Aloha Print Serials!

Methods to Identify Titles for Cooperative Journal Retention

orDisposal

Diana Reid – Serials Acquisitions Librarian

diana.reid@louisville.edu

Tyler Goldberg – Head, Technical Services

tylergoldberg@louisville.edu

Print volumes in libraries Over 1 billion volumes in North

American academic libraries Mid-size libraries add average of

20,000-30,000 volumes per year http://www.oclc.org/research/publica

tions/library/2007/2007-01.pdf

Shared print initiatives for journals

Storage model Shared Distributed -- “print in place”

Retrospective / Prospective Means of selection Costs Length of retention / participation Level of verification

ASERL Collaborative Journal Retention -

background Proposal drafted in 2009 by Shared

Storage Study Group Based on other retention programs,

an agreement was drafted focusing on storing low-use print journals

Call for participation in spring 2010

ASERL Collaborative Journal Retention Program

Agreement

Length of participation is 25 years Library nominated Facilities requirements Information to be provided for each title

chosen Information delivery to participants Associated costs absorbed by individual

libraries

ASERL Steering Committee discussions:

Giving issues to other libraries to fill in their gaps

Modifications to facilities Bibliographic records

583 field Number of titles to be added per

institution

University of Louisville Lots of print journals Crowded Robotic Retrieval System

(RRS) and crowded stacks Budget constraints Participant in ASERL’s Collaborative

Journal Print Retention program

What do we retain for ASERL, what do we consider discarding?

First steps…

Created report from Voyager ILS of all serials format holdings in print

Approximately 41,000 titles

The path not taken…

Identifying journals for retention,

part 1 (easy)

Observation Knowledge of collections Bibliographic Other considerations

What we will retain, part 1

Identifying journals for retention, part 2

Exported a spreadsheet of electronic holdings from SFX Included all major publishers, Ebsco,

Proquest, Free titles, JSTOR, Project Muse, Highwire, etc.

Already had streamlined spreadsheet of print holdings

Print ISSN universal identifier for both

Identifying journals for retention, part 2

(continued) Established two primary categories

of interest: Titles (ISSNs) held in print that were

not held electronically Titles (ISSNs) held in print AND only

available electronically through an aggregator such as Ebsco or Proquest.

Identifying journals for retention, part 2

(results) What do we hold in print that we do

not have access to online?

Theory: these would be ‘unique gems' worth saving

Reality: directories, proceedings, oddball titlesException!: Title changes; literary

titles

Examples

Identifying journals for retention, part 2 (results

continued…) What titles do we have in print, and

have e-access but only through an aggregator?

Theory: These titles are potentially a higher risk for loss of access

Reality: There are relatively few scholarly titles that are not accessible via an established online publisher or platform.Exception : there were a few, but…

More of what we will retain

Unexpected benefits Found titles that we were not getting

in electronic form but could/should be

Further reduced titles currently sent for commercial binding

Cleaned up limited runs of titles we never really wanted

Withdrawal decisions Our bound periodicals are spared…

for now What if you must make space NOW?

JSTOR = “easy” choicePrint Collections Decision Support

Tool Perpetual access

Publishers making more readily identifiable

When can you reasonably assume?

Print Collections Decision Support Tool

Ithaka’s "What to Withdraw" report published in 2009 – proposes a model for preservation requirements

Freely available Decision Support Tool created to apply criteria described in report to JSTOR collections Designed to reveal JSTOR titles safe to

withdraw without affecting preservation A quick Google search for ‘JSTOR

withdrawal’ reveals many libraries have taken advantage of the tool

Future withdrawal decisions

Declining print usage (statistics or dust test)

Consortial agreements Faculty buy-in

Final thoughts Easy to decide what to keep Hard to throw it away

Bound periodicals from Colorado College’s JSTOR withdrawal project enjoy one final, brief incarnation as public art…http://libraryshenanigans.wordpress.com/category/tutt-library-colorado-college/

The Bottom Line

In 2035…We will be OLD

And REALLY OLD

What form will our collections take?