A university library was out of space and needed more, preferably in the prime area of the first floor. The decision was made to deselect bound periodical titles which were taking up huge chunks of that space. This poster will explain the criteria used to deselect and how the actual deselection was accomplished from start to finish. Presenters: Susan Andrews & Sandy Hayes, Texas A&M University-Commerce

1. TEMPLATE DESIGN © 2008
www.PosterPresentations.com
Imagine more space in your library!
Weeding bound periodicals
Susan Andrews Susan.Andrews@tamuc.edu
Sandy Hayes Sandy.Hayes@tamuc.edu
Background Process (cont.)
Recommendations
Problems
OPTIONAL
LOGO HERE
OPTIONAL
LOGO HERE
What we would do differently
 Determined usage of title
 From 1999-2009, we tracked usage with
dot stickers placed on the spines when re-
shelved
 Color and/or shape changed every two
years
 In 2009, we changed to using generic
bound volume records in the ILS and
counted all use on that record
 In 2010, we changed to a new ILS with
three in-house usage fields:
 In-house or internal use
 ILL for our patrons (document delivery)
 ILL for other libraries
 Also began entering individual volumes as
bound, and/or as re-shelved, and counted
which type of use before shelving
 Identified titles with archival online access
 Including JSTOR, MUSE, etc.
 Identified titles with online access
 Title was available in 3 or more reliable full-
text databases, preferably from different
providers
 Indexing
 If a title was not indexed, it was not
findable and was reflected in usage
 Determined criteria for weeding
 Took our list and visited bound volumes
and made our initial decisions
 Using decisions list, created weed report
which was checked for current use and
type of use
What do you do when your library is running out
of space, you need room for an ambitious new
computer lab, other departments are taking
over library real estate at a rapid rate and study
dens are popping up like mushrooms? Not to
mention, bound periodicals were already
running out of space?
Our answer was to weed the collection, but
how to start?
There were several things to consider before,
during and after this project. The primary areas
were:
 What criteria to use to determine
whether a title should be retained or not?
 Who makes these choices?
 Where do we get the data (both titles
and usage) from?
 How do we indicate which titles are
chosen for de-selection?
 Who pulls them and how do they
document them for statistics?
 What to do with the bound volumes that
are de-selected?
 Using dot stickers for usage
 Dots fell off (or wound up in hair)
 Shelvers forgot dots
 Decision-making about when dots were
applied and interpretation of usage dots
 Offering out
 Had a shrinking time frame and offering out
took too much time and manpower.
 Old cataloging rules made the list
problematic
 e.g. Bulletin of the American… shelved as
American …, Bulletin.
 Recycling
 Major space issues
 Had to find a recycler for books
Here are the things we absolutely recommend
for anyone having to undertake this project:
 Do usage!
 And make it as detailed as possible
 Do have two people de-selecting
 It helps to have two viewpoints (and
someone else to blame)
 Do check online availability and
archival access
 Remember, there is always ILL
 Try to be as objective and unemotional
as possible
 If there is time, and you have their
cooperation, please give your subject
librarians a chance to veto weeds
 Archival online access – De-select
 Usage
 No usage – De-select
 Low usage – De-select or compact
 Three or more uses – Keep
 If all use was ILL (other libraries) –
De-select
 Online access –
 Three or more sources - De-select
 Core titles or accreditation titles – Keep or
compact
 Would like to offer out titles with high ILL
usage
 Do not use a list that someone else created
Process
 Created master list of periodicals
 Pulled periodical title list
 Exported periodical data from ILS
including:
 Title
 Publication information
 Publication year
 Author
 Imported data into Microsoft Access
 Added fields that would be useful for weed
Criteria for Weeding
Process (cont.)
 Made final weed list and sent it to
Circulation for pulling
 When pulling, Circulation noted number of
volumes de-selected for statistics
 Initially offered out weeded volumes then
switched to recycling
 Cleaned-up records in ILS and OCLC