COLLABORATIVE COLLECTIONS: In academic libraries, collection development is becoming more of a team effort

Brian DeFelice

Dixon, J. A. (2019, August). COLLABORATIVE: COLLECTIONS: In academic libraries, collection development is becoming more of a team effort. Library Journal, 144(7), 36+. Retrieved from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A595194907/GPS?u=mlin_s_thomas&sid=GPS&xid=f473f88d


In this article, Jennifer Dixon explores the difficulties that some academic libraries are having with keeping up with the demands of collection development, while also balancing limited budgets and increased demand on their physical spaces. This article explores how some academic libraries have found creative ways to enhance their collection development polices and practices by joining library consortia, sharing spaces, and digitization, and state wide repository. One very interesting element of the article is discussing the idea of "sharing spaces" which really is more of a shared repository for academic libraries. The Research Collections and Preservation Consortia (Re-CAP) services Princeton, Columbia, and New York Public Library by proving off site material storage that can be requested by member libraries. Re-CAP acts as an offsite repository, allowing member libraries to house books off site, but still have them technically in the collection. Patrons can request items that are off site, which are then delivered to the requesting library in an inter library loan delivery fashion.

Of course, not all libraries need to share space or offload physical collections to an off site local. Some can join local public library consortia which allows them to expand their collection without having to actually add additional books on the shelves. Rather than store collected materials in an off site warehouse, each library acts as it's own "warehouse" lending materials to other libraries upon request. Some academic libraries just join other academic library consortia, others, Like Eastern Nazarene College in Quincy, MA opt to join public library consortia. Joining a consortia of either type can have an impact on collection development policy because some consortia have particular rules about lending and purchasing of materials. Some Library systems, like in Ohio, are working to create a state wide repository of materials for libraries of all types, to deal issues of limited space, funding, and enhancing resource sharing.

Geographic information systems: tools for displaying in-library use data

Riggs, Michelle



Mandel, L. H. (2010, March). Geographic information systems: tools for displaying in-library use data. Information Technology and Libraries, 29(1), 47+. Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A219899076/PROF?u=pott50179&sid=PROF&xid=ddd226bd


Mandel examines the benefit of using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to graphically represent the use of physical space in a library to justify funding and the overall value of the library. He recommends creating a map of the library and then using the “seating sweeps” method throughout the day to record how and when various locations are being used (socialization, reading, research, etc.) This data can then be represented graphically, which aides clarity and understanding. The data can also be used for targeted marketing of library services and materials by determining the most highly-trafficked areas of the library and placing marketing tools (signage, displays, etc.) there.


I found this article to be thought-provoking. Most libraries use circulation statistics, sign-in data, and program attendance as means of library-use data collection; however, it never would have occurred to me to track use of the physical space itself. This absolutely has value as a means of proving the value of various library resources and as a justification for funding needs. Presenting the data graphically is an excellent and effective idea, as in my experience, administrators never have time (or desire?) to read detailed reports. If they can look at a graphic and get the information quickly, it has the capability to have a far greater effect.

Is Ther a Future for Collection Development Librarians?

Clark-Collier, Kelsey

Thomas A. Karel, "Is There a Future for Collection Development Librarians?" (2013). Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284315257

How has the development of the E-Book and other digital resources impacted the role and purpose of the collection librarian? This is the core question that Thomas A.Karel seeks to discuss and address in his article titled Is there a Future for Collection Development Librarians? Reflecting on his career as an academic librarian, which required a great deal of collection development responsibility, Karel discusses how factors such as changing acquisiton plans combined with a lack of available space for the thousands of journal databases and 500,000 book titles housed within his library has resulted in an increasing number of demands being placed on the institution to develop an effective collection development and management policy. 

Following this, Karel touches upon his main critical point, which is the effect of the introduction of E-Books into his library's collection. He argues that the expertise of librarians regarding selection is considerably diminished when it comes to digital materials, a concern shared and supported by a wide  variety o recent literature. Karel goes onto list factors that pose threats to the collection librarian (such as E-books, diminished interest from faculty in ordering materials and the ever incresing demands from students regarding information needs) as well as potential opportunities (establishing closer relationships with vendors, working more closelywith faculty to select materials, and taking the opportunity to update exisiting collection development policies). Karel concludes by reflecting upon a teaching session he attended withother librarians where themes affecting collection development were discussed, along with varying degrees of concern and hope regarding the future of collection development in all different types of libraries.

This article stood out to me for a variety of reasons. While the impact of digital resources and technology on traditional print library collections is a complex topic that I have expierenced in prior courss, it is my belief that the notion of digital materials replacing print materials is somewhat overestimated, especially in school and public libraries. That's not to assume that patrons have been reluctant to adapt to new forms of technology and digital services. Rather, I feel that libraries as repositories of print and tangible resources is a deeply ingrained concept that spans thousands of years, and is likely not going away anytime soon. As Karel discusses however, the real core questionp is not whether digital materials will overtake print materials, its to what degree are which librarians in the present day willing and able to incoporate digitial materials innovatively into their institutions in such a way that benefits both library users and potential non-users. He takes it one step further by providing three excellent questions that serve as solid foundations for discussion and debate regarding the topic:

1.) What does a Collection Development librarian do?

2.)What tasks can be effectively carried out by other staff? 

3.) What, ideally, might be the role of a Collection Development Librarian in the new electronic enviornment?

These questions serve as excellent foundations for further discussion and debate because they provide an opportunity to gain insight not only into the current role and purpose of collection development librarians, but also the factors that are affecting this particular position both here in the present and in the future. 

In Favor of Weeding

Bishop, Andrew

Ferguson, C. (2015). In Favor of Weeding. Serials Review 41(4), 221-223. DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2015.1103573

An examination of the faculty and student objections to the storage of hard copy monographs and serials in favor of creating more study spaces during a library renovation at Colby College leads Ferguson into a contemplation of the future role of the library in campus life and what being a library will mean as technology and pedagogy advance, and what role weeding plays in the space allocation considerations of libraries going forward with a modernization of their physical space.  Colby College moved almost 40% of its monographic collection to off-campus storage to make room in the library for more learning commons type spaces in the facility.  Faculty objected to this move, arguing for the utility of browsing and serendipity, which are more difficult using electronic discovery resources, in research.  Ferguson argues that while these are valid concerns, “…ultimately, at the heart of most objections raised against weeding and storage initiatives in libraries is a debate on the role of the library itself” (221).  These questions and determinations often come from users, Ferguson cites MIT’s recent survey revealing students wanted study spaces and a café in the renovated library, rather than from the library apparatus itself.  Ferguson also points out the financial cost of a hard copy collection, saying a recent estimate in Library Journal put the cost of storage at over $11 per book, although renovating an existing space into a learning commons can run as high as $457 per square foot.  Preserving space for other uses becomes a higher priority than maintaining a certain collection size, which makes whether an item is worth the space it takes up the number one weeding criterion.  Ferguson makes several best practices recommendations, such as including the community in the decision-making process to both reduce user anxiety over library changes and ensure that the changes truly serve patron wants and needs, transparency of the reasoning behind the weeding criteria and the need for a weeding project, ensuring responsible disposal of weeded materials, and making weeding a regularly undertaken part of the collection development process instead of waiting until it is urgently needed and removing a giant chunk of the collection at once.

Evaluation

I agree with Ferguson’s best practice recommendations, even though they are largely geared toward alleviating patron anxiety over weeding rather than with the process of weeding itself.  Particularly valuable is her suggestion that weeding be an ongoing process rather than an occasional large project.  Not only are patrons reassured by regularity, it’s a lighter burden on the library staff to have something they can incorporate into their routines instead of a big thing they have to drop everything else for.  My main issue with this paper, and it is not necessarily with the paper itself but with the larger issue, is the assumption that study spaces and the like fall under the libraries’ mission and ought to be a part of them.  Is the campus community truly best served by bolting these areas onto the existing library instead of having an exclusive, purpose-built space?  Or is it that library renovations present the first, or only, opportunity for the community to request these paces be created on campus?  I know when I worked in an academic library (very recently), students using the study spaces did not simultaneously use other library resources, such as going out into the stacks or interacting with the reference librarians.  Although they may have been accessing electronic resources such as databases during their group study time, this could just have easily been done anywhere on campus.  Asking such questions falls outside Ferguson’s purpose with this article, though, and I think she gives a brief but thorough argument for weeding as part of not only collection management but management of the library’s physical space.

The Future of Libraries Has Little to Do with Books

Brandes-Miesner, Marta

Spinks, R. (2015, January 4). The future of libraries has little to do with books. Good: A magazine for the global citizen. Retrieved from http://magazine.good.is/articles/public-libraries-reimagined

Summary:

 In this article, the author talks about how libraries are reinventing themselves by becoming vibrant and attractive community “hubs”. The article emphasizes the need to develop libraries into places where patrons can become not only digitally literate, but digitally fluent. The future of libraries according to this article is encompassed by its free services, by being a community gathering space, and by fulfilling patrons’ needs for connectivity. The first “Bookless Library” has been built in San Antonio, Texas. The author described it as a “digital hub”. This library is all digital, cloud-based, and has over 10,000 eBooks and eReaders for the public. The author states though that with its plethora of auditoriums and creative spaces to relax, work and meet in, library materials seem like an afterthought. Nonetheless, the sentiment of this article is that reimagining and recreating the library as a place for people to gather works well for the future of libraries.

Evaluation:

This article is interesting in its ability to present images of future libraries, and those that have already been moving in this direction. Imagining that this is one of many directions future libraries will take is obviously plausible. However, the idea that libraries will become more community spaces to meet rather than to go to for the purposes of gaining something is not as plausible. There are so many existing places to meet, study, gather, etc. People go to libraries to “acquire” something-knowledge, information, Internet access, assistance, leisure materials, peace & quiet, solitude to study, etc. not only for the space itself. So while the author presents a vision of the future that is sleek and stylish and seemingly new, the article neglects to include the very reason libraries exist in the first place. They exist to impart information or knowledge (regardless of its format) and to act as a point of entry for equitable access to that information and knowledge. Without these two factors, these “gathering spaces” are just that.

Rethinking How We Organize Teen Spaces and Collections

Laudato, Maricar

Pattee, A. (2014). Rethinking library collections for young adults. Young Adult Library Services, 15-17.

Summary

In this article, Amy Pattee wants her readers to reconsider how young adult library collections are organized. In regards to the physical space, Pattee feels that placing literature that is deemed as “young adult” in the teen section is preventing adults who like reading ‘YA” books from accessing those materials. The same thing happens to teens who may like readings books that are in the “adult” collection. Pattee argues that this problem would be solved if librarians interfiled the young adult and adult print collection together. If libraries put the YA print collection with the adult collection, Pattee argues that it would free up the teen space for other opportunities, such as creating a Makerspace or create a computer lab.

Amy Pattee also discusses the importance of promoting the library’s eBook collection to teens. According to a Pew Internet Study, less than a 1/3 of adults own ereaders, and even fewer young adults. It is unclear whether teens are using their cell phones to access eBooks. Because of this, Pattee argues that librarians must actively enable and promote access to the library’s eBook collection to teens.

Evaluation 

I agree with Pattee that we should rethink how we organize our print collections because it is restricting our patrons to certain sections of the library and making them feel unwelcome in certain areas, or even discouraging patrons from accessing different genres of literature. In addition, if libraries interfile their YA collection into the adult collection, libraries can transform their teen spaces into a Learning Commons. Then, instead of merely inhabiting a space, teens would be using the space; thus making libraries more relevant in their lives.

In regards to eBooks, I personally feel that teens still prefer the print source when it comes to reading for fun, and I remember reading about it in a recent survey. When it comes to schoolwork, students prefer online eTextbooks. Students do not like reading on their phones because they equate that with socializing with their friends. But when it comes down to reading for pleasure/recreation, students seem to prefer holding the actual book in their hands.