Adapting ACRL Transfer Criteria to Facilitate Collection Analysis of Rare or Unusual Content in the Halle Library at

Eastern Michigan University

An over view of the criteria, process, outcomes, and benefits/drawbacks of benchmarking titles using the

ACRL transfer criteriaBob Kelly: Collection Development

Librarian Eastern Michigan University

As our collections age we need to:Review titles for their historical, cultural, or

monetary value.Identify early content that is uniquely

associated with the history of the organization.It is within our purview of preserving and

protecting content so that it is accessible to future generations.

Why Review?

Personal interest in evolution of early field guides from commentaries to identification. Field Ornithology by Eliot CouesA history of North American birds - Google Boo

ksDiscovered EMU had a number of guides in

collection and became interested in learning extent of earliest holdings.

Report of pre-1940 imprints yielded 40K titles.

Catalyst:

List sorted by earliest imprints and began checking those. The first 200 had missing or very odd imprint entries. Michael Barnes in cataloging investigated and

discovered problems probably stemming from retro-con process (convert physical catalog card to electronic record).

Determined we needed to set up process to fully assess scope of project and transfer criteria.

UM SI Archives student Maureen Kerwin: Literature search Developing criteria Implementing, refining, and documenting process.

Article to be published in Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services Journal.

Initial Investigation:

Literature search revealed very few articles published on topic of transfer of rare/unusual content.

Guidelines from ACRL provided framework to construct, test, modify, and finalize a set of transfer benchmarks. The key take aways are:Promulgate the library's definition and

management of rare and special publications.List and document the criteria for the selection

of items for transfer.Set forth clear procedures to implement the

transfer process.

Guidelines on the Selection and Transfer of Materials from General Collections to Special Collections (3rd Edition)

1. Market value2. Age 3. Physical and intrinsic

characteristics 4. Condition5. Bibliographic and research

value

Key elements of transfer criteria:

Premise: title to remain in current collection unless criteria warranted change

Initially attempted to utilize all criteria With application became evident that only 3

were required for our setting:Market valueNumber of copies in MichiganRelevance to EMU (Historical/Bibliographic)

EMU’s Application/Revision of criteria

No formal mission to collect/retain rare materials

Space limitations in University ArchivesArchive’s mission focuses on EMU’s historical

documents (administrative/programmatic)Working with the University Archivist, Rosina

Tammany, we expanded the definition of historic documents to include collection content related to EMU and Ypsilanti’s history, enabling us to justify transferring a limited number of titles to the archives.

Additional factors impacting EMU transfer criteria:

Reviewed Collections:63 titles (6%) in circulating collection945 titles (94%) in ARC

837 titles (83.05%) remained in their current location.

39 titles (3.87%) were transferred:.5% (5) Circulating titles transferred to ARC3.37% (34) from ARC to Archives

132 titles (13.10%) no decision

Results of benchmarking 1008 titles against finalized transfer criteria

Of the 5 circulating titles transferred to arc: 3 had 5 or fewer copies in Michigan; 1 was in poor condition; 1 title, if not rebound, would have been worth $600.

34 ARC titles transferred to Archives:Date of publication between: 1800 to 1855Scarcity (3 or fewer copies in Michigan) Contained color plates/mapsHad condition issues

Analysis of transferred titles

24% of all reviewed titles had cataloging problems.

104 titles (10%) cataloged as original publications when in fact they were a reprint.

1 title published in 1711 was cataloged as reprint and was in fact an original:Q. Horatius Flaccus, ex recensione & cum notis

atque emendationibusFewer cataloging problems found for titles

published after 1900.

Overall Analysis: Cataloging

27 books on a typical shelf took 1 hour and 45 minutes to process:8 minutes to request from ARC/Shelf22 minutes to retrieve and checkout1 hour 10 minutes to assess collection2.5 minutes average assessment time per title

Overall Analysis: Time/Effort

Once criteria established and parameters set review went much fasterWhen OCLC showed large number of holdings

not necessary to establish value.Remaining attributes for transfer to Archives

fairly easy to assess:Significance to EMUBooks in original binding

Standardized recording of data with codes/colors

Accelerating the review:

Online availability (I.E. Google Book Project)Decided to retain even if freely available onlineNeeds further exploration

Located at nearby archive (UM Bentley Historical Library Collection)Could be indicator EMU should also hold in our

own archivesIf found at 3 or fewer primarily academic

libraries in Michigan we moved into ArchivesUM/WSU/DPL/MSU/CMU/WMU

Discussion: Assessing Holdings

Publishing dates and editions difficult to confirm

Number of scores held by institutions may not be reflected in OCLC holdings

Consulted UM Music Library for insight on how best to handle

Music Scores

Improve accuracy of catalog holdings: 104 reproductions were cataloged as original publications.

Book in hand provided opportunity to assess condition as well as compare to bibliographic record.

Learning opportunity for SI interns: Real world application of theoretical concepts and librarians exposed to latest ideas.

Benefits:

Identifying and evaluating the oldest content provided a means to systematically evaluate rare or unusual content hidden in the library.

This is a long term process which requires the coordinated involvement among different departments (cataloging, circulation, collection development, archives).

Under taking this effort resulted in updating in-accurate records, developing enhanced review procedures, and most importantly, identifying valuable titles to be moved to a secure location.

Conclusion: