Best Practices in Cooperative Collection Development: A Panel
Discussion
Panelists• Bruce Leach, Ohio State Univ.• Eric Carpenter, Oberlin College• Rob Kairis, Kent State Univ. - Stark• Gerald L. Newman, Univ. of Cincinnati• Margo Warner Curl, CONSORT Colleges• Paul Jenkins, College of Mount St. Joseph• Joyce Baker, Belmont Technical College• Linda Brown, Bowling Green State Univ.
Goals for Panel Discussion
• Review current theory and practice of cooperative CD in OhioLINK
• Create synergy necessary to develop new models and practice
• Generate additional topics for luncheon and/or group discussions this p.m.
• Stimulate grass roots development of additional cooperative projects in months ahead
A Simple Step Any Selector Can Take
• Bruce Leach
• Head Biological Sciences/Pharmacy Library, Ohio State University
Monograph Duplication in OhioLINK: a College Library
Response
Eric J. Carpenter
• Collection Development Librarian
• Oberlin College Library
• Oberlin, OH
OUTLINE
• Background
• Needs
• Goals
• Project Description
• Guidelines
• Results
BACKGROUND
• Oberlin: liberal arts college + conservatory of music
• Oberlin live on pcirc in 1995
• Budget reductions at Oberlin - subscription cuts, 97-98
NEEDS
• Raise faculty awareness of OhioLINK, promote use of pcirc
• Reduce acquisitions budget, spend $$ wisely
• Respond to Feb. 97 CIRM discussion - monograph duplication
• Enrich local and OhioLINK collections
GOALS
• Consider # of copies in OhioLINK available before ordering monograph
• Write guidelines for purchasing monographs in view of new OhioLINK membership
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
• Sample orders: # OL copies, availability• German - 3, History - 8, Math - 4 copies• Wrote Guidelines for Purchasing
Monographs in View of OhioLINK• Distributed Guidelines to relevant teaching
departments• Selectors indicated levels of availability (L,
A, D)
GUIDELINES
• L - LOCAL: Needed at Oberlin regardless of OhioLINK availability
• A - ACCESSIBLE: Must be readily accessible, via OhioLINK availability or purchase
• D - DESIRABLE: Availability is desirable via OhioLINK or purchase if funds permit
RESULTS
• Concept endorsed by Faculty Library Committee
• Limited success with faculty selectors - History Dept.
• Success with library selectors - concept integrated into selection decisions
• Project never implemented on large scale due to budget and workload pressures
OhioLINK Duplication: Statistics/Software
• Rob Kairis, Library Director
• Kent State University-Stark
Not Bought in Ohio
Cooperative Collection Development Summit
Gerald L. Newman
• Assistant Dean for Collection Development
• University Libraries
• University of Cincinnati
Why the “Not Bought” Project?
• To enrich the state collection with items that have not been purchased
• By shifting purchasing to items not held in the state
• In the meantime also reducing unnecessary duplication
A Question for YBP
• As YBP had a record of the purchases of many of the institutions in the state
• YBP was the logical place to uncover our buying patterns
• Especially items covered by YBP but that no school in Ohio purchased
CBTF to YBP: “Can You Help?”
• As the chosen approval vendor for OhioLINK
• And having made a commitment to help Ohio in its agenda
• YBP was willing and interested in providing data that the CBTF could use
YBP to CBTF: “Yes”
• YBP provided the CBTF data in several formats over several months– First, in computer sheets detailing titles YBP
had not sold to Ohio schools– Later, slips looking like approval notifications
slips– Both paper trials had their drawbacks– The CBTF hoped for an online solution
GOBI 2
• As GOBI2 developed, consortial reports became part of YBP’s plan
• The 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
Limitations
• The “not bought in Ohio” reports are based on the YBP universe only
• These reports do not show activity on the same materials from other vendors
Positive Features
• Flexible search parameters to meet selector needs
• Easy identification of titles that the major approval vendor to the state has not provided
• Provision of a list “de-duped” across many of our collections
What Uses?
• To allow an individual selector to funnel some selection to titles not already bought in the state
• This can apply to selectors at any size library• To allow two or more selectors to cooperate more
easily on purchases• For a subject group to gather and distribute
efficiently potential purchase information to the group for consideration
• Others . . .
“Not Bought in Ohio”
For Your Consideration and Action!
Using GOBI2 to Facilitate Cooperative Collection Development through a Shared Approval Plan
Cooperative Collection Development:
Walking the Walk
December 8, 2003
Grant for CCD
• CONSORT Colleges – Denison, Kenyon, Ohio Wesleyan, Wooster
• Funding from GLCA of Mellon money
• To run through June 2004
• Together build a shared research collection
Shared approval plan
• Supplementary to individual institutional plans
• Single profile for the four libraries
• Accommodates local selection & acquisitions practices
• Easy to implement and use
Important elements
• Dedicated coordinator
• Committee members have decision-making authority
• Financial commitment
• Use plan for awhile before evaluating & revamping
• Libraries and Vendor both involved
Selecting subjects
• Rejected notion of working with ‘core’ discipline
• Interviewed selectors
• Identified areas of strong common interest– Asian Studies, Africana, Play scripts, Museum
& Gallery Publications
Qualities of successful areas
• Are of great interest across the institutions• Span depth and breadth far greater than any
individual library could manage individually
• Do not require extensive involvement from other library staff or faculty
• Are well suited to approval plan mechanisms
Moving into production
• Based initially on interdisciplinary tags and format types
• Includes entire universe of publishers covered by the vendor
• Written as though books would be sent automatically, but operates in a ‘virtual’ mode
• Evaluation without having to deal with managing actual books
Outline of the Plan
• Applied to A-GA, GE-PZ, SB 469-480, TR 640-685, Z-ZA
• DEN & 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
Use of Gobi2 Features
• Slip Views or GobiAlerts• Shared Folders• GobiTween – separate CONSORT info• Order Templates• Export Cart• Approval and Expenditure Reports
Technical Services
• Services provided for each sub-account mirrors those of each standalone account
• Each library exports records from GOBI and loads them to III to support order generation
• Each export action creates a separate file so that the individual library can pick up and process the appropriate files
Merits of the Plan
• Customizable – can alter to individual library specifications
• Flexible – can add other subject areas
• Adaptable – framework can be used by other consortia
• Assessable – can monitor use, refine profile
Presented by
Margo Warner Curl (with thanks to Michael Zeoli)
Coordinator of Cooperative Collection Development
CONSORT Colleges
C/o The College of Wooster Libraries
1140 Beall Avenue
Wooster OH 44691
330-263-2056
http://www.wooster.edu/library/oh5/cccd
SWORCS: A Modest Proposal
A Lesson In Patience
Paul O. Jenkins
College of Mount St. Joseph
Members of SWORCS
• College of Mount St. Joseph
• Xavier University
• Cincinnati Bible College
• University of Dayton
• Cedarville College (added)
• Athenaeum of Ohio (unable to join)
• Miami University (added upon request)
Finding Our Mission
• Non-Christian religions
• Islam
• Buddhism
• Judaism
• Hinduism
Bringing YBP Into the Picture
• GOBI Approval Plan
• Establishing Approval Plan Profiles
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.
Getting to Specifics
• Begin with retrospective purchases
Dividing Up Responsibilities
• Confucianism—XU • Tenrikyo and Shinto—Miami. • Taoism—UD.• Bahai, Zoroastrianism, Rastafarianism—MSJ.• Unitarianism, Scientology, Atheism—
Cedarville • Sikhism, Jainism—Cincinnati Bible.
Making a Financial Commitment
• $500 commitment from each school
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.
2 Year Colleges:
• Are We Really a Subject Group?
• Joyce Baker
• Belmont Technical College
• Director of Library & Learning Resource Operations
• December 8, 2003
Who are the 2-Year Colleges?
• 17 Community & Technical Colleges
• 20 Branches of Akron, BGSU, Cincinnati, Kent, OSU, OU
• Less than 1000 – over 14,000 FTE
• 1 to 4 campuses
• Collection Development Staff 1- 10
Differences in Mission• Several offer 4 year degrees
• Several offer graduate programs
• Many provide first 2 years of 4 year degree
• Programs range from liberal arts transfer module to technical studies with job placement as goal
Similarities in Mission• All offer a 2 year degree
• Focus is on teaching/learning; not research
• Most offer open enrollment
• Most offer basic skills/remedial programs
Similarity in Libraries• Most selection is accomplished by 1-2 staff with
some faculty input• Library materials are used in a similar manner
– Keep faculty current– Student papers & projects– Self help/Student success/Career Placement
• Support the curriculum• Support the teaching/learning mission
YBP Participation in 2Year Colleges
• 28 Firm Order Accounts or 76%
• 18 Approval/Slip Plans or 49%
• 20 Gobi2 Accounts or 54%
Survey to further assess similarities & differences
• 37 surveys distributed
• 19 completed
• 51% response rate
• 79% YBP Accounts
Common Curriculum Areas• 100% Business Management• 89% Accounting• 84% Early Childhood Education• 73% Criminal Justice• 63% Mental Health/Social Service• 58% Administrative Assistant• 47% Paralegal• 31% Real Estate
Nursing/Allied Health• 95% Nursing
• 63% Medical assisting
• 63% Radiology
• 53% Medical Assisting & Coding
• 47% EMT/Paramedic
• 37% Physical Therapy
Engineering• 84% Engineering Program
• 58% Electrical
• 53% Mechanical
• 26% Electronics
• 26% Drafting & Design
Computer/IT• 79% Computer Programming
• 79% Computer Networking
• 74% Computer Applications
• 68% Computer Science
• 63% Web Design
• 63% Computer Graphics/Multimedia
Teaching/Learning Interests• 79% Information Literacy
• 58% Assessment
• 53% Basic Skills
• 53% Distance Education
34 Unique Programs• Environmental Health & Safety
• Building Preservation & Restoration
• Golf Course Management
• Sports & Fitness Management
• Recording Arts
• Equine/Back Country
• Travel & Tourism
Specialties/Strengths/Interests• Amish• Appalachia• Local History/Culture/Geography• Allied Health/Nursing• Paralegal• Education/Teaching• Culinary Arts/Hospitality Management
Collection Weaknesses• Dated • Lack Depth• Need Coverage for New Programs• Lack Coverage in Specific Subject Areas
– Science/Engineering– Business– Computer/IT– Nursing– Reference– Social Sciences
Collection Analysis • Comparison to lists (Books for College
Libraries, Best Books, Brandon Hill)
• Check against other catalogs
• Faculty input
• Accreditation & Curriculum Review
• Weeding Projects (3 over ten years)
Faculty Notification• 79% New book lists, newsletters, displays,
web pages
• 74% E-mail/mailbox notification
• 37% personal contact informally & at meetings
• 16% YBP Approval Plan w/ faculty selectors
Current Ventures• Routinely check OhioLINK/YBP before ordering• 4 regional campuses recently reviewed periodicals
lists to eliminate unnecessary duplication• 2 libraries casually looking at Amish Materials• 1 library has a causal arrangement with local rural
hospitals & medical journals• 1 library hosts a Masters in Ed program &
professional education journals
Suggestions• Share collection responsibilities for print copies of
e-books• Explore potential cooperative areas such as
Appalachian resources, Nursing• Develop a circulating reference collection• Participate in other subject groups & subgroups• Weeding: check for last copy; offer to discard list• Check OL/YBP when ordering
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?
Making Collaboration Happen
Subject Connections
Linda A. BrownCollections CoordinatorBGSU
Opportunities
Develop your leadership skills
Build new relationships with colleagues
Start small… and act innovatively
More Opportunities…
Build areas of collection strength
Spend scarce materials budget dollars strategically
Put your library on the OhioLINK map as an innovator and collaborative collection builder
Subject Group Survey
Stronger, more effective leadership
More, and broader membership
Clear function or focus
Face-to-face meetings
Join an OhioLINK subject group
Invent and design cooperative collection development projects
Share cooperative successes with colleagues
Post progress reports on OstaffLearn from others’ experience
Health Sciences
Create a list of resources we all subscribe to independently and investigate pay-to-play group pricing
Weeding Use the subject listserv for information sharing on
current issues:– Vendor pricing models and policies– Public service issues -- Single public service desk– Publicizing BioMed Central and open access
publishing
OhioLINK Subject Groups
OStaff resources
• Login: ostaff
• Password: Available from any OhioLINK staff or committee member
Click on:
Collection Development
Subject Groups