Presentation on theme: "Panelists Bruce Leach, Ohio State Univ."— Presentation transcript:
1 Best Practices in Cooperative Collection Development: A Panel Discussion
2 Panelists Bruce Leach, Ohio State Univ. Eric Carpenter, Oberlin CollegeRob Kairis, Kent State Univ. - StarkGerald L. Newman, Univ. of CincinnatiMargo Warner Curl, CONSORT CollegesPaul Jenkins, College of Mount St. JosephJoyce Baker, Belmont Technical CollegeLinda Brown, Bowling Green State Univ.
3 Goals for Panel Discussion Review current theory and practice of cooperative CD in OhioLINKCreate synergy necessary to develop new models and practiceGenerate additional topics for luncheon and/or group discussions this p.m.Stimulate grass roots development of additional cooperative projects in months ahead
4 A Simple Step Any Selector Can Take Bruce LeachHead Biological Sciences/Pharmacy Library, Ohio State University
5 Monograph Duplication in OhioLINK: a College Library Response
6 Eric J. Carpenter Collection Development Librarian Oberlin College LibraryOberlin, OH
8 BACKGROUND Oberlin: liberal arts college + conservatory of music Oberlin live on pcirc in 1995Budget reductions at Oberlin - subscription cuts, 97-98
9 NEEDS Raise faculty awareness of OhioLINK, promote use of pcirc Reduce acquisitions budget, spend $$ wiselyRespond to Feb. 97 CIRM discussion - monograph duplicationEnrich local and OhioLINK collections
10 GOALSConsider # of copies in OhioLINK available before ordering monographWrite guidelines for purchasing monographs in view of new OhioLINK membership
11 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sample orders: # OL copies, availability German - 3, History - 8, Math - 4 copiesWrote Guidelines for Purchasing Monographs in View of OhioLINKDistributed Guidelines to relevant teaching departmentsSelectors indicated levels of availability (L, A, D)
12 GUIDELINESL - LOCAL: Needed at Oberlin regardless of OhioLINK availabilityA - ACCESSIBLE: Must be readily accessible, via OhioLINK availability or purchaseD - DESIRABLE: Availability is desirable via OhioLINK or purchase if funds permit
13 RESULTS Concept endorsed by Faculty Library Committee Limited success with faculty selectors - History Dept.Success with library selectors - concept integrated into selection decisionsProject never implemented on large scale due to budget and workload pressures
14 OhioLINK Duplication: Statistics/Software Rob Kairis, Library DirectorKent State University-Stark
15 Cooperative Collection Development Summit Not Bought in OhioCooperative Collection Development Summit
16 Gerald L. Newman Assistant Dean for Collection Development University LibrariesUniversity of Cincinnati
17 Why the “Not Bought” Project? To enrich the state collection with items that have not been purchasedBy shifting purchasing to items not held in the stateIn the meantime also reducing unnecessary duplication
18 A Question for YBPAs YBP had a record of the purchases of many of the institutions in the stateYBP was the logical place to uncover our buying patternsEspecially items covered by YBP but that no school in Ohio purchased
19 CBTF to YBP: “Can You Help?” As the chosen approval vendor for OhioLINKAnd having made a commitment to help Ohio in its agendaYBP was willing and interested in providing data that the CBTF could use
20 YBP to CBTF: “Yes”YBP provided the CBTF data in several formats over several monthsFirst, in computer sheets detailing titles YBP had not sold to Ohio schoolsLater, slips looking like approval notifications slipsBoth paper trials had their drawbacksThe CBTF hoped for an online solution
24 GOBI 2As GOBI2 developed, consortial reports became part of YBP’s planThe reports are designed not only to show consortial purchases, but also to show what Ohio has not bought – as in “not bought in Ohio”Reports can be generated by individuals on many of the standard parameters for report generation
25 A user would define Consortial Report parameters on this screen A user would define Consortial Report parameters on this screen. This screen is set to focus on titles acquired by the group. (Under Report Type.)
26 And this screen shows the not acquired option And this screen shows the not acquired option. Here, ‘Display As’ can only be a list (not a graph).
27 LimitationsThe “not bought in Ohio” reports are based on the YBP universe onlyThese reports do not show activity on the same materials from other vendors
28 Positive Features Flexible search parameters to meet selector needs Easy identification of titles that the major approval vendor to the state has not providedProvision of a list “de-duped” across many of our collections
29 What Uses?To allow an individual selector to funnel some selection to titles not already bought in the stateThis can apply to selectors at any size libraryTo allow two or more selectors to cooperate more easily on purchasesFor a subject group to gather and distribute efficiently potential purchase information to the group for considerationOthers . . .
30 “Not Bought in Ohio” For Your Consideration and Action!
31 Cooperative Collection Development: Walking the Walk December 8, 2003 Using GOBI2 to Facilitate Cooperative Collection Development through a Shared Approval PlanCooperative Collection Development:Walking the WalkDecember 8, 2003
32 Grant for CCDCONSORT Colleges – Denison, Kenyon, Ohio Wesleyan, WoosterFunding from GLCA of Mellon moneyTo run through June 2004Together build a shared research collection
33 Shared approval plan Supplementary to individual institutional plans Single profile for the four librariesAccommodates local selection & acquisitions practicesEasy to implement and use
34 Important elements Dedicated coordinator Committee members have decision-making authorityFinancial commitmentUse plan for awhile before evaluating & revampingLibraries and Vendor both involved
35 Selecting subjects Rejected notion of working with ‘core’ discipline Interviewed selectorsIdentified areas of strong common interestAsian Studies, Africana, Play scripts, Museum & Gallery Publications
36 Qualities of successful areas Are of great interest across the institutionsSpan depth and breadth far greater than any individual library could manage individuallyDo not require extensive involvement from other library staff or facultyAre well suited to approval plan mechanisms
37 Moving into production Based initially on interdisciplinary tags and format typesIncludes entire universe of publishers covered by the vendorWritten as though books would be sent automatically, but operates in a ‘virtual’ modeEvaluation without having to deal with managing actual books
38 Outline of the PlanApplied to A-GA, GE-PZ, SB , TR , Z-ZADEN & OWU more interested in East Asia (fund DEN OWU)KEN & WOO more interested in South Asia (fund KEN OWU)Some exceptions in B & N classes (e.g. fund OWU WOO)Include all African Books Collective from L&H
39 Use of Gobi2 Features Slip Views or GobiAlerts Shared Folders GobiTween – separate CONSORT infoOrder TemplatesExport CartApproval and Expenditure Reports
40 Technical ServicesServices provided for each sub-account mirrors those of each standalone accountEach library exports records from GOBI and loads them to III to support order generationEach export action creates a separate file so that the individual library can pick up and process the appropriate files
41 Merits of the PlanCustomizable – can alter to individual library specificationsFlexible – can add other subject areasAdaptable – framework can be used by other consortiaAssessable – can monitor use, refine profile
42 Presented by Margo Warner Curl (with thanks to Michael Zeoli) Coordinator of Cooperative Collection DevelopmentCONSORT CollegesC/o The College of Wooster Libraries1140 Beall AvenueWooster OH 44691
43 SWORCS: A Modest Proposal A Lesson In PatiencePaul O. JenkinsCollege of Mount St. Joseph
44 Members of SWORCS College of Mount St. Joseph Xavier University Cincinnati Bible CollegeUniversity of DaytonCedarville College (added)Athenaeum of Ohio (unable to join)Miami University (added upon request)
45 Finding Our Mission Non-Christian religions Islam Buddhism Judaism Hinduism
46 Bringing YBP Into the Picture GOBI Approval PlanEstablishing Approval Plan Profiles
47 Reexamining the Mission to apply cooperative collection development principles in our libraries in order to reduce duplication of titles and better cover peripheral areas of Religious Studies;specifically, to create a shared slip approval plan profile in the area of non-Christian religions (specifics yet to be determined) that can serve as a model for larger OhioLINK groups in other disciplines.
48 Getting to SpecificsBegin with retrospective purchases
49 Dividing Up Responsibilities Confucianism—XUTenrikyo and Shinto—Miami.Taoism—UD.Bahai, Zoroastrianism, Rastafarianism—MSJ.Unitarianism, Scientology, Atheism—CedarvilleSikhism, Jainism—Cincinnati Bible.
50 Making a Financial Commitment $500 commitment from each school
51 Lessons Learned This is possible but difficult. Don’t expect it to be perfect.Be patient.Start small.Be flexible.Be prepared to compromise.Vendor participation essential.
52 Questions? Contact Paul O. Jenkins 513-244-4351
53 Are We Really a Subject Group? 2 Year Colleges:Are We Really a Subject Group?Joyce BakerBelmont Technical CollegeDirector of Library & Learning Resource OperationsDecember 8, 2003
54 Who are the 2-Year Colleges? 17 Community & Technical Colleges20 Branches of Akron, BGSU, Cincinnati, Kent, OSU, OULess than 1000 – over 14,000 FTE1 to 4 campusesCollection Development Staff 1- 10
55 Differences in Mission Several offer 4 year degreesSeveral offer graduate programsMany provide first 2 years of 4 year degreePrograms range from liberal arts transfer module to technical studies with job placement as goal
56 Similarities in Mission All offer a 2 year degreeFocus is on teaching/learning; not researchMost offer open enrollmentMost offer basic skills/remedial programs
57 Similarity in Libraries Most selection is accomplished by 1-2 staff with some faculty inputLibrary materials are used in a similar mannerKeep faculty currentStudent papers & projectsSelf help/Student success/Career PlacementSupport the curriculumSupport the teaching/learning mission
58 YBP Participation in 2Year Colleges 28 Firm Order Accounts or 76%18 Approval/Slip Plans or 49%20 Gobi2 Accounts or 54%
59 Survey to further assess similarities & differences 37 surveys distributed19 completed51% response rate79% YBP Accounts
60 Common Curriculum Areas 100% Business Management89% Accounting84% Early Childhood Education73% Criminal Justice63% Mental Health/Social Service58% Administrative Assistant47% Paralegal31% Real Estate
61 Nursing/Allied Health 63% Medical assisting63% Radiology53% Medical Assisting & Coding47% EMT/Paramedic37% Physical Therapy
67 Collection Weaknesses DatedLack DepthNeed Coverage for New ProgramsLack Coverage in Specific Subject AreasScience/EngineeringBusinessComputer/ITNursingReferenceSocial Sciences
68 Collection AnalysisComparison to lists (Books for College Libraries, Best Books, Brandon Hill)Check against other catalogsFaculty inputAccreditation & Curriculum ReviewWeeding Projects (3 over ten years)
69 Faculty Notification79% New book lists, newsletters, displays, web pages74% /mailbox notification37% personal contact informally & at meetings16% YBP Approval Plan w/ faculty selectors
70 Current Ventures Routinely check OhioLINK/YBP before ordering 4 regional campuses recently reviewed periodicals lists to eliminate unnecessary duplication2 libraries casually looking at Amish Materials1 library has a causal arrangement with local rural hospitals & medical journals1 library hosts a Masters in Ed program & professional education journals
71 SuggestionsShare collection responsibilities for print copies of e-booksExplore potential cooperative areas such as Appalachian resources, NursingDevelop a circulating reference collectionParticipate in other subject groups & subgroupsWeeding: check for last copy; offer to discard listCheck OL/YBP when ordering
72 Questions/Considerations What method can be used to assess the collection?How can we share profiles?How do we develop an awareness of what is purchased elsewhere?How can we test Gobi2 features?What Gobi2 features can be used to enhance the selection process?How can we coordinate efforts?Should we join other subject groups?
73 Making Collaboration Happen Subject Connections We’ve heard from colleagues of some innovative ways of thinking collaboratively. Now we all need to take the next step and make the connections necessary for collaboration to blossom.Linda A. BrownCollections CoordinatorBGSU
74 Opportunities Develop your leadership skills Build new relationships with colleaguesStart small… and act innovativelyWhy get involved in cooperative collection development?Opportunities abound…..…recruit colleagues to become involvedOthers will join you!
75 More Opportunities… Build areas of collection strength Spend scarce materials budget dollars strategicallyPut your library on the OhioLINK map as an innovator and collaborative collection builder
76 Subject Group Survey Stronger, more effective leadership More, and broader membershipClear function or focusFace-to-face meetingsLast summer, the CIRM Subject Groups Working Group surveyed OhioLINK librarians to gather information regarding the effectiveness of the subject groups. The survey indicated OhioLINK librarians believe that the groups need…Task Force documents are posted on the OhioLINK Ostaff page.To fulfill the OhioLINK vision for cooperative collection development will require everyone’s commitment and involvement
77 Join an OhioLINK subject group Invent and design cooperative collection development projectsShare cooperative successes with colleaguesPost progress reports on OstaffLearn from others’ experienceOhioLINK has established 28 subject groups to facilitate communication among subject selectors. One of your handouts lists these groups, the CIRM liaisons, and brief instructions for subscribing to an OhioLINK listserv.
78 Health SciencesCreate a list of resources we all subscribe to independently and investigate pay-to-play group pricingWeedingUse the subject listserv for information sharing on current issues:Vendor pricing models and policiesPublic service issues -- Single public service deskPublicizing BioMed Central and open access publishingThe Health Sciences subject group met in Columbus recently.From Barbara McNamee at MCOThe Health Sciences list has had very little traffic on it in the past.Shared discussion like this can build a comfort level for collaboration I think.
79 OhioLINK Subject Groups OStaff resourcesLogin: ostaffPassword: Available from any OhioLINK staff or committee memberClick on:Collection DevelopmentSubject GroupsLastly, an unabashed plug for the OhioLINK Ostaff pages. Collection Development and Subject Group information is posted here.