2011 ACRL Workshop: Collaborative Collection Development & Patron-Driven Acquistions
•
1 like•429 views
ACRL 2011 Workshop: Collaborative Collection Development + Patron Driven Acquisitions = A Win-Win for Libraries and Patrons. Presented by the CTW Library Consortium: Beth Hansen, Connecticut College Doris Kammradt, Trinity College Andrew Klein, Wesleyan University Pat Tully, Wesleyan University Steve Bischof, Five Colleges Consortium Lorri Huddy, CTW Library Consortium
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (9)
Similar to 2011 ACRL Workshop: Collaborative Collection Development & Patron-Driven Acquistions
Similar to 2011 ACRL Workshop: Collaborative Collection Development & Patron-Driven Acquistions (20)
More from The CTW Library Consortium
More from The CTW Library Consortium (12)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
2011 ACRL Workshop: Collaborative Collection Development & Patron-Driven Acquistions
- 1. AACCRRLL WWoorrkksshhoopp:: CCoollllaabboorraattiivvee CCoolllleeccttiioonn DDeevveellooppmmeenntt ++ PPaattrroonn--DDrriivveenn AAccqquuiissiittiioonnss == AA WWiinn--WWiinn ffoorr LLiibbrraarriieess aanndd PPaattrroonnss
- 2. TThhee CCTTWW LLiibbrraarryy CCoonnssoorrttiiuumm TTeeaamm Beth Hansen, Connecticut College Doris Kammradt, Trinity College Andrew Klein, Wesleyan University Pat Tully, Wesleyan University Steve Bischof, Five Colleges Consortium Lorri Huddy, CTW Library Consortium
- 3. WWeellccoommee aanndd OOvveerrvviieeww • Defining consortial collection goals • Evaluating vendors and their programs • Implementing patron-driven acquisitions • Assessing assumptions and outcomes
- 4. AA qquuiicckk sshhooww ooff hhaannddss How many of you are exploring PDA… • in a single library? • in a consortium? How big is your consortium? • small (up to 5 libraries) • medium (up to 25) • large (up to 50) • x-large (over 50)
- 5. TThhee CCTTWW CCoonnssoorrttiiuumm Trinity College Connecticut College Wesleyan University
- 6. CCTTWW iinn NNuummbbeerrss • Total FTE: about 9,800 students • Total materials budget: about $6.6 million • Total WorldCat holdings: 2.3 million titles
- 7. CTW CCoollllaabboorraattiivvee CCoolllleeccttiioonn PPrroojjeeccttss • Collection analysis of all three libraries • Pilot project for shared print collection • Shared eBook project with PDA
- 8. Part 1: Collaborative CCoolllleeccttiioonn DDeevveellooppmmeenntt Thinking Locally, Acting Consortially Learning Outcome: Identify criteria to be integrated into your PDA program in order to fulfill the libraries’ shared collection goals.
- 9. BBeeffoorree tthhee ggrraanntt,, CCTTWW …… • Shared print collections shared via daily delivery service • Did some coordination of circulation and resource-sharing policies and processes • Informally coordinated collection development
- 10. TThhee pprroojjeecctt bbeeggaann bbyy …… • Comparing and analyzing our three institutions and patrons • Identifying common collection needs and opportunities for sharing
- 11. CCoommppaarriinngg iinnssttiittuuttiioonnss,, ppaattrroonnss • Mission and goals • Degrees granted • Graduate programs – number and kind • Departments/programs offered • Course enrollment • Declared majors • Faculty research, teaching interests
- 12. CCoommppaarriinngg,, aannaallyyzziinngg ccoolllleeccttiioonnss • Collection development policies • Circulation statistics • Collection analysis (using WorldCat Collection Analysis tool) – Individual collection strengths, weaknesses – Comparing each library’s collection to each other
- 13. Identifying ooppppoorrttuunniittiieess ffoorr sshhaarriinngg • Collection weaknesses across consortium • Individual collection strengths in one or more subjects • Subjects with large percentage of multiple copies across the consortium
- 14. OOuurr AAssssuummppttiioonnss • On average, a consortial ebook costs less than purchasing three print copies • For patrons, an ebook is an acceptable alternative to print • Staff workload for ebooks is less than for print • The use of an ebook is about the same at each school
- 15. ++ OOuurr GGooaallss • New ways of collection sharing • Instant access for any CTW patron • Increased cost efficiency by reducing consortial duplication • Enhanced discoverability and access by patrons
- 16. == OOuurr EExxppeeccttaattiioonnss • 24/7 access to multiple users on three campuses • Efficiencies in title selection • More reliable consortial inventory control • Cost savings from shared and patron driven purchases • Reduced physical handling of materials
- 17. CCCCDD GGrroouupp AAccttiivviittyy What are your assumptions and goals for: • Ebooks • Purchase on demand • Collaborative collection development
- 19. PPaarrtt 22:: VVeennddoorr EEvvaalluuaattiioonnss Learning Outcome: Evaluate vendors’ capabilities and proposals in order to achieve consortial goals and assure a successful consortium-vendor partnership.
- 20. WWhhyy PPDDAA?? Consortial goals need to be clearly defined in order to make a PDA program work for your consortium. How might a specific vendor’s program help you meet those goals?
- 21. WWhhyy PPDDAA?? CCTTWW’’ss ggooaallss Potential cost savings: • Reduce duplication/triplication of content • ‘Just in Time’ vs. ‘Just in Case’ purchases Enhance patrons’ access to materials: • Easier sharing of titles across three campuses • 24/7 simultaneous access for multiple users Potential staff and space benefits: • Selection / acquisition efficiencies • Reduce need for more collection space
- 22. HHooww WWiillll YYoouu EEvvaalluuaattee TThheemm?? Your criteria should be driven by your goals. For example: Goal: Enhance patrons’ access to consortial materials Criteria: Multi-user, simultaneous access to all PDA titles
- 23. WWhhoo aarree tthhee VVeennddoorrss?? Aggregators: And publishers… and more?
- 24. CCTTWW’’ss PPrriimmaarryy CCrriitteerriiaa …… aanndd wwhhyy wwee cchhoossee MMyyiiLLiibbrraarryy // CCoouuttttss • Multi-user access to ALL titles • Perpetual access and ownership • Detailed profiling • De-duplication service • Established relationship with publishers • Print–on–Demand
- 25. VVeennddoorr EEvvaalluuaattiioonn AAccttiivviittyy Your table has been assigned one of 8 evaluation categories. Take 10 minutes to: Brainstorm and prioritize the criteria you would use to evaluate a vendor in that category. Then come back to the large group and share your ideas.
- 27. TTiimmee ffoorr aa BBrreeaakk!!
- 29. IImmpplleemmeennttiinngg yyoouurr pprrooggrraamm Learning Outcome: Anticipate implementation needs and develop strategies that will help your PDA program get off to a good start.
- 30. IImmpplleemmeennttaattiioonn AAccttiivviittyy • List the various tasks that need to be done • Identify who is likely to be responsible for each task • Estimate how much time may be needed overall (Weeks? Months?)
- 31. PPrriimmaarryy IImmpplleemmeennttaattiioonn NNeeeeddss ACCOUNTS: Funds & Profile ACCESS: Titles & Users AWARENESS: Communication & Training
- 32. TThhee AAccccoouunntt:: TTaakkiinngg CCaarree ooff BBuussiinneessss Customer Profile Registrations For: the Vendor … and the eBook Provider From: each Library … and the Consortium Contacts Needed: Acquisitions: Invoices / Finances Technical Services: Cataloging / Systems Collection Development: Profiling E-Resources: Access and Support
- 33. YYoouurr PPrrooffiillee:: GGeettttiinngg TTiittlleess tthhaatt FFiitt • Content Areas • Publication Date • Types of Materials • Language • Readership Level • Price Limit •Specific Publishers Title List Review = Profile Tweaks?
- 34. DDee--DDuupplliiccaattiioonn SSeerrvviiccee • Option to remove titles held by libraries from PDA record loads • Libraries’ holdings sent to vendor • PDA set up pulls titles based on profile, but library holdings impact final list
- 35. AAcccceessss ttoo TTiittlleess…… AAcccceessss ffoorr UUsseerrss Records Review Quality & Local Customizations Standardized Numbers- ISBN, OCLC, Vendor Authentication Proxy, SSO, VPN Discovery Catalog, Link Resolver, Vendor site, CMS, etc.
- 36. AAwwaarreenneessss Raising awareness of your PDA program through Communication and Training
- 37. TTrraaiinniinngg NNeeeeddss Profile changes Title List Reviews Invoices & Prices Customer Service Platform Publishers & Titles Usage Statistics Technical Support Updates & Notifications
- 38. DDeevviilliisshh DDeettaaiillss?? Who will report and follow-up? …for your library …for the consortium
- 39. RRaaiissiinngg AAwwaarreenneessss…… CCoommmmuunniiccaattiinngg aabboouutt PPDDAA Who should know…and to what extent? Students and Faculty Library Staff College Administration
- 41. PPaarrtt 44:: AAsssseessssmmeenntt Learning Outcome: Identify criteria for evaluating the PDA program in order to assess if it has met expected goals and desired outcomes.
- 42. “AAllll aasssseessssmmeenntt iiss aa ppeerrppeettuuaall wwoorrkk iinn pprrooggrreessss..”” Linda Suskie, V.P., Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), 2005
- 43. GGrroouunndd RRuulleess ffoorr AAsssseessssmmeenntt Be sure to start at the beginning Think about what you might need Keep it simple
- 44. OOuurr OOvveerraallll PPrroojjeecctt GGooaall “…to build a [successful] model for a shared online collection for the three CTW institutions.” Mellon eBook Pilot Project Proposal August 2009
- 45. OOuurr AAssssuummppttiioonnss • On average, a consortial ebook costs less than purchasing three print copies • For patrons, an ebook is an acceptable alternative to print • Staff workload for ebooks is less than for print • The use of an ebook is about the same at each school
- 46. ++ OOuurr GGooaallss • New ways of collection sharing • Instant access for any CTW patron • Increased cost efficiency by reducing consortial duplication • Enhanced discovery and access by patrons
- 47. == OOuurr EExxppeeccttaattiioonnss • 24/7 access to multiple users on three campuses • Efficiencies in title selection • More reliable consortial inventory control • Cost savings from shared and patron driven purchases • Reduced physical handling of materials
- 48. BBuuiillddiinngg OOuurr AAsssseessssmmeenntt • UUsseerr rreessppoonnssee • VVeennddoorr ppeerrffoorrmmaannccee • PPDDAA mmooddeell • BBuuddggeett • PPrrooffiilliinngg • WWoorrkkffllooww • IImmppaacctt oonn aacccceessss
- 49. AAsssseessssmmeenntt TToooollss Quantitative Data • Usage statistics: total per title, after purchase, across CTW, by LC class • Prices: “e vs. p” Qualitative Measures •Surveys or questionnaires • Focus groups • Patron Interviews • Observation
- 50. BBuuddggeett:: CCTTWW CCoosstt SSaavviinnggss?? Cost analysis • Actual prices vs. added value of ebook vs. print • Value of titles viewed but Not purchased • Pricing practices by publisher: Cost of ebook vs. print (HC and SC) • Pricing practices by vendor: MiL vs. other ebook vendors
- 51. WWoorrkkllooaadd:: RReedduucceedd ffoorr ssttaaffff?? PDA workflow analysis • PDA functions and services: de-duplication, title lists & record loads, invoicing • Deletion files, profile alerts, problem reports • Staff time needed to support processes to maintain PDA program Acquisitions – Cataloging – Systems Collection Development – Access Services
- 52. PPDDAA AAsssseessssmmeenntt AAccttiivviittyy Assessment noun ə-ˈses-mənt, a- A systematic method for collecting, analyzing, and using information to answer questions about [your] project
- 54. TTiimmee ttoo WWrraapp--uupp Questions? Comments… Reactions?
- 55. TThhaannkk yyoouu!! Beth Hansen: ehhan@conncoll.edu Doris Kammradt: doris.kammradt@trincoll.edu Andrew Klein: aklein01@wesleyan.edu Pat Tully: ptully@wesleyan.edu Steve Bischof: sbischof@library.umass.edu Lorri Huddy: lhuddy@conncoll.edu
- 56. PPhhoottoo && IImmaaggee CCrreeddiittss Question Mark Bubble: http://www.steinski.com/blog/a_question_for_you/ Ebrary Banner: http://www.ebrary.com/corp/index.jsp NetLibrary Logo: http://www.netlibrary.com/ Ebook Library (EBL) logo: http://www.eblib.com/ MyiLibrary Banner: http://www.myilibrary.com/Home.aspx Stopwatch: http://www.windowdepotphiladelphia.com/ Ducks in a Row: http://rengawman.wordpress.com/2007/12/20/getting-your-ducks-in-a-row/ FourShortQuacks.wav by Tewell: http://www.freesound.org/samplesViewSingle.php?id=90027 Puzzle pieces: http://www.vcbytes.com/2010/06/ Stacked stones photo: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ericlippert/archive/2009/04/27/the-stack-is-an-implementation-detail.aspx Ebooks image: http://mhpbooks.com/mobylives/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ebooks1.jpg Devil photograph: http://www.negotiationlawblog.com/uploads/image/devil(1).jpg Scale photo: http://www.lewisborogov.com/Government/committeesandcouncils/assessmentreview.html Assessment Cycle graphic: http://www.bhsu.edu/Portals/0/academics/graduateStudies/SAassessmentcycle.jpg Blocks. http://www.vadv.org/secAction/1000grandmas.html Tape measure. http://healnh.org/YYFH/toolkits/2009/01/waist-circumference.cfm Teamwork. http://www.toastmasters.org/MainMenuCategories/FreeResources/QuestionsaboutLeadership/Teamwork.aspx Question Mark Keyboard: http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2007/10/how_much_does_o.php
Editor's Notes
- The size of the consortium will drive the decisions we’ll ask you to consider. It may be helpful for our group discussions – to identify the consortium you’re part of. (There may be follow-up discussions among – like-sized consortia)
- A few basics about CTW and the libraries that make it up: CTW is a consortium of three liberal arts schools in CT: Connecticut College in New London, Trinity College in Hartford, and Wesleyan University in Middletown. Our schools have a combined student FTE of 9,800 almost all of whom are undergraduates. The libraries’ materials budgets total $6.6 million. The CTW Consortium was established in 1987, to share the costs of an online library catalog, and to share physical collections via a daily delivery service. In 2007 we were awarded a grant by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to explore collaborative collection development which enabled us to hire Lorri specifically for grant-related projects. We did a collections analysis to gauge the strength of our individual and consortial collections. We then instituted a pilot project to purchase single consortial copies of expensive, supplementary print books through YBP. Soon afterwards, we started exploring the possibility of building a shared ebook collection. As we learned more about new ebook purchasing options, we decided to implement a patron-driven acquisitions program with Coutts / MyiLibrary. During this workshop, we’ll walk you through the various stages of our pilot project. It will give you the opportunity to think about what this process would entail for your library or consortium … and walk away with a plan in hand.
- The first thing to do in any project, of course, is to determine what your goals and assumptions are. For our ebook purchase-on-demand project, the goals and assumptions evolved from our Mellon-funded collaborative collection development project, and from the economic crisis that hit in 2008. So first I’ll give you a little background on how we came to the goals and assumptions for our consortial ebook PDA project. Then we’ll give you a chance to think about what your assumptions and goals are for your project.
- The CTW inter-library delivery service has been, and continues to be, very popular with our students and faculty. Because of this delivery service and a shared catalog, the libraries have coordinated many circulation and interlibrary loan policies, although there have been occasional difficulties and misunderstandings, and differences remain. Finally, most of our selectors have long been in the habit of checking the holdings of the other libraries when selecting books that are useful, but not core titles for their collection. If one or more of our CTW partners had the book, then often the selector would not order it for their own library.
- When we were awarded the Mellon grant in 2007, we were mostly thinking about how to be more cost effective by reducing the duplication in our print collections. We also saw this as an opportunity to create more space in our stacks by doing collaborative weeding. An important question was how to start thinking about our collections as a single collection, serving all our institutions. So with that in mind, we began by comparing our institutions and patrons, and how they needed to be supported by the library. We then used this as the basis for identifying common collection strengths and needs. I’ll go into a little more detail about how we did this.
- We looked at all of these characteristics of our institutions and our patrons: Our institutional missions and strategic goals Our departments and programs, and the type of degrees granted Course enrollment figures—what departments were most popular, with majors of course, but also with non-majors Faculty research and curricular interests Within CTW there are some differences in programs, faculty interests, and student majors. But, the similarities between our schools far outweigh the differences. We are all liberal arts institutions, with similar numbers of students and faculty, and although we have some strong graduate programs, our primary emphasis is on undergraduate education. This similarity had advantages for CTW but also disadvantages for collaborative collection development, as we’ll see.
- Our libraries, too, have more similarities than differences, although we differed significantly in the degree to which we documented (or didn’t document, in the case of Wesleyan) our collection development practices! Within CTW we compared our circulation statistics and collection strengths. We used WorldCat’s Collection Analysis tool both to compare our collections to one another and to a variety of similar consortia, and standard collections such as Books for College Libraries. In looking at the results, we were pretty impressed at how well our selectors had done in their informal check of the CTW catalogs before purchasing supplemental books. There were a significant number of titles that we held either in duplicate or triplicate in the consortium, but not as many as we had anticipated.
- Using all this data, we were able to identify common collection strengths and weaknesses, and LC classes with the largest percentage of multiple copies across the consortium. When the economic downturn hit in 2008, we were all facing budget reductions. At one point in our discussions, one of the selectors said, why don’t we think about sharing ebooks. The committee thought this was a great idea, and Lorri started contacting ebook vendors and compiling information about how each service worked. We’ll talk about that a little later.
- We made several assumptions when we began thinking about doing an ebook purchase on demand pilot project. Here are some of them: We assumed that the average ebook would cost the consortium less than purchasing three print copies of the same book. Since we all purchase paperback unless there is a compelling reason to purchase in hardcover, the price we had in mind was the paperback price. We assumed (or at least were interested in the possibility) that the electronic version of a book is an acceptable alternative to the print version for our patrons, or could quickly become so. We assumed that the record downloads, invoice processing and troubleshooting for ebooks would be less work overall for our staff than the acquiring, cataloging and maintaining of print books. We assumed we would see a similar level of ebook use at each school, since we have similar numbers of students and faculty.
- We also had several goals: Per our Mellon grant project objective, we were interested in exploring new ways of collection sharing. We wanted our patrons to be able to access consortial collections instantly from wherever they were. And material in electronic format, of course, is perfect for this. We wanted to continue to provide our patrons with access to a variety of materials, despite the budget reductions of the past few years. We wanted this access to be as easy and seamless as possible for our patrons.
- Using our assumptions and goals, we developed these expectations for the pilot project. We submitted these as part of our proposal to Mellon to fund the pilot: We expected to be able to provide 24/7 access to these titles to all our users, wherever they are. We expected that patron-driven acquisitions would make collection development more efficient in some subject areas, and an analysis of what materials patrons actually use would inform selectors in their own decision-making. We expected that having records for these titles in our catalog would make for easy and reliable tracking of what our patrons are using, what the consortium has access to and has purchased; and, if necessary, what titles to delete. We expected to save money because we would share the purchase cost with each other, and we would only be purchasing titles that our patrons use. In addition, we would be providing access, without cost, to a wide variety of titles that are in scope for our collections, thus enhancing discoverability. Finally, we expected to save staff time because there would be no physical processing, shelving, shipping or otherwise handling of print volumes.
- So, what assumptions are you making about the project you are doing or contemplating? What are your goals in doing the project? Please take some time to write these down and share them with others at your table. After 10 minutes, we’ll go to each table to report out one or two assumptions or goals.
- CTW’s Shared eBook Pilot Expectations Ease of sharing 24/7 access Multiple simultaneous users Cost savings Patron-driven selection Space needs Workflow
- Some CTW evaluation points: Consortial Needs: Access to ALL titles by ALL libraries was an utmost concern PDA details: what constitutes a use? >> what triggers a title’s purchase? Ebook vs. Print: Unless you ask, you may not find out about this! Some publishers produce two versions of their titles and the vendors rely upon publishers to be forthcoming about which titles are affected. (i.e.) Yale redacts all art images and photographs from ebooks. Technical: wanted to avoid propriety software (for users & IT’s sakes!) E-readers starting to make waves – wanted to know how pro-active vendors were being in regards to supporting alternative access methods. Retaining Access to Purchased titles – VERY important! Is covered by licensing and platform / access fee is required by all vendors Rights on use of Ebooks: Access Services not happy about ILL limitations (portions of books). Discovery issues: wanted to be sure openURL linking to ebooks possible – GOOD MARC records a must . Print-on-Demand: just in case print copy ever needed -- possibly help with acceptance of ebooks?
- Who, What, How and Why? Who are the primary vendors that offer PDA programs? What are some distinguishing features of these vendors and their PDA programs? What makes their options stand out from the others? How does their program work? What new / different workflows are needed? Why would the library choose this vendor over the others? CTW examples: A primary objectives was having access to many publishers and titles via one platform >> meant an ebook aggregator CTW invited each vendor to present their ebook products & options. A list of questions was sent in advance and served as our evaluation criteria.
- Coutts / MiL seemed the most forward-thinking of the vendors and spoke about potential services they might provide in the future. (i.e) (1) working with publishers to allow ILL (2) providing users w/ option to order personal print copies (3) more recently, expanding PDA to include print
- How to evaluate possible options: using criteria to objectively select a vendor Why this process is important... Helps libraries to stay objective and focused on collective needs and goals Criteria spreadsheet will include details that might be easily forgotten Ask vendors to review information compiled about them - assures details are correct! When decision is made - note promises made during the vetting process (formalize in writing) Business Practices / Licensing Issues: Titles that increase over profile limit due to publishers’ price increases How will customers be notified to have choice to keep or remove such titles? Invoicing > prices changes between usage reports and invoice What is the library actually purchasing? Does it "own" these titles or buying the right to perpetually access them? What happens if you cancel your PDA program with the vendor? Are traditional library practices allowed? - reserves, ILL request fulfillment, access through course mgt softwareHow does the vendor assure long-term access to their ebooks? (dark archive?)- What happens if the vendor goes out of business? Who’s responsible for usage / purchases due to illegal access? piracy safeguards in place – how will illegal access be handled? DRMs – acceptable terms of use under Licensing, but also tie into User Access and Functionality/Features. .
- Welcome back! During the second half of the workshop Steve and I will talk about our PDA Implementation and then, Beth Hansen will talk about Assessing a PDA program…
- We want you to walk out of here knowing what was involved in the hope that our experiences may help you avoid some of our stumbling blocks. So Steve and I are going to talk about many of steps needed to set up CTW’s PDA program – as well as what’s required to maintain it. Doing this for a consortium added a layer of complexity: it required coordinating efforts among library depts (in multiple libraries!) >> all the individual steps were familiar, but the combination was a bit different Think about the processes required when buying print titles: profiling / cataloging / acquisitions Add some e-resources elements: Authentication needs, access points, and usage stats (so acquisitions knows the invoice is correct!) And some systems / tech services help! Setting up the process for records both coming and going: getting PDA records loads and sending library holdings to the vendor. Familiar – yet a bit different! It was a learning experience for both sides of the equation: the PDA set up was new for the libraries and the consortial account was new for Coutts/MiL. - CTW was the first consortium that they set up a PDA program for.
- While we’re doing this… use the Implementation Activity Worksheet so you walk out of here with a good sense of who needs to be involved and why. Be thinking about what we DON’T mention that will be needed for your set up. Please offer to share these – it’s likely to be relevant to others. When we’re done, take a guesstimate of how long to allow for implementation – from start to finish. This way, if you want your PDA in place for Fall 2011, you’ll have a good idea of how far in advance, things need to start rolling. ================================================= Create the PDA Profile < Heads of Collection Development> Consortial CCD criteria and Vendor's profiling options; Tweak profile based on title lists Payment and Invoices <E-Resources/Acquisitions - library or consortial level?) Payment options: monthly payments vs. deposit account Monthly usage statistics for checking invoices -- who will follow-up on usage/invoice problems? Training <Vendor and Library Staff?> Staff / Library Functions (behind-the-scenes- administrative, acquisitions, collection development) Reference and User Functions (public end: interface ) Note: Training should fulfill needs and address concerns of libraries Other needs/tasks? MARC record customizations Time frame: CTW chose vendor in early Nov ‘09 - goal to be ready by Jan (~ 6 wks) Took ~ 10 weeks to get initial record load + 2 weeks for dust to settle (an unexpected hiccup!) Fully in place by early Feb -- took 2x the time expected!
- These three needs – Accounts – Access – Awareness – provide a VERY simplistic overview of what’s involved: >> Set-up account & method of payment >> Tell the vendor what to provide >> Set up access to what’s provided >> Talk about the program and learn what’s needed to make it run smoothly!
- First thing to consider: How many accounts will you need? The PDA Vendor may be different from your eBook Provider… and you may need to set up both Library AND Consortial Accounts … > Who will be the primary contacts in each library and on behalf of the consortium ? > How will you pay for the PDA titles – a deposit account or monthly invoicing? Your vendor may suggest or dictate the options for payment (something to ask about during your evaluations!) FYI: CTW has a consortial deposit account to pay for monthly invoices. Usage statistics are gathered monthly for checking the invoice. We initially thought each library would contribute an equal amount to our fund. But usage stats show that 2/3 of our purchases are triggered by one library. So future contributions will be based upon past usage and will be adjusted semi-annually or annually. (still to be decided.) Things to be aware of when deciding who’s responsible: Invoice checking can be time consuming requires pulling monthly statistics and tracking over time to collate views that may occur months apart. You may need to pull information from various places to get all the info needed for invoices. We pull usage stats from the MiL admin system and then get prices from Coutts’ admin system. Some unexpected situations that required follow-up: Reporting titles not invoiced that should have been and vice versa! Prices that increased between pulling of usage reports and getting the invoice Reporting unusual usage of our PDA titles, discovering it was illegal activity, and negotiating with the vendor & publishers about how to handle the purchases that were triggered. ( This is a good reason for one person to pull usage reports so s/he becomes familiar with ‘normal’ usage patterns. )
- The other Account is for Collection Development- your PDA profile Profiling was extremely impt to us after hearing cautionary tales about PDA programs & too many books about bananas. We wanted to assure that the PDA titles we offered = ones we would purchase anyways (if we had all the money to do so!) Profiling can help create a balance btwn funds and offerings. The more PDA records you add to your catalog, the more quickly your money will be spent. As you can see, our profile covers Subject and Non-subject parameters. For Content: we included all LC classes and subclasses that support curricular needs at all three schools, including interdisciplinary topics. We’re able to limit to specific LC ranges. All three campuses offer a Neuroscience curriculum, but no pre-Med programs so for Internal Medicine, we kept ONLY RC 321--571 for Neurosciences/ Biological Psychology/ Neuropsychiatry Limits were also applied to our Non-Subject Parameters: We assume our students and faculty are more likely to “dip” into ebooks vs. reading them cover-to-cover online. As a result, we identified types of books aligned to this behavior– such as anthologies and collections of essays and criticism. We exclude titles we normally don’t purchase (textbooks and workbooks) -- and titles we want our selectors to choose (multi-volume titles) Our profiling capabilities also allowed limiting our PDA program to: -- University presses and specific academic publishers -- English language content published on or after 2008 -- and setting a price cap – in our case, up to $250 for multi-user access <click> Reviewing PDA Titles: was impt to us too -- to assure what we got, matched what we thought we’d get. We thought it would be temporary but we’re still doing it because Titles “bleed in” -possibly due to how subject vs. non-subject parameters are ranked eBook pub dates that differ from print – the e-version gets a newer date but it’s an older title (i.e.) we got some titles from 1998-2007 even though our profile is for 2008+. Publishers that increase prices mean titles that once fit our profile, no longer do. We usually find out on the invoice & then request a price check of all our PDA titles. >> How will your vendor deal with such publisher practices?
- Tied to our profiling and records received -- CTW decided to utilize Coutts/MiL’s de-duplication service for a few reasons: - All 3 libraries subscribe to ebrary’s Academic Complete Collection and we hoped to exclude these - At onset, we didn’t want to include e-versions of titles held in print at each library (triplicate holdings across the consortium) For our initial PDA load: we wanted as many unique titles as possible >> All titles owned in duplicate and triplicate were removed; >> so this load included only unique or titles held by one CTW library. -- the plan was for subsequent loads to remove only titles held in triplicate but this was too time-consuming; had to be done manually So now we only send e-holdings to avoid buying duplicate electronic copies.
- Set up De-Duplication Service (if offered) < Systems/Technical Services – library/consortium level? This is closely tied to profiling and involves sending library holdings to Vendor so that titles currently held can be removed from PDA record loads. Need to determine schedule for sending holdings w/ libraries & vendor; responsible for sending and coordinating updates - when do other providers send monthly updates (i.e) ebrary PDA Records – Quality of records and Loading into Catalog(s) <Systems/Tech Services> Do vendor-supplied records meet cataloging standards and expectations Adding access notes & notes to indicate purchased titles > will vendor do this for fee or free? Did files load OK? Records expected = Records provided? Test URLs <E-Resources / R&I > Multiple people should test - raise awareness that PDA titles are in catalog; see firsthand what patrons will see; Assure that access on and off campus is working OK - IPs, proxy servers, etc. Do URLs open right titles? Does catalog record description and title that opens Match? Discovery of Ebooks (besides catalog) <E-Resources / R&I) OpenURL service: who needs to do what to keep this updated? Course Mgt Software, Reserves, LibGuides, etc.: communication w/ faculty about use of ebooks Direct Link to ebook platform like other e-resources Do platform search/browse functions work as promised/demonstrated? Devilish Details: (5) Platform Issues = loss of a Discovery option: we do NOT provide a direct link to MyiLibrary Subject browse unreliable: MANY titles in absolutely positively the wrong content area Long lag turning off titles whose records got deleted due to licensing issues, price increases, URL problems (4) Record issues: usually requires re-loading records = extra work for catalogers # records expected don’t always equal records received -- need to double check load counts URLs: sometimes open different titles than listed in record or description page opens different title Last load: URLs didn’t open description page, opened the book (discovered 3 weeks after loading!)
- Everything’s falling into place – with the Accounts and Access points covered, you’re pretty much ready to go. Now it’s time to talk about Awareness: … passing along information about the program and getting training on its various components to keep things running. Let’s talk about Training first – it’s the most straight-forward
- Training needs to cover two sets of systems: behind-the scenes (for staff) and front-end (for users) These are mostly self-explanatory, but here are some to consider for internal needs: The initial profile is in place, but it may need changing. If you have access to your profile – how do you change it? Is there a way to “play around” with profile options to see what you’d get if you change it? If you’re reviewing titles – how is this done? How do you mark titles for exclusion that fall outside your profile? If you’ve found titles you want added to PDA – how is that done? How do you find out about changes that may affect your offerings? (i.e.) publishers in the PDA program -- new ones or those who have dropped out? What are the options for learning how to use the ebook platform? – in-person, webinars, online help? Who can sign up: “train the trainer” or are any specifically meant for end-users? Aside from account reps: who else can be contacted w/ questions or problems? Do different questions/problems need to go to different contacts? --You need to know who’s responsible for what at the vendor and ebook provider. Probably most important: what keeps you -- as a customer -- informed about changes?
- Last, but not least : who will be the primary person(s) responsible for handling issues that arise? Steve and I both mentioned unexpected situations that required follow up. Most of these came to our attention while handling routine tasks and requests (i.e.) loading records, reviewing title lists, pulling usage stats, and checking invoices. Everyone - the libraries and the Vendor- underestimated the oversight needed for our consortial PDA. CTW’s account needed a bit more hand-holding due to special things the vendor agreed to do for us and it was the first time the vendor worked w/ a consortium. Because this is a grant project, we may be paying CLOSER attention than you would. But another factor may be: an increasing interest in PDA = heavier workload for account reps = less attention to accounts in general. Bottom Line: a PDA program may prove time-consuming - especially at first. It’s not something to set up and then ignore. If you want to be sure it’s meeting expectations, someone needs to be monitoring it. =============================================================== Publishers and Prices – Pub list vs. content available, price increases that bump titles out of profile Usage stats – OK, but could provide more types of data and report options Invoicing – that requires tracking usage over time Record Issues which usually requires re-loading records = extra work for catalogers Platform Issues = loss of Discovery option Title Review & Profile Tweaks
- This may seem like an odd question. But let’s think this through… At its most basic, PDA is simply a different purchasing model. How much do we talk about the other ways the library acquires materials? One primary difference might be the format of what’s being bought – but maybe not. We’re focusing on ebooks b/c that’s what CTW did, but you can set up a PDA program for print too (a NISO webinar in March, included info about print PDA programs.) >> Who is likely to be interested in this new business model? >> What might they want to know and to what level of detail? Here are three groups that the library should consider. What should be communicated to each and why? … and who should be the messenger? Make this a group discussion…five minutes… ==================================================================== Our Users: In general, will students care? Are they likely to be satisfied as long as they get what they want and when they want it? Faculty ARE likely to be interested, so how much do we tell them? If it’s in the catalog, is that enough? Will knowing how titles get purchased create “unnatural” usage – either more or less than normal? Library Staff: Many will need and want training on the new set up and user interface. Talking about the details will keep them informed and they are likely to have suggestions and want updates. Reference/Instruction librarians will recognize the need to avoid using PDA titles as “demo” materials in classes. Administrators: This is an opportunity for the library to talk about its proactive effort to hold down costs and stay within budget to Administrators, Trustees, etc… Also to warn about over-reliance on PDA due to potential & unexpected side effects on collection. Emphasize PDA for core vs. supplementary titles?
- First, we’ve got a question for you – How long do you estimate is needed for implementation – from start to finish? CTW’s Time frame: - licensed signed w/ Coutts/MiL in early Nov 2009 - goal to be ready in early Jan (~ 6 wks due to holidays) Took about 10 weeks to get initial record load + 2 weeks for dust to settle (experienced an unexpected hiccup!) Fully in place by early Feb: took 12 weeks / 3 months: 2x the time expected!
- Assessment Learning Outcomes Assessment serves as the final stage of our project and therefore has not fully been developed. For this part of our workshop I’ll be briefly covering our plans for assessment and then bring you, our resident experts into the planning ACTIVITIES by asking for your input in helping to determine the best way to measure the success of our pilot.
- I think Suskie’s statement sums it all up… Assessment never ends!
- Before we get started I’d like to remind you of three basic ground rules for developing an assessment. Start at the beginning It’s important to consider assessment as you plan your project. Waiting until the end may leave you with out the information & data you need to evaluate your success Think about what you need Consider what you might need to assess your goals & desired outcomes. Talk to your vendor to determine what reports they can provide that allows you to track your data. They may be willing to develop a report if you ask. Keep it simple Assessment is important but, don’t get lost along the road. Focus on the goal and what you need to make it successful. In retrospect we’ve kept to these rules where we can but, sometimes you find that keeping it simple is a bit difficult! Andrew has already given you an idea of the criteria we used in selecting Coutts/MyiLibrary as our PDA partner. And Lorri has found that maintaining a careful watch on your PDA program is essential!
- We began by going back to our original e-book project proposal submitted to Mellon in August of 2009. There we’ll find the basis for the overall stated goal for our pilot eBook project… “…to build a [successful] model for a shared online collection for the three CTW institutions.”
- Earlier Pat spoke to the assumptions we made about ebooks and our patrons across the Consortium as we were developing our eBook Project goals. These assumptions were behind the decisions we made right from the start and led to the project goals that Pat also mentioned earlier. [next slide]
- As a reminder let’s take a quick look back the project goals as Pat presented them earlier. By now these will have become fairly familiar to you so I won’t go into details. But, remember, the philosophy of purchasing “Just in Time” was new to CTW as was the purchase of individual ebook titles and allowing patrons to take a greater role in our collection development process. New ways of collection sharing Instant access for any CTW patron Increased cost efficiency by reducing consortial duplication Cost savings from shared and patron driven purchases Enhanced discoverability and access by patrons Discovery through our OPAC is just one way we hope our patrons will increase their access to the content they want and need
- Our project assumptions and overall goals then resulted in our expectations. The process of outlining our assumptions, creating our goals and establishing expectations for the project are critical for the assessment process. [next slide] <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> 24/7 access to multiple users across the three campuses Our users already have viable access to our shared print resources through our daily delivery service but, eBooks would allow for instant shared access anywhere – anytime. Efficiencies in title selection Our hope was that the loading of eBooks into our catalog based on a shared profile would allow patrons to contribute to the selection process, enhancing the work of our selectors in meeting patron needs More reliable Consortial inventory control; The availability of these titles in our OPACs enables us to see what is available electronically across the Consortium for more efficient inventory & selection Cost savings from shared and patron driven purchases PDA is based on the principle that you provide access at the time of need rather than purchasing in anticipation of need Reduced physical handling of materials And certainly we would be saving staff time as we moved from “p” to “e”… or did we?!
- From these assumptions, goals and expectations we have created seven different categories that serve as a framework for our assessment. Each category encompasses one or more questions we want to answer during our assessment. Let’s take a look at these to see what questions we might ask. As I present each category you might want to jot down any ideas you might have for questions under each category. Budget Like most libraries we are each experiencing the challenge of reduced $$ and limited space. This is a major incentive for conducting our pilot. Have we seen a cost savings in our materials budget as a result of PDA? Profiling The use of a profile allows us to control the content & format of our titles and thereby limit the overall number of titles that are loaded. Have we been able to balance the total number of titles added with the available funds we have to expend on PDA? Workflow Our expectation has been that ebook workflow would alter the workload of our staff in terms of acquisitions, processing for our CTW Loan service. What workflow changes have taken place? Have these had a positive or negative affect on staff workload? Impact on User Access This broad category addresses the impact on our users in accessing the research titles they need. PDA & ebooks directly impact ILL, circulation, reserves, and our patrons’ ability to discover new resources. To date, how has PDA impacted these services? User response Yes, the users! That’s what this should really be all about… user response is critical. Can we just assume that “if we build it they will come?!” What has our users’ experiences been in using our ebooks & PDA titles? The next two categories listed are very specific to how we chose to implement our pilot. Would we do it all over again the exact same way given the opportunity and the funding?! Vendor Performance Your choice of vendor and your ability to work with them effectively can make or break your program. Did we make the right choice? - How responsive has Coutts/MiL been in developing our PDA program? PDA Model Our original intent was to develop a model for shared ebook access. The choice of a PDA model developed out of our discussions with the vendors and discussions with our peers. Is PDA a good option for meeting our consortial goals of providing content that meet curriculum & research needs?
- We’ve identified our categories and provided some sample questions. Now how do we measure? What tools do we have in-hand and what others might we use? You’ll need both quantitative data along with some qualitative measures to get the full picture. Lorri has collected a great deal of data already and has been analyzing it as a means for keeping our project on track and decision making that has been necessary along the way. We can also revisit Andrew’s vendor selection criteria. There have been enormous change in the ebook/PDA landscape since we started our project. But, we still need to do work on our qualitative analysis to complete the picture. Which of these measurements will best give us the answers we’ll need? Who will do the work? Are there costs associated with the assessment? Here a couple of examples of what we’ve planned so far…
- Let looks at the Budget Category as an example of the quantitative measure: Here are four questions we have to determine if we have received Favorable consortial pricing on ebook purchases. Example: Initially, a CTW assumption was that consortial ebooks would cost less than 3x the cost in print. Based upon what we were told, our expectation was that we might pay up to 1.7 times the cost of print. What CTW wants to know is: Question: Was the cost of our PDA titles at or below 1.7 times the cost of print? Measurement: By tracking what was paid for the PDA title vs. its cost in print (both cloth and softcover prices). Lorri has been collecting data and doing a comparison each month as we receive our invoices. This is a good example of how assessment has been a perpetual work in progress throughout our pilot.
- We think this category calls for the use of qualitative measures. Example: CTW’s initial assumption was that purchasing ebooks would result in reduced workload for our staff. Our expectation was that PDA would simplify the selection & ordering of individual titles to be added to collections. What CTW wants to know is: Does the time required for pre-loading PDA records by technical services result in a decrease in the time required for selection and ordering? Have we seen an overall reduction in total staff time? Measurement: We could attempt to log the actual amount of time associated with PDA title loads but, we might learn more by collecting qualitative information from the staff, specifically our Technical Services staff responsible for our PDA record loads and troubleshooting. I think we’re ready to go to work on your final activity.
- Activity Description Now its time to take out your Assessment worksheets. This will serve as the final activity of our workshop. Using the examples we just provided each table will be working together for the next ten minutes to brainstorm your ideas for what other questions we need to ask and how these might be measured. You may use one or more of the categories to get you started. First fill in the 1st column with a question and then brainstorm ways in which we might determine an answer. Assign someone to record your discussion and report out to the entire group at the end. The workshop presenters will be walking around to assist you in your discussions. [Five minute warning] [2 minute warning with directions -- wrap-up] To keep things moving I’ll ask each reporter to identify one new idea that is especially important to your group or add to another groups' ideas as we work our way around the room.