Taking a step back
-
Upload
mike-crumpton -
Category
Documents
-
view
256 -
download
1
Transcript of Taking a step back
Charleston Conference 2010
Stephen Dew
Collections and Scholarly Resources Coordinator
Mike Crumpton
Assistant Dean for Administrative Services
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Taking a Step Back,
To Move Forward
Library Space is Limited
No longer collection storage only!
New models have emerged for collection
management
More electronic resources
Off site storage and collaborative options
Quantitative volume counts less important
Learning assessment based on student outcomes
Collection space shared with “Users”
Building additions, expansions and remodels
competing with other projects in a tough economy
Library as Place
Space attributes being assessed, i.e. LibQUAL+
Space that inspires study and learning
Comfortable and inviting
Quiet space for individual contemplation
Community space for group and collaborative learning,
study and related activities
Space that serves as a gateway and accessibility for
study, learning, research and related resources
Third place space
Fosters community spirit and involvement
Encourages creative and collaborative thinking
Aged Space is Unappealing
Basement Stacks Government Documents
Creating appealing space
Changing User Needs
Collections Based User/Learner Focused
▫ All materials warehoused and available quickly
▫ Collection selected and endorsed by faculty as extension of classroom resources
▫ Collection built to support research with primary sources
▫ Significant financial investment made to process, deliver and maintain collection
▫ Dedicated space to support learning needs
▫ Technology driven attributes to access needed resources
▫ Group space to meet and work collaboratively with classmates
▫ Individual study with tools/conveniences to support technology
▫ Financial resources stretched to cover larger breadth of collaborative/technological needs
The Price of Space• Maintaining print
collections
▫ Processing
▫ Access/delivery
▫ Shelving and repair
• Storage and retrieval costs
• New technologies
• Infrastructure needs
• Updated furnishing
“Limited funding forces libraries to make financial choices”
How Space is Used
Usable floor space Sq. Ft How space is used Sq. Ft
Tower stacks 55,980 Book Shelving 57680
Tower Lobbies 4,116 Staff/offices 16500
Main – B,1 and 2 77592 Specialty areas* 46632
Main – 3rd Floor 8772 SCUA 11000
Total usable space 146,460 Common user spaces 14648
Total 146,460
*this includes reference,
reading room, Jarrell Hall,
Gov Docs
What Students Want
Small group work spaces
Access to tutors, experts, and faculty in the learning space
Table space for a variety of tools
Integrated lab facilities
IT highly integrated into all aspects of learning spaces
Availability of labs, equipment, and access to primary resources
Accessible facilities
Shared screens (either projector or LCD); availability of printing
Workgroup facilitation
Learning Spaces Educause 2006
Campus Priorities and Plans
Library Addition
UNCG has identified the expansion of Jackson
Library as one of its top priorities. The proposed
design:
Expanding the tower for book stacks.
Create a new center of academic and student
life.
Secondary transit hub will be adjacent to
Jackson Library addition reinforcing the critical
role of the building to the life of the campus.
Public spaces of the library should be located in
conjunction with the transit hub.
Proposed Library Addition
Existing Main and Tower
Weeding Justifications
Volume count is a less important metric in ranking
(not part of strategic plan)
Space for collections is becoming a lower priority
on campus
Electronic resources are improving access to
same or similar materials
Continuation of same strategy has a finite end so
alternatives must be considered now.
Slote principles Reasons to weed
Increases book usage
Increases user satisfaction Saves staff time Makes room for new
technologies
Resistance to weeding stems from: Emphasis on numbers -
“bigger is better” Professional work pressure
- “not enough time” Fear of public displeasure -
“letters to the editor”
Sacredness of collection - Conflicting criteria
Impact of E-books and E-journals–
increased and flexible access
Reference – moving from “building use only” to
available at home 24/7
Technology and other subjects that date quickly
Test manuals
Strong user preference for e-journals over print
Space savings for all
Bang for the buckIndividual monograph
weeding Serials weeding
Labor intensive for decisions
Labor intensive for record modification
Hard to gain enough space
Unlikely to have electronic back up
Book sale and recycling options
One decision can cover multiple volumes
One record change covers multiple volumes
Gains more space more quickly
Biggest gains from print/electronic duplication
Limited options for discards
Low hanging fruit
Duplicate formats and copies
Outdated editions
Obvious solutions to some – aren’t obvious to all
Disciplinary differences
Impact and Assessing Situations
ASERL unique monograph list
Binding investment
Economy on politics
Economy on buying (growth projection)
Remote collections
Receiving gifts
Cautionary Tales
Level of detail for weeding varies by person doing
the weeding, i.e. reference librarian looks
holistically vs. tech service personnel looking at
call numbers and item numbers
Personal biases can play a role
Groups need to be unified by common goal
Communication constantly maintained to
establish procedures and resolve problems
Entire operation needs to be transparent
Collaborations
Large scale serials
weeding procedures
Bigger is better?
Judgment factor?
Space Gainers
Special Collections and Archives
Unique signature to institution
Undergrads with technology
Technical enhancements for collaborative devices is
part of learning environment
Undergrads without technology
Old fashion need for privacy and quiet
All Users
Community center focused space
UNCG Groups to consider
Space Planning Committee – oversight group,
including wide representation
Collection Management Committee – Subject
Liaisons
Technical Services Staff
Access Services Staff
University Groups
Teaching Faculty
Students!
Green Weeding
Library and campus are committed to
sustainability
Recycling and Reusing accomplished by: Connections with Recycling Office
Better World Books
AVOID THE DUMPSTER
UNCG Solutions
Identified duplication
Monographs
Journals owned electronically and in print
Identified low use monographs
Weeding with specific goals
ID target call number ranges
Partnered with departmental liaisons
Prioritized storage availability
Compact shelving pros and cons
Journal De-Duplication Project
2007
Reasons to De-Duplicate Journal Subscriptions
Annual price increases for journals have significantly exceeded
inflation Need to keep journal budget under control and not take
from other resources
The vast majority of users want and expect electronic copies - why
pay for a duplicate print copy that nobody uses
With e-only, there is no longer a need for processing, claiming,
binding, etc., so there will be additional monetary savings and staff
time will be freed for other tasks
With e-only, shelving space is freed for other use
Other Institutions Going to
Electronic Journal Subscriptions in 2007
University of South Carolina
Appalachian State University
East Carolina University
Drexel
UC Davis
UNC Charlotte
American University
Binghamton University
University of Maryland
Central Michigan (moving 70% to online by 2008)
Kansas State University
College of Charleston
Logistics of the De-Duplication Project
Coordinated by Collection Management Committee--AD for Collections, librarians who are department liaisons, and the heads of cataloging, acquisitions, and access services.
Developed a spreadsheet of 850 journals for which the Libraries subscribed to both the print & electronic versions and the journals offered an e-only subscription option
At UNCG, most journal subscriptions are assigned to a particular academic department, and the spreadsheet was sorted by department (3 letter code)
Logistics of the De-Duplication Project
A template letter that explained why print subscriptions should be dropped in favor of e-only subscriptions was prepared and shared with liaisons
Some liaisons revised the template for their own style, but everyone provided essentially the same message
During first week of March 2007, liaisons sent letters and spreadsheets to department chairs and representatives for their review and comment
Results from De-duplication
Project For 813 journals, print subscriptions were
cancelled and an e-only subscriptions
maintainedSavings on subscription cost
Shelf space freed in Current Periodicals area
Shelf space freed in Stacks
No Processing Costs
No Claiming Costs
No Binding Costs
We lose no content, remove duplication, & still
provide what our users want most: Electronic
access to the information
Journal Cancellation & Budget
Reduction Project
2009
North Carolina State Budget Crisis 2010
Due to a significant shortfall in tax revenues, on
April 6, 2009, the state ordered all agencies to
freeze purchasing
As of that date, the Libraries lost whatever
collection funds it had remaining for the fiscal
year and could not make anymore purchases or
pay any incoming invoices
The Libraries had to prepare for a possible 15-to-
20 percent budget cut for fiscal 2009-10
Logistics of the Journal Cancellation &
Budget Reduction Project
Coordinated by Collection Management Committee
Developed a spreadsheet of 1,750 journals
Libraries had a direct subscription (not a package deal)
The current issues of the journal were available in PDF in a protected aggregator database
The spreadsheet was sorted by department and reviewed by liaisons, who made recommendations on cancelling/keeping
Departments & faculty were notified about recommendations
Protected Aggregator Databases
Results from the Journal Cancellation and
Budget Reduction Project
700 journal subscriptions cancelled
$175,000 reduced from the serials budget of
$1.52 million
We lose no content, remove duplication, & still
provide what our users want most: Electronic
access to the information (do lose ownership)
Weeding & Space Repurposing
Project
2008 to Date
Space Based on Print Collections
All materials warehoused in building (shelves/cabinets)
Significant financial investment made to process, deliver,
& maintain collection
Library prestige & ranking dependent upon physical size,
total volumes, etc.
Print collection takes more & more space, taking away
from student study, collaborative space, and other uses
Print Replaced by Electronic
Frees space to support a more conducive learning
environment--more individual study space, more group
study space, more computers, etc.
Frees financial resources for other needs
Library prestige more dependent on electronic resources
provided and the building’s learning environment
Coordination of the
Weeding & Space Re-Purposing Project
Space Planning Committee (July 2008) --the oversight group responsible for planning renovation of space, setting priorities, and scheduling when certain call-number ranges of the collection would be reviewed for weeding
Collection Management Committee –responsible for reviewing the journals, making recommendations, communicating with departments and faculty, and coordinating the actual weeding and transfer
We Are Not a Museum
We cannot afford to become a museum for
printed journals that are available electronically.
We cannot afford to become a museum for old
books that are duplicates, out-of-date, or out-of-
scope.
Our current patrons do not use them
We can expect the same behavior from our future
patrons.
Weeding Totals for Journals
7,000 linear feet of bound journals weeded from Jackson Library
1,500 linear feet of bound journals weeded from Storage
1,000 linear feet of bound journals removed from Jackson to Storage
Weeding Totals for Books &
Microforms
700 linear feet of books weeded from Jackson
Library
2,500 linear feet of books weeded from Storage
(review still in progress)
50 linear feet of microforms weeded from Jackson
25 microform cabinets removed from Jackson to
Storage
Goal = 50% increase in User
Space
Proposed use of space Sq. Ft
Book Shelving 43680 All materials in tower
Staff/offices 16500
Specialty areas* 37860
SCUA 18000 Acquire 3rd floor main
Common user spaces 30420 User service pts in basement including
Gov docs and larger CITI lab
Total 146,460
*this includes reference, reading room,
Jarrell Hall,
Selected SourcesDubicki, Eleonora. “Weeding : Facing the Fears.” Collection Building 27, no. 4
(2008): 132-135.
Lugg, Rick and Ruth Fischer. “Future Tense – The Disapproval Plan: Rules-Based
Weeding & Storage Decisions.” Against the Grain 20, no. 6 (2008-2009): 74-78.
Metz, Paul and Caryl Gray. “Public Relations and Library Weeding.” The Journal of
Academic Librarianship 31, no. 3 (2005): 273-279.
Oblinger, Diana G, ed. Learning Spaces. Educause, 2006.
http://www.educause.edu/LearningSpaces
Penniman, Sarah and Lisa McColl. “Green Weeding: Promoting Ecofriendly
Options for Library Discards.” Library Journal 133, no. 15 (2008): 32-33.
Schonfeld, Roger C. and Housewright, Ross. “What to Withdraw? Print Collection
Management in the Wake of the Digital Age, ITHAKA S+R, September 2009
Slote, Stanley. Weeding Library Collections, 4th ed. Englewood: Libraries Unlimited,
1999.
Wakaruk, Amanda. “Dissecting the Disconnect : Thinking about Public Space in
Academic Libraries.” College and Research Libraries News 70, no. 1 (2009) 16-
18.