Transcript Best Practices in Cooperative Collection Management: A

Best Practices in Cooperative
Collection Development: A Panel
Discussion
Panelists
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bruce Leach, Ohio State Univ.
Eric Carpenter, Oberlin College
Rob Kairis, Kent State Univ. - Stark
Gerald L. Newman, Univ. of Cincinnati
Margo Warner Curl, CONSORT Colleges
Paul Jenkins, College of Mount St. Joseph
Joyce Baker, Belmont Technical College
Linda Brown, Bowling Green State Univ.
Goals for Panel Discussion
• Review current theory and practice of
cooperative CD in OhioLINK
• Create synergy necessary to develop new
models and practice
• Generate additional topics for luncheon
and/or group discussions this p.m.
• Stimulate grass roots development of
additional cooperative projects in months
ahead
A Simple Step Any Selector Can
Take
• Bruce Leach
• Head Biological Sciences/Pharmacy
Library, Ohio State University
• [email protected]
Monograph Duplication in
OhioLINK: a College Library
Response
Eric J. Carpenter
• Collection Development Librarian
• Oberlin College Library
• Oberlin, OH
OUTLINE
•
•
•
•
•
•
Background
Needs
Goals
Project Description
Guidelines
Results
BACKGROUND
• Oberlin: liberal arts college + conservatory
of music
• Oberlin live on pcirc in 1995
• Budget reductions at Oberlin - subscription
cuts, 97-98
NEEDS
• Raise faculty awareness of OhioLINK,
promote use of pcirc
• Reduce acquisitions budget, spend $$
wisely
• Respond to Feb. 97 CIRM discussion monograph duplication
• Enrich local and OhioLINK collections
GOALS
• Consider # of copies in OhioLINK available
before ordering monograph
• Write guidelines for purchasing
monographs in view of new OhioLINK
membership
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
• Sample orders: # OL copies, availability
• German - 3, History - 8, Math - 4 copies
• Wrote Guidelines for Purchasing
Monographs in View of OhioLINK
• Distributed Guidelines to relevant teaching
departments
• Selectors indicated levels of availability (L,
A, D)
GUIDELINES
• L - LOCAL: Needed at Oberlin regardless
of OhioLINK availability
• A - ACCESSIBLE: Must be readily
accessible, via OhioLINK availability or
purchase
• D - DESIRABLE: Availability is desirable
via OhioLINK or purchase if funds permit
RESULTS
• Concept endorsed by Faculty Library
Committee
• Limited success with faculty selectors History Dept.
• Success with library selectors - concept
integrated into selection decisions
• Project never implemented on large scale
due to budget and workload pressures
OhioLINK Duplication:
Statistics/Software
• Rob Kairis, Library Director
• Kent State University-Stark
• [email protected]
Not Bought in Ohio
Cooperative Collection Development
Summit
Gerald L. Newman
• Assistant Dean for Collection Development
• University Libraries
• University of Cincinnati
Why the “Not Bought” Project?
• To enrich the state collection with items that
have not been purchased
• By shifting purchasing to items not held in
the state
• In the meantime also reducing unnecessary
duplication
A Question for YBP
• As YBP had a record of the purchases of
many of the institutions in the state
• YBP was the logical place to uncover our
buying patterns
• Especially items covered by YBP but that
no school in Ohio purchased
CBTF to YBP: “Can You Help?”
• As the chosen approval vendor for
OhioLINK
• And having made a commitment to help
Ohio in its agenda
• YBP was willing and interested in providing
data that the CBTF could use
YBP to CBTF: “Yes”
• YBP provided the CBTF data in several
formats over several months
– First, in computer sheets detailing titles YBP
had not sold to Ohio schools
– Later, slips looking like approval notifications
slips
– Both paper trials had their drawbacks
– The CBTF hoped for an online solution
GOBI 2
• As GOBI2 developed, consortial reports became
part of YBP’s plan
• The reports are designed not only to show
consortial purchases, but also to show what Ohio
has not bought – as in “not bought in Ohio”
• Reports can be generated by individuals on many
of the standard parameters for report generation
Limitations
• The “not bought in Ohio” reports are based
on the YBP universe only
• These reports do not show activity on the
same materials from other vendors
Positive Features
• Flexible search parameters to meet selector
needs
• Easy identification of titles that the major
approval vendor to the state has not
provided
• Provision of a list “de-duped” across many
of our collections
What Uses?
• To allow an individual selector to funnel some
selection to titles not already bought in the state
• This can apply to selectors at any size library
• To allow two or more selectors to cooperate more
easily on purchases
• For a subject group to gather and distribute
efficiently potential purchase information to the
group for consideration
• Others . . .
“Not Bought in Ohio”
For Your Consideration and
Action!
Using GOBI2 to Facilitate Cooperative Collection
Development through a Shared Approval Plan
Cooperative Collection Development:
Walking the Walk
December 8, 2003
Grant for CCD
• CONSORT Colleges – Denison, Kenyon,
Ohio Wesleyan, Wooster
• Funding from GLCA of Mellon money
• To run through June 2004
• Together build a shared research collection
Shared approval plan
• Supplementary to individual institutional plans
• Single profile for the four libraries
• Accommodates local selection & acquisitions
practices
• Easy to implement and use
Important elements
• Dedicated coordinator
• Committee members have decision-making
authority
• Financial commitment
• Use plan for awhile before evaluating &
revamping
• Libraries and Vendor both involved
Selecting subjects
• Rejected notion of working with ‘core’
discipline
• Interviewed selectors
• Identified areas of strong common interest
– Asian Studies, Africana, Play scripts, Museum
& Gallery Publications
Qualities of successful areas
• Are of great interest across the institutions
• Span depth and breadth far greater than any
individual library could manage
individually
• Do not require extensive involvement from
other library staff or faculty
• Are well suited to approval plan
mechanisms
Moving into production
• Based initially on interdisciplinary tags and format
types
• Includes entire universe of publishers covered by
the vendor
• Written as though books would be sent
automatically, but operates in a ‘virtual’ mode
• Evaluation without having to deal with managing
actual books
Outline of the Plan
• Applied to A-GA, GE-PZ, SB 469-480, TR 640-685, Z-ZA
• DEN & OWU more interested in East Asia (fund DEN
OWU)
• KEN & WOO more interested in South Asia (fund KEN
OWU)
• Some exceptions in B & N classes (e.g. fund OWU WOO)
• Include all African Books Collective from L&H
Use of Gobi2 Features
•
•
•
•
•
•
Slip Views or GobiAlerts
Shared Folders
GobiTween – separate CONSORT info
Order Templates
Export Cart
Approval and Expenditure Reports
Technical Services
• Services provided for each sub-account
mirrors those of each standalone account
• Each library exports records from GOBI and
loads them to III to support order generation
• Each export action creates a separate file so
that the individual library can pick up and
process the appropriate files
Merits of the Plan
• Customizable – can alter to individual
library specifications
• Flexible – can add other subject areas
• Adaptable – framework can be used by
other consortia
• Assessable – can monitor use, refine profile
Presented by
Margo Warner Curl (with thanks to Michael Zeoli)
Coordinator of Cooperative Collection Development
CONSORT Colleges
C/o The College of Wooster Libraries
1140 Beall Avenue
Wooster OH 44691
330-263-2056
[email protected]
http://www.wooster.edu/library/oh5/cccd
SWORCS: A Modest Proposal
A Lesson In Patience
Paul O. Jenkins
College of Mount St. Joseph
Members of SWORCS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
College of Mount St. Joseph
Xavier University
Cincinnati Bible College
University of Dayton
Cedarville College (added)
Athenaeum of Ohio (unable to join)
Miami University (added upon request)
Finding Our Mission
•
•
•
•
•
Non-Christian religions
Islam
Buddhism
Judaism
Hinduism
Bringing YBP Into the Picture
• GOBI Approval Plan
• Establishing Approval Plan Profiles
Reexamining the Mission
• to apply cooperative collection development
principles in our libraries in order to reduce
duplication of titles and better cover peripheral
areas of Religious Studies;
• specifically, to create a shared slip approval plan
profile in the area of non-Christian religions
(specifics yet to be determined) that can serve as a
model for larger OhioLINK groups in other
disciplines.
Getting to Specifics
• Begin with retrospective purchases
Dividing Up Responsibilities
•
•
•
•
Confucianism—XU
Tenrikyo and Shinto—Miami.
Taoism—UD.
Bahai, Zoroastrianism, Rastafarianism—
MSJ.
• Unitarianism, Scientology, Atheism—
Cedarville
• Sikhism, Jainism—Cincinnati Bible.
Making a Financial Commitment
• $500 commitment from each school
Lessons Learned
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
This is possible but difficult.
Don’t expect it to be perfect.
Be patient.
Start small.
Be flexible.
Be prepared to compromise.
Vendor participation essential.
Questions?
• Contact Paul O. Jenkins
• 513-244-4351
• [email protected]
2 Year Colleges:
• Are We Really a
Subject Group?
•
•
•
•
Joyce Baker
Belmont Technical College
Director of Library & Learning Resource Operations
December 8, 2003
Who are the 2-Year Colleges?
• 17 Community & Technical Colleges
• 20 Branches of Akron, BGSU, Cincinnati,
Kent, OSU, OU
• Less than 1000 – over 14,000 FTE
• 1 to 4 campuses
• Collection Development Staff 1- 10
Differences in Mission
•
•
•
•
Several offer 4 year degrees
Several offer graduate programs
Many provide first 2 years of 4 year degree
Programs range from liberal arts transfer
module to technical studies with job
placement as goal
Similarities in Mission
•
•
•
•
All offer a 2 year degree
Focus is on teaching/learning; not research
Most offer open enrollment
Most offer basic skills/remedial programs
Similarity in Libraries
• Most selection is accomplished by 1-2 staff with
some faculty input
• Library materials are used in a similar manner
– Keep faculty current
– Student papers & projects
– Self help/Student success/Career Placement
• Support the curriculum
• Support the teaching/learning mission
YBP Participation in 2Year
Colleges
• 28 Firm Order Accounts or 76%
• 18 Approval/Slip Plans or 49%
• 20 Gobi2 Accounts or 54%
Survey to further assess
similarities & differences
•
•
•
•
37 surveys distributed
19 completed
51% response rate
79% YBP Accounts
Common Curriculum Areas
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
100% Business Management
89% Accounting
84% Early Childhood Education
73% Criminal Justice
63% Mental Health/Social Service
58% Administrative Assistant
47% Paralegal
31% Real Estate
Nursing/Allied Health
•
•
•
•
•
•
95% Nursing
63% Medical assisting
63% Radiology
53% Medical Assisting & Coding
47% EMT/Paramedic
37% Physical Therapy
Engineering
•
•
•
•
•
84% Engineering Program
58% Electrical
53% Mechanical
26% Electronics
26% Drafting & Design
Computer/IT
•
•
•
•
•
•
79% Computer Programming
79% Computer Networking
74% Computer Applications
68% Computer Science
63% Web Design
63% Computer Graphics/Multimedia
Teaching/Learning Interests
•
•
•
•
79% Information Literacy
58% Assessment
53% Basic Skills
53% Distance Education
34 Unique Programs
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Environmental Health & Safety
Building Preservation & Restoration
Golf Course Management
Sports & Fitness Management
Recording Arts
Equine/Back Country
Travel & Tourism
Specialties/Strengths/Interests
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Amish
Appalachia
Local History/Culture/Geography
Allied Health/Nursing
Paralegal
Education/Teaching
Culinary Arts/Hospitality Management
Collection Weaknesses
•
•
•
•
Dated
Lack Depth
Need Coverage for New Programs
Lack Coverage in Specific Subject Areas
–
–
–
–
–
–
Science/Engineering
Business
Computer/IT
Nursing
Reference
Social Sciences
Collection Analysis
• Comparison to lists (Books for College
Libraries, Best Books, Brandon Hill)
• Check against other catalogs
• Faculty input
• Accreditation & Curriculum Review
• Weeding Projects (3 over ten years)
Faculty Notification
• 79% New book lists, newsletters, displays,
web pages
• 74% E-mail/mailbox notification
• 37% personal contact informally & at
meetings
• 16% YBP Approval Plan w/ faculty
selectors
Current Ventures
• Routinely check OhioLINK/YBP before ordering
• 4 regional campuses recently reviewed periodicals
lists to eliminate unnecessary duplication
• 2 libraries casually looking at Amish Materials
• 1 library has a causal arrangement with local rural
hospitals & medical journals
• 1 library hosts a Masters in Ed program &
professional education journals
Suggestions
• Share collection responsibilities for print copies of
e-books
• Explore potential cooperative areas such as
Appalachian resources, Nursing
• Develop a circulating reference collection
• Participate in other subject groups & subgroups
• Weeding: check for last copy; offer to discard list
• Check OL/YBP when ordering
Questions/Considerations
• What method can be used to assess the collection?
• How can we share profiles?
• How do we develop an awareness of what is
purchased elsewhere?
• How can we test Gobi2 features?
• What Gobi2 features can be used to enhance the
selection process?
• How can we coordinate efforts?
• Should we join other subject groups?
Making Collaboration Happen
Subject Connections
Linda A. Brown
Collections Coordinator
BGSU
Opportunities
Develop your leadership skills
Build new relationships with
colleagues
Start small… and act innovatively
More Opportunities…
Build areas of collection strength
Spend scarce materials budget dollars
strategically
Put your library on the OhioLINK map as
an innovator and collaborative collection
builder
Subject Group Survey
Stronger, more effective leadership
More, and broader membership
Clear function or focus
Face-to-face meetings
Join an OhioLINK subject
group
Invent and design cooperative collection
development projects
Share cooperative successes with colleagues
Post progress reports on Ostaff
Learn from others’ experience
Health Sciences
 Create a list of resources we all subscribe to
independently and investigate pay-to-play group
pricing
 Weeding
 Use the subject listserv for information sharing on
current issues:
– Vendor pricing models and policies
– Public service issues -- Single public service desk
– Publicizing BioMed Central and open access publishing
OhioLINK Subject Groups
 OStaff resources
• Login: ostaff
• Password: Available from any OhioLINK staff or
committee member
Click on:
Collection Development
Subject Groups