Challenges of collection management: analysis staffing and space
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
1 gostou•261 visualizações
Academic libraries with collections of all sizes face limitations of space, staffing, budget, etc., but still must maintain their collections responsibly. Collection maintenance with the goal of reclaiming space requires both solid data analysis and staff to execute projects. Presenters with perspectives from three different institutions will discuss their experiences in facing the challenges of analyzing data and managing workflows for current and potential removal projects. Speakers: Lisa Adams, OCLC Michael Hanson, Head of Library Technical Services, Sam Houston State University Ali Larsen, Serials Librarian, Siena College Melanie J. Church, MA, MLIS, Content Services Librarian, Rockhurst University
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Semelhante a Challenges of collection management: analysis staffing and space
Semelhante a Challenges of collection management: analysis staffing and space (20)
Mais de NASIG
Mais de NASIG (20)
Último
Último (20)
Challenges of collection management: analysis staffing and space
- 1. Challenges of Collection Management: Analysis, Staffing, & Space https://sched.co/MBN2
- 2. MANAGING THE UNKNOWN: PLANNING FOR THE UNCERTAIN FATE OF BOUND PERIODICALS Ali Larsen Siena College NASIG | June 7, 2019
- 3. THE SCENE
- 4. PRINT AT SIENA • About 200 current print subscriptions • Attempting to transition to electronic when possible • Done as money/opportunity/need presents itself • In 2017-2022 strategic plan • No additional money to help make this transition • Have consortial commitments to retain certain print holdings • We are still binding… • The footprint seems larger than it is.
- 8. The Setup • A librarian walks into a meeting…
- 10. WORD ON CAMPUS IS THAT: • No one uses print anymore • Everything is online • Everything is free • Space containing serials is being wasted Resulting in: • A lot of outside ideas on what the space is better suited for • Library playing defense
- 11. BE PREPARED…BUT FOR WHAT? • What did we actually have down there? • Holdings statement only, no reliable itemized number of physical volumes • Would we be forced to relocate them? To where? When? • Print to electronic conversion-not as simple as it appears • Some titles only in print still • Cost for current access and cost for back files • Our print collection is still growing! And is still being used! • For volumes that can be removed-ethical disposition desired • What does recycling mean? Can we repurpose?
- 13. STEPS TAKEN • Completed a bound periodicals inventory • Help from local high school transition program • Used final number to update insurance policy • Living spreadsheet • Helps us answer what if questions posed to us and ones we pose. • Re-assessing print • Flipster • Bindery evaluation • Conversations/quote from publishers for backfiles. • Space Master Planning Committee • Represented the library • An exercise in patience • Voiced issues/concerns-potential removal and relocation options • Actually made a difference and some progress!
- 14. MORE STEPS Visually prepare the area Circle stickers represent volumes that can be withdrawn Color coded by backfile source
- 15. WHAT A DIFFERENCE AN AISLE MAKES
- 16. ATTEMPTING TO RE/UPCYCLE The Glowforge
- 17. ASK QUESTIONS AND LISTEN CAREFULLY • What do we want to see space used for? • What do students want to see? • White board questions coming • Part of a bigger library space discussion • We need to start playing offense!
- 18. The unknown path continues… but at least we are more prepared for whatever lies ahead. Thank you! Ali Larsen Serials Librarian alarsen@siena.edu
- 19. Challenges of Collection Management: Analysis, Staffing, & Space Presented by: Melanie Church NASIG Conference June 7, 2019 Keep the Work Flowing: Managing Student Assistants in Deselection Projects
- 20. Small, Private University Started with approximately 100,000 volumes Modest previous projects Consortium Small staff
- 21. First steps Inventory Liaison data assessments Meetings with faculty
- 22. Pathways Faculty physically walk the stacks & choose items for review Librarian prepares statistical list for faculty review & comment
- 23. Managing Student Assistants Work Study, often Freshmen May be the first job Training Routine
- 24. Student Site
- 26. Designing Documents for Projects For spreadsheets, include cells for: • Initials • Date For instructions: • Quick overview of why we need the data • What format we need the data in (eg. v.1:10-15 is different from entering volume 1, issues 10-15)
- 27. Thank You! Questions? Melanie Church Content Services Librarian melanie.church@rockhurst.edu
- 28. EMPLOYING DATA TO RIGHT-SIZE SAM HOUSTON STATE’S PRINT COLLECTION
- 29. THE SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY CONTEXT • State University • Texas State University System • 15K FTE/20K Head count • Doctorate and Master Institution • 1.4 million volumes • Faculty Librarian Subject Liaisons charged with managing subject areas of the collection
- 30. THE SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY RENOVATION AND SPACE REALLOCATION Space Stress • Building renovation beginning in February of 2020 • Currently little room for new print books • Library floors and foundation cannot support compact shelving • Changing user expectations of library space Collection Stress • Partially de-duped • Not weeded for 3 decades
- 31. CHALLENGES
- 32. PROVIDING USEFUL AND ACCURATE DATA • Subject Specific: Subject liaisons and faculty only want to see books that relate to their subjects. • Internal Value Indicators: Circulation, publication year, multiple copies/editions, representation of subject within collection, etc. • External Value Indicators: Uniqueness/rarity of material, holdings across peer institutions, holdings across all other libraries, CHOICE reviews, HathiTrust Public Domain, etc.
- 34. MANAGING THE OUTFLOW OF BOOKS
- 35. GREENGLASS PROVIDED SOLUTIONS • Collated all the desired assessment data • Allowed for many users to concurrently examine parts of the collection • Accounted for local call number assignment • Produced datasets that we used for • Deselection • Accounting for regulations • Outflow of materials • Provided useful visualization of the data
- 37. • Identify where the library has duplication between print books and e-books • Identify multiple editions of the same work—a form of duplication Many ways to use the data: • Find common materials that have never circulated • Locate unique or rare materials for preservation • Find pockets of subject strengths
- 38. • How many holdings/copies? • Where are they? • Is the title secure? • Can the title be accessed quickly? • Can the title be re-obtained if needed? • What options are available for each title? Good Data Improves Decisions
- 39. Library’s bib, item and transaction data for Monographs 1. 2. 3.
- 40. Same Edition: Holding set on same OCLC# • Better for widely-held, conservative for deselection Any Edition: Holding set on same or related OCLC# • Defined by OCLC Work Family • Better for scarcely held, minimizes false uniqueness OCLC Work ID#
- 41. GREENGLASS VISUALIZATIONS Bottom right box represents materials held by over 200 libraries and never circulated*
- 42. Example: Rare American History Titles
- 43. Example: Titles to Offsite Storage
- 44. HathiTrust
- 45. Comparator Libraries Choose comparator libraries or groups Groups can be existing consortia or ‘virtual’ groups Examples: • University of Florida; Penn State University • All academic libraries in NY, NJ, and PA • All ARL Libraries • Any handpicked group of libraries
- 46. Duplication
- 47. A Range of Options Compact Shelving Offsite Storage (Regular Stacks) Offsite Storage (High Density) Deselection • Preservation • Collection Discoveries • Digitization • Shared Print Archiving
- 49. REPORT PROCESSING: MAINTAINING AN INTERACTIVE, INVITING ENVIRONMENT OUTSIDE OF GREENGLASS Before:
- 50. FORMATTING: MAINTAINING AN INTERACTIVE, INVITING ENVIRONMENT OUTSIDE OF GREENGLASS After: Pre-Set Selections New Columns Shifted ColumnsConditional Formatting Frozen Panes Relabeled Sheet
- 52. PROJECT RESULTS Since initiating the project in March 2018, the SHSU Library has: • Reviewed more than 90,000 books (15% of collection, 54% of books with zero uses, and with publication dates of 2008 or earlier) • Discarded and donated more than 22,000 books to Better World Books • Collaborated with 12 libraries within the TSUS system to donate over a hundred titles to participating libraries • Established workflow, which better positions the library to quickly adapt to evolving library space requirements as they arise
Notas do Editor
- Serials footprint is small, yet coveted.
- Previous projects: About 7 years ago, copy 2s removed. One of the limitations of this project was that there were an unknown number of unmarked copy 2s that had been added to the collection over the years. In that same time frame, quite a few law books were removed since there isn't a law program. Approximately 5 years ago, we started communicating with faculty who requested an updated version of an existing work & letting them know that, unless they requested otherwise, the older edition would be withdrawn. As part of the Mobius consortium, the library has an agreement in place to do some cooperative collection development. Any items to be withdrawn need to be offered to other member libraries if there are fewer than 3 copies remaining in the consortium. Since we are on a cluster model, our ILS only has exportable data from our cluster, so that has meant a lot of individual title search to determine if items need to be offered before removal. With a total staff of 6 full time & between 3-5 part time employees, it would have taken many more years to complete these projects without work study students. The Content Management & Discovery Services department (Technical Services) has three members and there are 2 of us who directly supervise student assistants. We're all talking about collection management & deselection projects and going to at least touch on data analysis, space, and staffing. I'm going to give a quick overview of our deselection process & then my focus is going to be on managing the work of student assistants, especially within the deselection context.
- Before starting any discussions with any of the departments, we decided to do some clean up and see how close the number of expected volumes was to the actual number of volumes. With some testing by staff and a lot of scanning by student assistants, we used Circa (iii product) to inventory the entire collection. Between identifying items that were in the collection, but not in the catalog and identifying items that were in the catalog, but were no longer on the shelves, we found out that the 100,000 estimate was very close. With improved certainty in the accuracy of the catalog, liaisons started looking at the call number ranges relevant to their departments. The smallest of mine, Communication & Fine Arts had 5,400 total items and my largest, English, had over 17,000. In order to present a plan to the faculty, each liaison looked at variables like the age of the collection, number of titles in non-English languages, and the number of low to no circulating items. We set goals for each department (usually between 10-30% of their overall collection) and presented our findings and reasoning behind the project to the chair or their designated selector.
- In the meetings with faculty, librarian liaisons established criteria, timelines, and pathways. Some faculty wanted to go through the stacks physically, while others wanted to review lists. Once everything was agreed on, we had liaisons get signed copies to save on file. For serials, the process was a bit different. The collection was quite a bit smaller. It started with just under 800 titles and was brought down to about 200. We didn't consult with faculty and based all of the decisions on statistical data (especially overlap analysis). It's 3 years after that project and nobody has asked what happened to the bound journals or microforms.
- Whether there is a high level of faculty involvement or not, student assistants do a fair bit of the leg work and data gathering that can't be automated. At my institution, the library doesn't have a budget for this type of work, so we employ students on the federal work study program. They have a set amount each year and are paid at the state minimum wage level (it's not determined by the library, so we can't offer raises or other financial bonuses to try to get people to come back). Returning students aren't always offered work study funds, so even if somebody did a great job and we really want to bring them back, that isn't always possible. Since I've been in my position (6 years), there's been at least 1 new person to train each year. Everybody uses the same checklist and does the same post-test. For anything that isn't answered correctly, we'll talk through the correct answer and make sure they're clear. The training documents & videos are accessed through the same site that we use to manage the work that students will be doing throughout the semester.
- One stop shop. It's got the training materials and all of the project documents and instructions. Archives was added to the Content Management and Discovery Services department a couple of years ago, so there are separate places for Archives projects. All student assistants do the same core training, but archives student assistants have some modules that the other students don't do. The Newsfeed is place to ask questions or post announcements. If it's a vital & timely announcement, we have students reply with their initials to mark that they have seen it. There's a schedule that students can check. It's the calendar button. Easier to do on Google Sites (the settings for access are easier to navigate), but you can set up the same types of permissions with certain people having ownership of the site (library staff) and others being able to edit.
- Mechanisms to manage work when you're not in the office. It requires some diligence because you can only assign one person to a particular task or project at a time. If there are multiple people working on the same project (as often happened with big deselection projects), you have to change the assignment for the next person coming in and also remember to clear out any task assignments from the previous day that were completed. We do divide work into tasks or projects. Tasks are routine, ongoing work and projects are defined by having an end date. All of the above were parts of deselection projects. Tasks would be things like checking in journals and processing new books. Unless there is some reason to reorganize workflows, we have students do tasks first before moving on to projects.
- What data do you need to get out of it? How are you going to check in & follow up? Detailed directions that answer the questions that you can think of that somebody would ask. Also think about whether students need to do a sample exercise before they start on the project. We had all new students this year and didn't have the time to spend following up on a lot of under-counted titles that were near matches due to different cataloging practices at different institutions in the consortium catalog. In training, we discussed possible exceptions with each of the 5 students, pulled sample searches from previous projects with a range of issues, looked at their accuracy, & discussed any notable deviations between their numbers and the previous numbers. A couple of students needed some additional practice, so we repeated the process before having them start on the actual project. Make it so that you can track if somebody is having issues with accuracy & follow up. Color coding can be helpful or at least making clear what the necessary information is. Hide unnecessary columns, emphasize what's important. In this example, author title, & publisher can be helpful in determining if they've pulled the right item, but the thing that they really need is the call #. This spreadsheet was designed by my co-worker and I would probably have put the notes at the end & put the checkbox for pulled items as close to the call number as possible, but the placement worked out fine.
- First the obligatory contextualization about our University and Library, but as this context has direct implication on how we’ve chosen to use this, it’s important to run through it quickly. State University. Thus governed by State constitution and laws concerning state property. Member of Texas State University System. Thus governed by system regulations. 15K FTE; 20K head count. Doctorate granting institution, 9 doctorates offered, 54 masters, so we do collect for graduate studies as well as undergraduate studies. 1.4 million volumes (includes monographs, print journals, government documents, and other physical materials). Our collection is managed with a shared model, where faculty librarians are liaisons for instruction and support of certain departments, and thus select and deselect targeted materials for their subjects, while the Head of Technical Services oversees the overall collection management and the materials budget.
- We had a new director start on March 1st and a few days later we found out the administration will be renovating part of our building and moving some academic programs into our space. Our reference shelves, government document room, and microform room are all likely to have to move. Construction is planned to commence in the spring of 2020. As of 2015, print collections had been partially de-duped, but otherwise not “weeded” for 3 decades. Even without the renovation plans, we’re running out of shelf space for new books. We’re still bringing in between 4,000 and 5,000 print volumes annually, so we do need a place for these books to go. Library floors and foundation unable to support weight of compact shelving Our users expect to use the library space for many things other than finding a print resource. Librarians want to respond to student’s requests for different use of Library space. All these factors combine to make us need an extremely efficient mechanism to review our titles and assign the appropriate treatment for them.
- SHSU librarians wanted data points to be available to assist them in their decision making and in the conversations they were having with faculty. The subject selectors are keenly aware of what has been written in professional literature about the benefits and risks of relying too heavily on data from our systems for deselection of print materials. Library subscribed to OCLC’s Collection Evaluation and were working on combining data from that resource with data from ILS to assist Selectors in their deselection decisions. Lots of work extracting data from ILS. Lots of work reformatting and cleaning up data so it is usable.
- Subject Selectors and Faculty wanted: To see only the titles germane to their subject assignments To be able to communicate with each other and with the faculty in departments they liaised with about titles that have use in multiple areas Circulation Number of Circulations Last date circulated Holdings U.S. Texas The Texas A&M University System_The University of Texas System Joint Library Facility Certain peer subject collections. We had much of this data in our ILS and we could export it in a number of reports and then work to collate it into a single tool. This would have taken considerable time and effort.
- Abiding by the Texas State and TSUS regulations for disposal of state properties Cannot just send out materials. Must go through process of offering them to other Texas Government institutions before we can discard to a third party book dealer. Have a number of Government Documents shelved in the main collection. They cannot be deselected without being reviewed by other government document libraries. Our book dealer does not take all books, so we have to pull out materials they will not take.
- Managing the outflow of books Allowing subject selectors to examine books Identifying books for delivery to other libraries. Moving the books at the right time. Dividing the books so they go to the correct recycling agencies. All this requires good data
- GreenGlass provided the us with the ability to. Collated all the data we wanted into a single downloadable Excel file Allow for many stake holders to examine and configure the data as they wanted to at the same time.
- Black box in lower right – Held by over 200 libraries and never circulated *As far back as the library’s circulation data goes
- North American History subjects (E, F). This query took 4 minutes to put together. This ARL has almost 4 million titles, and in 4 minutes found 901 titles held by less than 5 libraries in the U.S. AND by none of their peers, and not in HathiTrust
- International Recycling Symbol: Public Domain image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Recycling_symbol.svg; Each has pros and cons of each.
- Building the query list is the core of our use of the system. We have 14 Subject Liaison overseeing 25 subjects. They’re able to individually create review lists and review at their own pace. Each Subject liaison is able to build their own query lists. Narrow the call number range to those that class their subjects Facets on the left hand side allow for Circulation stats Holdings Date added Create and output a query.
- This is what the output from the query looks like. It is title by tile and has the data point collated by GreenGlass
- Used VBA Report processing to change spreadsheet into a deselection tool.
- Librarians and Staff are delighted with the simplicity of creating the query and how that data can then allow for the simple routing of the books through the entire process.