Rightsizing the Academic Library Collection by Suzanne M. Ward

 

By Adame, Katelynn

  Ward, S. M. (2015). Rightsizing the academic library collection. ALA Editions, an imprint of the American Library Association.

Summary: 

Ward's Rightsizing the academic library collection provides a new take on the deselection/weeding process. Always a daunting task, the book proposes the solution of rightsizing for academic libraries. The book begins my evaluating some of the challenges faced by academic libraries, including collaborative efforts, instruction design, employee relation, online learning, enrollment consideration, data collection, diversity, and more. Ward points out that libraries, "need to prove not only that their services benefit the institutions students and faculty, but also that these services are an integral part of student and faculty success," (p. 3). Where collections are concerned, issues of space, quality, and usability are all considerations when advocating for the growth of the library and their collections. Collection curation and deselection criteria should constantly be evolving to meet the needs of students, however, predicting the needs can be difficult, leaving library staff trailing behind while students advance. Large, unruly collections can be difficult to maintain and use, posing potential risks to funding and accessibility of the library collection. Ward does cover some traditional methods of weeding, and while these values still have merit, they may not necessarily be the best solution for academic libraries. The concept of Rightsizing requires libraries to assess their collections and evaluate what a suitable collection may look like for their institution. Rightsizing implements a plan that clearly "state the project’s objectives, staffing assignments, available resources, importance and relationship to the library’s primary goals, expected time frame for a large retroactive effort, measures of success, and strategy for ongoing maintenance," (p. 49). Instead of an annual practice, rightsizing transform the practice of deselection into an ongoing practice that is integral to the lifecycle management of an overall collection. The goal is to ultimately utilize space as best as possible while providing a collection that is usable, accessible, and offers students multiple avenues of information access. 

Evaluation/Review: 

As someone who works in a library with an unruly collection, this was an invaluable resource. Weeding has been an ongoing issue for our institution. Our general collection is full of outdated and unused material. While we continue to get new materials, our old materials seem to never leave. This leaves our collection daunting and unusable for students. I believe Ward has posed some excellent solutions through Rightsizing. Her solution of creating a weeding plan and criteria to generate an ongoing process of weeding can be helpful for librarians who do not have the time or resources to complete the laborious task of weeding. Rightsizing offers a means of maintain a collection that is realistic, manageable, and suitable to your staffing and institutional needs. For individuals in academic libraries, balancing collection management alongside other duties as liaisons, instructors, committee members, and more can be daunting. Typically, the practice of weeding gets pushed aside, leaving a collection in less than ideal condition. Rightsizing might be an excellent solution for information professionals who are looking to manage an unruly collection. 

Weeding without worry: transparency and communication help ease weeding woes

Kate Lasky

INFO266 Spring 2019

Vnuk, R. (2016, May). Weeding without worry: transparency and communication help ease weeding woes. American Libraries, 47(5), 50+. Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A452496301/GPS?u=s9186272&sid=GPS&xid=2feffce8

In “Weeding without worry,” author Rebecca Vnuk reviews opportunities to improve communications and support transparent practices in the deselection of library material as a regular and proper process for all librarians.

Weeding is often negatively represented in the news. Damaging stories are most commonly generated by an employee or community member who is uninformed about the process of weeding and its necessity as part of collection development. Author Rebecca Vnuk advocates that librarians prepare public communications in advance of large weeding projects and promote transparency.

The article outlines several ways librarians can frame communications by focusing on making room for new materials, updating the offerings, opportunities for inter-library loan, and patron requests for purchase. The article offers a few examples of weeding “horror stories.”

Finally, the author advises librarians to find ways to reuse and recycle weeded material to help patrons understand the books will be used in the future.

The article, though brief, is a helpful reminder that effective communications requires thoughtful preparation in advance. Creating a list of frequently asked questions and answers and posting them on the library website can help employees, patrons, and board members better understand the finer points of deselection of materials.

Crying Over Spilled Milk

Mercado, Crystal

Dickenson, G. (2005). Crying over spilled milk. Retrieved from
    https://www.scribd.com/document/221220527/Dickinson-Crying-Over- Spilled-Milk-1

In this article, Dickenson explains why weeding the collection in the library on a regular basis rather than on a seasonal or annual basis is a necessity. She also gives pointers and tips to Library Specialists that may be hesitant to begin the process.

Unless the library has established a routine for regularly scheduled weeding, it can be a daunting task. When I started in the library, I instructed the staff and students to weed out any fiction books that fell under the MUSTY and CREW idea. Over the last school year, we weeded over 1,000 fiction books. In true fashion for librarians that are afraid of "backlash from the community," the board was questioning why I discarded so many books. Dickenson's article gives good reasons as to why weeding is not only a necessity but the responsibility of the library to keep updated, useful information on the shelves for patron use. She compares weeding to spoiled milk in the fridge.

The Art of Weeding

Smith, Cassandra

Chant, I. (2015). The art of weeding. Library Journal, 104(11), p. 34-37.

Article can also be found here: https://lj.libraryjournal.com/2015/06/managing-libraries/the-art-of-weeding-collection-management/#_


Summary

This article explains the importance of weeding and explains criteria, steps, and tips of successful weeding to maintain a healthy collection. Similar to a garden, a library needs regular maintenance to flourish. Nuggets of wisdom in the article include:

“Those shelves hold a lot of junk that has to make way for the new titles getting published every day.”

“When people can browse the shelves without having to sift through older material they’re not interested in, they’re more likely to find something they are looking for.”

“When ordering material, having an end-of-life-plan for it is essential”

The article also suggested doing continual weeding everyday rather than one big project once a year. One person referred to weeding as “selecting for the book sale.”

Evaluation

Many people are nervous when it comes to pulling materials from the collection. But this article helps puts many of their common concerns at ease. There isn't enough physical space to continually add to a collection. People will have a better experience browsing the shelves if it isn't cluttered with outdated, battered, or irrelevant information. Make room for the new stuff by clearing away the old. Sometimes books are still in decent condition, but aren't (for various reasons) circulating any longer. These titles would be better off sold or made into art than taking up precious realty on the library shelves.

Simple Weeding Guidelines

Lugo, Adriana

Manning, P. (1997, May). When less is more: Cultivating a healthy collection.
School Library Journal. p. 54.

This article presents  very direct, clear guidelines to follow when weeding
a collection of books. The article explains what steps to take in order to
begin sorting, repairing or discarding items. It presents us with four criteria
to follow when trying to decide what to do with a book. As the article goes
on, it further presents what to consider when weeding nonfiction instead
of fiction. It’s a very well written, clearly stated article that would help
beginning librarians or paraprofessionals in charge of school libraries in
updating their collections. I highly recommend reading it.

Weeding Without Worry

Nguyen, Marian

Vnuk, R. (2016). Weeding without worry. American Libraries, 47(5), 50-53. Retrieved from https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2016/05/02/library-weeding-without-worry/

Descriptive Summary:

In recent years there have been news stories and articles about members of the community being upset at the library’s weeding process, especially when they discover library books being tossed into the dumpster. All these negative press can hurt a library’s reputation as well as give library weeding a bad name. From her own weeding experiences, Vnuk offers advice on how to properly and successfully weed library materials without raising any issues or concerns from both staff members and the public.

When it comes to weeding, Vnuk writes that communication and transparency are the keys to easing the public to the weeding process. If the library is planning a large weeding project, the director should release a statement about it on the library’s website, newsletter, or local press in order to inform the public about the weeding before hand and to avoid any potential bad press. The statement should explain the reason for the weeding, how it works, as well as how it would affect patrons. The statement should also explain how weeding isn’t about getting rid of books, but about refreshing the library’s collection with new materials and new copies of the same titles. If it is an ongoing weeding project, Vnuk writes that no formal announcement need to be made; however, staff should be prepared to answer any questions about it from patrons. Vnuk adds that libraries should inform the public that library materials that are weeded will be reused or recycled, in order to relieve the public’s concern of books being tossed into the dumpster. If a material does need to be tossed, then Vnuk advise that the library director make a statement about what types of materials are to be tossed, such as outdated text or damaged books. Additionally, Vnuk uses the Milwaukee School of Engineering (MSOE) as an example of a library’s transparency in their weeding process, since the MSOE has a page on their website explaining their weeding process and how a patron could advocate for a book to not be weeded.

Evaluation:

I agree with Vnuk’s advice that libraries should communicate with their patrons and be transparent about the weeding process. Weeding can be a very hot topic issue with book lovers and patrons as they can get upset that books are being weeded from the library. In order to alleviate concerns over the weeding process, I think it is important that the library informs patrons about the weeding process so that patrons can get a better understanding about the process and why weeding may be necessary. Communication and transparency is also important for libraries as well so that they can avoid any bad press that may occur during the weeding process. No library wants to be caught in a PR nightmare and lose the trust of their patrons. By following Vnuk's advice it can make the weeding process less stressful and let libraries take the neccessary steps needed to help their collection continue to grow.

On Weeding

Christopher Fluetsch

California Department of Education. (n.d.) Weeding the school library. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/lb/documents/weedingbrochure.pdf

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (2013). Collection development. Retrieved from http://www.library.illinois.edu/uni/policies/collectiondevelopment.html

I find that one of the more difficult parts of collection management is weeding. As with all libraries, my shelf space is limited. My school library has grown over many years, and some of the books on our shelves are obsolete, inaccurate or damaged. Despite this, I have a hard time bringing myself to weed.

There are two basic reasons. First, I seem to be constitutionally incapable of getting rid of a book. My home library is quite large. I have boxes of comic books. I have multiple copies of old role-playing game rule books. I like books, and I hate to get rid of them.

Second, it can be difficult for me to determine if a book in the school library ought to be weeded. I always find myself thinking, “What is a student decides to research this, and I’ve gotten rid of the last copy.” Or, “Sure, no one has checked out this book in a decade, but I enjoyed it when I was a child. Perhaps someone will come along and discover it.” Additionally, I am concerned about violating some obscure library protection law.

The two documents listed above will be extremely useful to me, because they address this last issue. The first document is from the California Department of Education. It provides official guidelines approved by the CDE. These include specific age guidelines, best-practice procedures to adopt and even a helpful mnemonic. In addition to its practical aspects, the document provides me with CYA cover should anyone question my weeding procedures.

The University of Illinois document offers additional guidelines. Though more appropriate for universities, these guidelines reinforce many of the things discussed in the CDE flyer. Some specifically helpful aspects are lists of reasons to weed, lists of quickly outdated materials and directions about eliminating extra volumes of a particular work.

If, like me, you are not fully comfortable with the process of weeding, I highly recommend these two documents. They are short, easy to understand and extremely useful.

Feel the Need to Weed!

  

Reaching Across Illinois Library System. (July 24, 2015). Feel the need to weed! Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoyVSmb2aZo

In this RAILS(Reaching Across Illinois Library System) video, Rebecca Vnuk, librarian and author of The Weeding Handbook(2015) and Head of Youth Services, Veronica De Fazio, offer some great basics on how to weed a collection whether in a public library setting or academic setting.  While this video is designed for someone who has never embarked on this endeavor before, it is thorough and the Question & Answer portion starting at 51:21 offers useful specifics for a variety of situations.  Get your basics covered with this hour long watch.


A little bit of food for thought:

J. Hasselberger
Spring 2016

Crowd-Sourcing Weeding: Making it fun, makes it effective

Empire State Library Network. (April 4, 2016). Patron-driven weeding as engagement and collection management. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbUVT0igDl0

After a comprehensive analysis of the library collection and circulation habits, university librarians, Kristin Hart and Rebecca Hyams, realized their collection was in dire need of an overhaul.  With their work cut out for them, they attempt some unorthodox methods for a major (80% of collection) weeding involving students and faculty.

Reasons to weed:

• Not serving needs of students or faculty
• Students/Patrons inclined to pick the shortest book, were not necessarily picking the best for scholarship/relevance
• Students/Patrons when desperate were using the "take anything" method, rather than the most suitable and reliable resource

Ways to Make a Fun Weed with Patrons:

• Design a Scavenger hunt for the funniest/strangest/oldest/weirdest book, divide students into groups and offer prizes (most of what was collected was on the "No Circ" report and ultimately weeded out
• Incorporate Weeding activities in regularly scheduled Library Workshops - Students didn't need much guidance and managed to pick things within the standard weeding criteria

Ways to Involve Faculty

• Share collection metrics, even if it's negative data
• Pitch participation as relying on their expertise to pick the right items to keep/get rid of
• Send out survey- open up lines of communication
• Plan weeding days 

Results

• About 5,000 books evaluated, about 41% discarded
• 10 faculty very involved in process
• Involved students spend more time in library, make face-to-face suggestions for purchases
• Will hopefully lead to a more thoughtful library policy 

J. Hasselberger

Spring 2016

More Best Practices on "The Art of Weeding"

Jonathan P. Bell

INFO 266

March 12, 2016

Chant, I. (2015). The art of weeding. Library Journal, 140(11), 34-37. http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2015/06/managing-libraries/the-art-of-weeding-collection-management/#_

Weeding is one of the most challenging functions of collection management. The librarian is tasked with removing books -- a thankless, counter-intuitive and resource-intensive duty that the public rarely understands. Library users often perceive such removal as offensive, as in: “Why are you taking away our books?!!” But weeding is necessary. As Chant observed in this article, by removing outdated and unused books, weeding preserves the “health of a collection.”

It’s valuable to highlight Chant’s thesis. After opening with a description of all the headaches associated with weeding, the author asks: “So why go to the trouble? Because in a library, just as in a garden, taking out unwanted items makes those left behind stand out.” It’s difficult to say it any better. Weeding enhances your collection.  In the space below I outline Chant’s arguments for effective weeding.

• Weeding is normal - Weeding a collection should be viewed as a regular and necessary part of collection management. Conducting weeding in regular intervals prevents the confusion and potential negative optics that arise from last minute or irregular weeding.
• Be mindful of public perceptions - There stories from around the world of library users up in arms upon learning of weeded books ending up in dumpsters. Librarians can avoid public relations snafus by working with user groups to identify appropriate weeding areas and being cautious and thoughtful about their weeding methods.
• Large-scale weeding is tricky but necessary - Whether it’s because of materials damage or outdatedness, librarians will have to weed in large numbers at some point. Communication is imperative. You need to tell users what’s being weeded and why. Explain the reasoning to line staff so they can relay it to users. Consider sharing your “how and why we weed” online, too.
• Data-driven weeding with a human touch - Off the shelf software is available to run data analyses to help select potential titles for weeding. However, library staff familiar with your materials absolutely must weigh in on weeding decisions. Personal knowledge of user preferences is crucial. An algorithm alone cannot be the final arbiter.
• Weeding by age - Contemporariness and condition of materials play a role in weeding decisions. But there are caveats. Owning a rare or important book in poor condition is more valuable than not owning it. Publication date alone is not a catch-all metric for weeding in every subject. Yes, outdated and inaccurate materials are potential candidates for deselection, but librarians should consider whether such items are worth preserving for history or archival research.
• Weeding by recycling - Weeded books can have a fruitful afterlife as recycled pulp, art objects, even upcycled furniture. Before thinking of a dumpster, librarians should think of creative ways to repurpose weeded materials.
• Weeding eResources - Even digital materials should be weeded. Librarians should look to download and eCheckout data to assess the popularity of digital materials in the collection. Libraries can save on the cost of rising digital subscriptions by focusing on eResources that users actually use.
  
  

Evaluation

Chant’s article is among the many entries I’m finding in the apparent LIS subfield I’m now calling “Weeding the right way” (my own title). Chant’s 2015 entry is similar to the 2010 article by Allen I reviewed earlier this semester. Chant offers similar or the same “how to weed right” best practices, though his analysis goes a step further by including a section on digital weeding. That’s the major improvement over Allen’s article, which was a very informative piece itself. Both Allen and Chant’s articles are enlightening, and both offer useful guidance on how to weed properly, but in examining eBook weeding, Chant provides more relevant insight for today’s increasingly digital collections.

The Art of Weeding to Avoid Criticism

Jonathan P. Bell

INFO 266

Spring 2016

Allen, M. (2010). Weed ’em and reap: The art of weeding to avoid criticism. Library Media Connection, 28(6), 32-33.

Open access URL: http://public.sd38.bc.ca/~gpowell/libe461/docs/art-of-weeding.pdf

Republished as:

Allen, M. (2015). Weed ’em and reap: The art of weeding to avoid criticism. In Repman, J., & Dickinson, G. K. School library management (253-254). Columbus, Ohio: Linworth Pub.

Summary

Allen’s brief but informative article argues that consistent weeding is necessary to maintain an optimal library collection. Allen explains the need to maintain current materials in an era of evolving curriculums and rapid technological change. Libraries should develop a weeding policy to guide deselection. Books removed from collections should be recycled, if possible, before being trashed. While Allen’s piece focuses on weeding in a school library media center, the lessons learned are broadly applicable to other library environments.

Why weed?

Weeding can daunting if undertaken infrequently. Therefore, Allen argues to approach weeding as an ongoing process, one section of the collection at a time. She outlines 4 justifications to weed regularly:

• Keep “the best” resources in the face of increasing space limits
• Maintain “uncluttered” shelves to aid finding
• Provide materials in “good condition” that patrons will enjoy using
• Remove outdated materials that may contain “stereotypes and misinformation”

How to weed

Allen recommends that libraries develop a weeding policy to guide decisions. A weeding policy aids transparency and accountability in explaining or justifying deselections to patrons. The weeding policy should have a criteria applicable to a broad array of items. As Allen says, the guiding question is, “Does this resource serve an appropriate purpose in the learning community?”

Allen proposes the MUSTY mnemonic device for developing an effective weeding policy:

• M - Misleading or inaccurate information
• U - Ugly and damaged beyond repair
• S - Superseded by new or better edition
• T - Trivial with little value
• Y - Your collection has no use for the item; it’s irrelevant to your community’s needs

Citing a tendency for general print materials and computer-mediated items to seem outdated after 3 to 5 years, weeding based on “currency” is emphasized. Thus Allen proposes a 10-year rule, whereby most items in the collection (except war history and reference) should have a copyright date of less than ten years.

Making use of discards

A well weeded collection will leave staff with discarded materials. Allen recommends recycling and repurposing these items. She identifies charities that accept books and offers ideas for adaptive reuse of printed materials such as art projects, picture cutouts, and scrapbooks. Trashing materials should be a last resort for salvageable items, or exercised for items damaged beyond practical use.

Evaluation

This is the first resource I’ve read on the topic of weeding in my 6 years at SJSU iSchool. I’m a bit late. I generally understood the practice and purpose of weeding, but admittedly my understanding was gained from tertiary learning (e.g. reading references to it in other works, hearing others talk about weeding, etc). I started modestly here, with a brief piece that provided a concise overview of weeding library collections. I found the article highly useful and informative. I feel like Allen hits all the major points of weeding: what weeding is, why we do it and how often, how it should be done, and what happens to materials after. While the article was written with library media centers in mind, the learning is applicable to other library environments. Allen’s recommendations are based on real world experiences and can be implemented in other libraries.

I especially appreciated how Allen encourages librarians to engage patrons about weeding. Educating patrons about materials deselection brings them in as partners in the library. If they know what weeding is and why it’s needed, they’re more aware of the library’s efforts to optimize the collection to reflect community needs. Such engagement efforts remove perceived hierarchies between patrons and librarians. A forward thinking weeding policy could even include patrons in the weeding process. For example, the library can establish an advisory committee comprised of patrons who advise library staff on items to keep and remove.

The decision to remove materials can be controversial. Library items may have value beyond their superficial condition or copyright date. This is especially the case outside of school library media collections. Following a MUSTY criteria might help guide decision making but I caution against relying solely, and uncritically, on a checklist when it comes to deselecting items from the collection. Other questions need to be asked. Perhaps the book has value as an artifact for your local history collection? Perhaps it was written by a local historic figure or community leader? Perhaps it’s the last copy available?! Considerations like these challenge Allen’s proposed 10-year rule and the simple admonition: “If the paper is yellowed… then weed that book.” I argue that wiggle room, grey area, awareness of intangibles, and discretion are required for an effective weeding policy.

The Art of Weeding

von Mayrhauser, Heidi

Chant, I.  (2015).  The art of weeding.  Library Journal, 140(11), 34-37.

Notes Summary: Weed gradually instead of all at once, as this makes the process easier and will prevent tension.  If the public or staff sees high numbers of books being thrown out, controversy can arise.  In addition to weeding slowly, communication and transparency about weeding policies can help.  Inviting patrons on tours and showing how the library is maintained can help.  You can keep outdated materials as examples to illustrate the need for weeding.  The article recommends weeding first by numbers and reports, then having a librarian check the report to look for classics, local authors/interests, books by authors about the release a new title, and last copies in the system.  Weed for age when the book needs to contain relevant information.  An example from the article, "Jennifer LaGarde, educator on loan for the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction and a 2012 LJ Mover & Shaker, recalls a title she came across while thinning out a reference section during her first year as a school librarian.  The book stated confidently that "scientists do not believe HIV is transmitted through sexual content."  Alternatives for the dumpster are sending the books to a book sale and using them to create arts and crafts.

Evaluation:  This article was helpful for me, as I have not done a great deal of weeding.  I can relate to the public's distress over seeing dumpsters full of books, so I appreciated that the article addresses this and provides recommendations for preventing tension.  Weeding slowly and being transparent and open about what is going on should help to inform and educate concerned citizens.  

Weeding Made Easy

Laudato, Maricar

Kalan, A. P. (2014). The practical librarian's guide to collection development: Weeding and acquisition made easier. American Libraries Magazine.

Summary

Abby Kalan offers tips on both the weeding and acquisition process. She jumps right into her weeding process because it provides her insights on what not to purchase when it comes to the acquisition process. Quick weeding tips include getting rid of subject areas that change rapidly such as guidebooks, books with shifting political, scientific, or technological content, and books that are now politically incorrect. As for easy acquisitions, getting books that are always in high demand from patrons, such as bestsellers are no-brainers. When it comes to ordering non-fiction, it’s best to order materials that have been published within the past 1-2 years.

Evaluation

 

I thought that Kalan’s article provided an excellent introductory overview if you’re new to the weeding process. I wish she had written this article when we started extensive weeding back in 2011. But I’m glad that I have access to the article now. Even though I’m already doing what she outlines what you should keep in mind while weeding, it’s nice to see it written down somewhere. I plan on adapting her article and adding it to our section on weeding in our collection development policy.