Best Practices in Cooperative Collection Development: A Panel Discussion.

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

• [email protected]

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

• [email protected]

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

[email protected]

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.

Questions?

• Contact Paul O. Jenkins

• 513-244-4351

• [email protected]

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