will we borrow these articles from?
 How does ILL-centered article procurement become a

...
Is ILL enough: Examining ILL demand after Journal Cancellations at 3 North Carolina Universities
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Is ILL enough: Examining ILL demand after Journal Cancellations at 3 North Carolina Universities

550 views

Published on

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

No Downloads
Views
Total views
550
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • (Kristin Calvert)Welcome audienceIntroduction of presentersBrief outline of Presentation:Background & Literature ReviewStudy Results from Each SchoolResults of studyDiscussion Topics
  • (Rachel Fleming)The literature review we conducted for the earlier study serves this study as well, and is written up excellently in Katherine Hill’s report of the WCU presentation at the North Carolina Serials Conference presentation in Serials Review.  In Edward Warner’s 1981 study of faculty in 32 departments at the University of North Dakota, faculty identified ILL as an appropriate substitute for 77% of titles identified as marginal by librarians.  In the early days of interlibrary loan, it was already seen by faculty as an effective method for cost control combined with access to content.A series of studies in the mid-to-late nineties (during the height and aftermath of the “serials crisis”) studied the effects of massive cancellations at several institutions. Crump & Freund conducted a study at the University of Florida in 1995, reviewing the impact of the cancellation of 1377 journals during a two year period.  38 requests for 24 cancelled journals were only 0.2% of total ILL requests during the study period.Kilpatrick & Preece studied the effect of cancellations of 1241 titles at SIU Carbondale in 1990 during a study period in 1994.  124 of 3143 requests came from 58 cancelled journals (just under 4% of requests).Wilson & Alexander studied the long term demand of 3095 titles cancelled in the early 1990s at Texas A&M, looking at four years of request data from 1995 to 1999.  during the study period, 44 of the over 3,000 titles cancelled received over five requests, and the study authors determined that ILL remained a cost effective alternative to subscriptions.All of these studies found that journal cancellation projects have not led to significant increases in interlibrary loan demand that affects service provision, but concerns continue to arise when beginning journal cancellation projects.
  • (Rachel Fleming)So why are we concerned about ILL and ILL demand when going into a cancellation project or a budget reduction?The concern comes from librarians as we talk to faculty about cancellation projects.  The desire to “maintain access” to titles or the intellectual content contained in them is pressing, so we forward Interlibrary loan as an alternate means of access.  In order to claim that ILL is as useful as subscriptions, we feel a pressure to guarantee short turnaround times for requests, which in turn supposes the ability of ILL staff to handle the capacity of requests, so that if a significant increase is made in the amount of requests, our ability to deliver requests in a supremely timely way is hindered. (1) do we want to question this premise?(2) query audience as to how much this is a concern in their cancellations. Anecdotally, all three of our institution had concerns or expected to see an increase in ILL demand after cancellations.
  • (Rachel Fleming)The University of North Carolina System has faced a series of significant budget cuts over the past 5 years.The system faced cuts of up to 18% in 2011-2012.  In these budget cuts, campuses were given the budget cut and were able to allocate the cuts within their individual campuses.WCU faced drastic library reductions, and we investigated the impact that these cuts had on WCU ILL demand, but we wanted to put our results in a larger context.  While we are concerned about there being pressures on Interlibrary loan demand, the way we’ve constructed our cancellation projects has been designed to isolate the very titles that won’t be in demand.(1) This is another premise which we might want to reconsider(2) These are listed in a kind of “depth of cut” order, where deeper cuts mean going further down the list.(3) poll audience as to the number of them who have cut according to each criterion.All three schools used Aggregator access, and WCU & EDU used the other criteria as well.
  • (JanetMalliet)Comparing WCU, WSSU, and ECU:A range of research intensiveness, and a range of enrollment levels.  additionally, WCU is rural former teaching college while WSSU is a more urban HBCU, so we’ve covered a lot of ground for three institutions.  Enrollment numbers : Fall 2012 IPEDSLibrary Budgets 2012 Library IPEDSIn these data we are looking at the changes from 2011 to 2012.
  • (Janet Malliet)
  • (Janet Malliet)
  • (Kristin Calvert)
  • (Kristin Calvert)
  • (Kristin Calvert)
  • (Kristin Calvert)Data from ECU 2011 and 2012 cancellation lists. Took bigger hits to staff wages and other operational funds and the book budget. http://www.ecu.edu/cs-lib/techsrv/cdv/Collection-Reductions-2011-2012.cfmMake a note of the “unique content” criterion.
  • (Kristin Calvert)
  • (Kristin Calvert)Note the difference in scale: top number of requests by date is three.
  • (Kristin Calvert)As a check on whether ILL demand shown by our current study, we looked at the requested titles and reviewed the number of requests for those titles in previous years.  Earlier requests might indicate some part of the journal backfiles are in use but not available through the library, although other reasons could explain the demand.The “first” and “more” columns indicate which requests represent a new demand for ILL on these titles.  These data indicate that the ILL demand we reported could be lowered by as much as a third.First: first request for the title is after cancellationMore: there are more requests after cancellation than there were before cancellation (i.e. 2 requests before cancellation, but 4 requests after)Same: same amount of requests before/after cancellationFewer: fewer requests after cancellation.
  • (JanetMalliet)Cancelled journals with ILL requests: number, and also percent of total cancelled titles that have ILL requests
  • (Rachel Fleming)Encourage audience comment throughout these slides.I) Cancellation dates do not coincide with lack of access: publishers extend grace periods on online versionsII) Possible other factors influencing ILL demand: WCU implemented a discovery service around the time of the cut, which could have led increased demandIII) WCU also cancelled a number of “bridge” titles for titles available through aggregators, and saw an increase in ILL for articles published in those journals in the current years.  This may create another category for review as they walk the line between which method of access (ILL or subscription) is better for the institution. -- would a subscription result in use that justifies it? IV) Finally, it is true that you can’t rely on database full text as a persistent subscription to an individual title. However, if there is enough demand, you will be able to spot the titles that you need to resume subscriptions to.  We have an example.
  • (Rachel Fleming)WCU’s one outlier on the ILL demand was this aggregator access being restricted by the publisher.WCU cancelled most T&F titles because of their availability via EBSCOhost databases.After the cancellation project, T&F put an 18mo. embargo on most of their titles.Monitoring ILL demand allowed us to spot the individual titles to which we needed to resubscribe. Brings up the question of why the embargo was put in place in the first place, but we still ended up saving substantially on T&F titles because we limited our subscriptions to those titles with the highest use.
  • (Janet Malliet)I) Our results reconfirm the earlier research resultsII) We can see these results as a confirmation of our review criteria: we were successful in cancelling titles with low enough demand that our patrons and our services were not adversely affected.  There was low “real” demand for the journals cancelled and ILL will continue to be cost effective. III) As earlier research both showed and speculated, we continue to move toward a collection of core journals duplicated throughout institutions -- only ECU had a unique content criteria.IV) However, we continue to operate with the same concerns as we have since that earlier research, when many things are new.  Are we still reacting in a “serials crisis” mode when so much continues to change?
  • (Kristin Calvert)I) do our students need what we provide them? access drives use?II) how does this / would this influence the choices we make as collection developers -- is it the same consideration for mostly undergraduate institutions than graduate institutions?  How do you address the specific research needs of faculty in this world? Some considerations:-- increasing reliance on e-journals with their related issues: contracts v. fair use of print, changes to ILL with methods of e-article lending.  (i.e. cut even more with a fast ILL service?)III) In order to drive demand, journals need to be found and have use -- publishers are pressured to include content in aggregator databases, and aggregator databases are increasingly being relied on as a main avenue of content in the library.  While we’ve made these decisions for practical reasons, we need to start thinking about what this new world means for all of the involved parties -- and how we move forward (especially as budgets continue to be constrained)
  • (Rachel Fleming)I) What kind of stress do we put on research institutions when we move forward with ILL-based access to specific texts -- is there a real alternate with paid article delivery service, either through vendors or through another kind of aggregatorII) If this is our model going forward, what kind of additional changes need to be made to ensure its continued feasibility for all parties involved -- i.e. e-article lending, contract negotiations, discovery venuesIII) what is the role of intentional shared collection development of electronic resources, as some libraries are doing with print collections to reduce duplication and costs – we’re already using big deals and consortial deals, but this idea would move beyond that and likely require increased vigilance to renegotiate license terms and copyright royalty payment schemes. A related concern is e-book ILL lending, but that is perhaps getting off topic … other than people are perhaps increasingly treating book chapters like articles.
  • Is ILL enough: Examining ILL demand after Journal Cancellations at 3 North Carolina Universities

    1. 1. Kristin Calvert, Electronic Resources Librarian, Western Carolina University William Gee, ILL & Document Delivery Librarian, East Carolina University Janet Malliet, Serials Librarian, Winston Salem State University Rachel Fleming, Serials Librarian, Western Carolina University Charleston Conference 2013 7 November 2013
    2. 2. Early Studies Studies consistently showed marginal impact to ILL after cancellation projects:  1981 University of North Dakota  1995 University of Florida  1996 Southern Illinois University – Carbondale  1999 Texas A&M For full literature review see Hill Katherine, Kristin Calvert, and Rachel Fleming, “Impact of Journal Cancellations on Interlibrary Loan Demand” Serials Review, 39:3 (September 2013) pp 184-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.serrev.2013.07.006
    3. 3. Concerns about ILL Demand “Selling” ILL to faculty as alternate means of access to materials in cancelled journals Timeliness of ILL delivery Capacity of ILL staff Significant increase in demand could adversely affect delivery times
    4. 4. Factors Influencing ILL Demand (or) Criteria for Cancellation  Available FT through aggregator database (to current)  Available FT through aggregator database (embargo)  Eliminate format duplication  High Cost-Per-Use  Low Use (regardless of cost)  Subject overlap  Connection to Curricula
    5. 5. Three North Carolina Schools Carnegie Classification Enrollment UG Grad Library Budget Serials WSSU WCU ECU Master’s Master’s Doctoral/ Medium Large Research 5,689 9,608 26,947 5,245 7,979 21,298 444 1,629 5,649 $3.18M $4.28M $17.11M $0.25M $1.23M $3.96M
    6. 6. WSSU – Cancellations  Budget Increase of approximately $250,000  Cancellation of 110 subscriptions  Reviewed subscriptions based on criteria:  Do we have access electronically?  Do we have access to it from a library close by (either public or another university)?  Maintained some level of access for nearly every title
    7. 7. WSSU – ILL Demand  For 110 cancelled subscriptions there were 3 article requests from 2 journals  Total article requests dropped 17% in 2012  4% of requests were for cancelled titles.  (54 article requests filled in 2012)
    8. 8. WSSU – Notes  Very few requests for the cancelled subscriptions because of extensive format duplication  Publication dates for the 3 article requests were from 1994-1995  …and would have most likely still have been only available through ILL and not a current subscription.
    9. 9. WCU – Cancellations  Budget reduction of approximately $350,000  Cancellation of 799 subscriptions  Reviewed subscriptions based on criteria  Available through aggregator databases  Multiple formats  High cost-per-use  Low use  Connection to curricula  Database review (content overlap)
    10. 10. WCU – ILL Demand  For the 626 cancelled journals there were 50 article requests from 29 journals  While total article requests increased 11% in 2012, only 2% of all requests were for cancelled titles
    11. 11. WCU – ILL Demand
    12. 12. ECU – Cancellations  Budget decrease of approximately $205,000  Cancellation of 350 subscriptions  Reviewed subscriptions based on criteria:  Database review (overlap)  Multiple formats  Strive to retain “unique” content  Low use and high cost-per-use  Journal citation practices, impact factors, etc.  Importance to curriculum and faculty research
    13. 13. ECU – ILL Demand  For the 348 cancelled journals there were 18 article requests from 13 journals  Total article requests dropped 3% in 2012, and only 1% of all requests were for cancelled titles.
    14. 14. ECU – ILL Demand
    15. 15. Is the ILL demand new?  Reviewed requests for cancelled journals in the years prior to cancellation  Noted whether the number of requests had changed relative to previous years.
    16. 16. Summary Data Cancellations Cancelled Journals w/ ILL requests Number of requests Percent of total requests Requests per journal Journals with single requests WSSU WCU ECU 110 626 348 2 29 13 1.8% 4.6% 3.7% 3 50 18 4% 2% 1% 1.5 1.7 1.4 1 19 11
    17. 17. Other Factors  Cancellation date may not be the same as the date that access ceases  Increased ILL requests may be due to many factors  High demand for current titles due to embargoed access  Aggregator access is not totally reliable as replacement for subscription access
    18. 18. Aggregator Access WCU Demand: Article requests per journal
    19. 19. What does it mean?  Re-confirms earlier research findings  Confirms review criteria  More core journals across all libraries  What should we be worried about if ILL demand is not a important concern?
    20. 20. Defining Need  Need for any material versus need for specific materials (satisficing)  What this means for collection developers  What does it mean for publishers and database providers?
    21. 21. Lending and ILL Providers  Who will we borrow these articles from?  How does ILL-centered article procurement become a sustainable model?  What is the role of shared collection development?

    ×