Monday, February 18, 2019

Applying Quantitative Methods to E-book Collections


Sexton, Rachael

Goertzen, M. J. (2017). Applying Quantitative Methods to E-book Collections. Library Technology Reports53(4), 3. https://doi.org/10.5860/ltr.53n4

Evaluation:  Since my summary of the article is so long, I included most of my evaluation within the summary so that you could more easily see where my opinions coincided with what was being said in the article.  My asides are in bold.  I was skeptical about and disagreed with a few things that were said, but overall the evidence of the savings that she was able to obtain make this 33-page article well worth the read.    

Summary: 

This article says that the e-book market is still in the developing stages and is known as “the new wild west.”  It is harder to obtain funding for digital resources, since there can be confusion about the cost, with some thinking that digital information is free.  Evaluating electronic resources using quantitative methods require skills and training that are hard to obtain in this new area.  The article references another article, “The Evolving DDA Project at the Orbis Cascade Alliance,” by Kathleen Carlisle Fountain.  There is then a long quote from that article, about the author not being trained to make book purchasing decisions based on a data driven approach.   This article and the quote greatly affected the author of this report, Melissa Goertzen. 
Goertzen relies on Microsoft Excel to do her work.  She spent two years conducting a study in preparation to write this article.  Where she works, Columbia University Library (CUL), was able to use the results of her study in a productive way to save money. The value of e-book collections is tied to patron needs.  Goertzen lays out what she will discuss in chapter 3 of the report.  Her analysis methods work just as well for e-journal packages as they do for e-book collections.  She gives a summary of what chapter 5 will contain.  She says that her report should not be viewed as an end point, but rather as just the beginning. 
Before anything can be accomplished, one should understand the trends of e-book publishing.  At the end of the chapter, Goertzen will provide a list of suggested reading.  Business models are often changing in regards to e-book distribution.  While e-books cost 12% less in one area to produce than print books, they have three other areas of expense that print books don’t have, so they aren’t less expensive to produce.  According to Goertzen, the business model for e-books is similar to the print module in regards to library’s acquiring them, though I personally disagree, since I think there are too many differences for them to be regarded as similar.  Goertzen even expounds on a difference that I had not considered in her next paragraph, saying that e-books are hosted on a third-party website, and that libraries pay for access to it.  There are many fears in regards to the very existence of e-book collections, piracy being one of them. 
There are multiple business models in regards to e-books, just two examples are that in some cases only one patron can have the book at a time, or multiple patrons can have the same copy at a time (which is another thing that could never happen with the acquisition of a print book).  Another technique for collection development in regards to e-books that is now being utilized is giving patrons the power to request books that are not in the collection.  With so many options to choose from, this provides libraries with the opportunity to choose the business model that best suits their needs.  The wonderful thing about e-books is the patron’s ability to access them any time.  Remote access is another benefit.  In regards to the academic world, e-books are most often utilized to complete a task.  Goertzen claims that e-books are most often skimmed and if they seem useful, a print version is requested and actually read.  I wonder if a study has been conducted to see if this is true across all age groups, it seems doubtful that it is.  The PDF format is especially popular in academic circles.
Goertzen reports having a paradigm shift several months into her study.  This led her to think of several new questions, which fed into one overarching question.  She identifies two collection strategies, “just in case” and “just in time” which informs purchasing decisions.  Discovering the intentions of the patrons can help when answering questions from stakeholders.  She states that chapter 3 will contain more information about indicators which influence collection development decisions.  Learn information needs by asking patrons directly.  Develop strong ties with liaison librarians. (Obviously this step doesn’t apply if you are the only liaison librarian or if your institution doesn’t have any.  It would have been nice if she had given an alternative to this step.)  Next, consider whether e-books are most likely to be skimmed or read. (How on earth would you know that for certain?  One man’s trash is another man’s treasure after all.  Worse, what if you thought you knew, and were wrong?)  Evaluate subscription usage over a period of three years.  Goertzen wrote a base evaluative framework.  She gives the titles of five articles that she recommends reading. 
Cost analysis is a quantitative method that can be useful for library administrators.  It is important to know what is meant by the term quantitative research.  It is data which can be represented by numbers and can then be used in statistics.  It answers the “what” and “how” most effectively.  Demographics are just one part of quantitative research.   However it cannot answer the “why,” which requires qualitative research.  Keeping one’s goal in mind is important when embarking on this sort of endeavor.  Quantitative research has six key characteristics.
Next she outlines the types of findings that quantitative research can bring about, as well as the advantages and limitations of it.  There are multiple sources of quantitative research.  Using subjects areas to study the e-book collections adds depth to the study.  Library administrators were the primary motivators to Goertzen’s work.  She organizes information into seven different categories.  She takes two days to update the information in these categories every year.  Information sources can come from within and without the library.  Goertzen next gives a list of definitions of words she will use.  Then she gives an overview of what data she uses in her e-book collection analysis.  First is input cost measures, second collection output measures, third effectiveness measures and indicators, fourth domain measures, and fifth cost-effectiveness indicators. 
There is a lack of standardization when it comes to data sets from certain vendors, which makes quantitative research challenging.  A strong understanding of the audience of your report is key.  Creating an outline of your intended project is never a waste of time.  Each project that you take on allows you to grow and be better equipped for the next project.  Goertzen started working at CUL in 2013, so she now has many years of experience.  She was able to save the library $50,000 in 2015.  CUL’s collection has more than 12 million volumes and 160,000 journals and serials.  They also have over 2 million e-book titles.  With such a large collection, a small subset was chosen to use in the study.  Next she analyzed the subscription cost of the e-books versus the usage of the e-books.  This resulted in a valuable find that one of their subscriptions contained outdated material and missing volumes in multivolume sets.  When going to cancel their subscriptions, a conversation was started with the vendor which ultimately led to an 80% discount and saved them $51,000 annually starting in 2014.  Another library division at CUL used this same technique and as a result were able to start saving $10,000 annually. 
The decision was made to study the titles that were included in course reserves at a later date.  She looked at a total of 96 subscriptions and 35 packages.  She was also able to go to the Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library in 2016 and conduct the study there.  She analyzed 14,802 titles for them.  She discovered that only 36% of the titles had been used at least once.  Another decision was made to analyze print subscriptions that are over five years old at a later date. 
Then she was asked to evaluate e-journal costs at two different libraries on campus.  An added element to this study was she also analyzed where users were when they accessed the e-journals.  Based on citation use, only 10% of the titles met the criteria to be retained.  Based on publication analysis, 25% of the titles met the criteria. 
By conducting this sort of study, collection development policies can be formulated.  This is especially important because budget will not likely grow alongside demand.  This study should be conducted once every five years.  For basic and extensive collections, the author recommends e-book purchases, but for research collections she recommends print resources.  There will be challenges going forward, such as complications arising from open-access initiatives and the fact that e-books are now beginning to be offered in pdf format instead of through a host platform.                           
  


Sunday, February 10, 2019

Social Tolerance and Racist Materials in Public Libraries

Tammy Ross

Burke, S. K. (2010). Social tolerance and racist materials in public libraries. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49(4), 369–379. https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.49n4.369

In this study, Susan Burke examines the concept of intellectual freedom in libraries and reviews the literature for studies about racism in library books. To learn which variables are linked to social intolerance and the censorship of racist library materials, Burke used data from the General Social Survey (GSS). The GSS is conducted by the National Opinion Research Center and began in 1972. From 1976 to 2006, the survey asked randomly selected adults in the U.S. whether they would support removing a book “spouting racist beliefs” that Black people are “genetically inferior” (p. 372) from the public library. Burke examined how certain demographics -- such as age, race, education level, occupation, geographic location, and political and religious affiliations -- impacted responses. She also looked at another study that examined attitudes toward removing books written by homosexuals or communists from a public library collection, and how these differed from “opposition to negative portrayals of African Americans” (p. 378). More people supported banning a book written by a racist because “racism limits the civil liberties of groups of people, which is not in line with the social trend of increasing tolerance” (p. 378).

Burke does a thorough job of synthesizing the GSS data and points out limitations of the dataset, i.e., that the survey does not ask participants if they’ve ever participated in a book challenge or whether the hypothetical racist book was written for adults or children. Still, the information in her study is designed to help librarians understand “how the library stance on intellectual freedom fits within the larger picture of scholarly thought from other disciplines and the broader public opinion” (p. 378). In regard to collection development, the article may help librarians be more aware about “self-censorship" -- not including certain books in an effort to avoid controversy. Burke argues that librarians should “stand by their professional values and educate the public and library shareholders concerning the implications of removing or not removing [racist] items from the collection” (p. 378). There’s a lot to unpack in 10 pages, especially all the survey results, but the article is worth the read. Burke ultimately reminds librarians that “Adding excellent materials to the collection regardless of their potential to spark controversy -- and resisting challenges to such material -- is an important professional obligation ... and it supports the principles established by the American Library Association” (p. 378).

For discussion, I give you a conflict posed in the article: Is exposure to controversial ideas or social/ethnic intolerance harmful, or does it teach readers to be critical thinkers?