UKSG Usage Statistics For Decision Making Nov 2010
•Download as PPT, PDF•
1 like•629 views
A case study on how usage statistics are informing the subscription review decision-making process at the University of York Library.
![Agenda ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],UKSG Usage Statistics for Decision Making]()
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (12)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to UKSG Usage Statistics For Decision Making Nov 2010
Similar to UKSG Usage Statistics For Decision Making Nov 2010 (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
UKSG Usage Statistics For Decision Making Nov 2010
- 1. Counting the cost: The role usage statistics can play in a library subscription review UKSG Usage Statistics for Decision Making
Editor's Notes
- Figures are 2008/9 Sconul statistics 119 databases: A&I, FT primary research, JSTOR etc
- The first stage actually involved adding in the ISSN and EISSN data to our list of subscriptions (I did this when compiling the 2008 data). To do this I used Access to query Final Usage for 2008 against our list of subscriptions, matching against title. I think I managed to output the ISSN and EISSN for just over half our subscriptions, for the rest I had to copy them across manually. When preparing the 2009 data I had a list of our subscriptions with ISSNs and EISSNs so could follow the methodology as outlined in the slide.
- for the consultation we only circulated 2009 usage data. I think the idea was that including two years of data made the spreadsheet too complex and unwieldy.
- Typical examples of feedback include: Please keep - English. Dr Richard Rowland notes that ceasing our subscription to this 'would signal complete resignation from any serious engagement with Renaissance drama, and make the department and library a laughing stock.' (for a £20 print only journal) IVG: I have had no requests that this title should be saved; however it has been accessed 113 titles so I think it should be renewed for another year and usage stats monitored. (Journ “ vital for an incoming researcher” (Women's Studies) al of the Operational Research Society)
- Agreed unanimously during the meeting that: Discussions be undertaken over the next year concerning the remaining savings, the impact of making these from titles identified as essential for research and/or teaching and the level of investment in information resources required to support the University’s world class aspirations. These discussions should involve Research and Teaching Committees, HoDs, and the committee with oversight of academic areas (chaired by the DVC), so that a strategic view can be taken of the Library’s budget and the impact of any cancellations. Also agreed it is essential that the Library have formal representation on senior University committees e.g. Research and Teaching Committees.
- As mentioned I also wonder whether you should add or mention the human side of using usage data. People may be curious about staff time etc. I estimate that in total I probably spent about 7-8 weeks on the review, between 260 and 300 hours, with maybe just over half of this spent dealing directly with the usage data, and the rest spent compiling and collating feedback and dealing with queries. Given it was the first time we’d done this, it is difficult to judge how representative this is. Then there’s the time you and Chris spent when we were preparing the data. I think that having a small group working intensively to prepare complex data for presentation to ALLs and academics made the process manageable, but at the cost of increased pressure on the staff involved, creating problems managing other work. Book budget for 2010/11 is £348K (09/10 actual £346K) Subs budget for 2010/11 is £2,077K (09/10 actual £1,902K) BUT, Law and TFTV incorporated for the 1 st time
- we’re thinking about whether we can develop a subscriptions review light, so that we can carry out a full review every 2 or 3 years and a light touch version at other times. Chris and I talked about this but didn’t come to any conclusions, although even with a light touch version we’d still need to compile and consolidate the usage data. I was thinking that maybe the process could be slimmed down on the consultation side, focussing on a few selected titles once we’ve looked at the usage. From my point of view this would save time when consolidating and compiling feedback etc.