Collection Development

Javier Morales

Lehman, K.A. (2014, July). Collection development and management. Library Resources & Technical Services, 58(3). 169-177.

Summary: Libraries are often limited in the space they have available and as such, have to make the most of the space they have by making sure every item in the collection serves users’ needs. Demand-driven acquisition is one way of ensuring that items are only added to the collection to serve actual demand. Libraries are also weeding their collections more than they used to as they turn away from the idea of preserving old materials that may not even be useful anymore and place more emphasis on enabling discovery within the collection.

Evaluation: The article discusses the evolving practice of collection development and touches on the following topics: demand-driven acquisition, inter-library loan, print on demand, electronic resources, preservation considerations, open access, library consortiums as a means of expanding the collection, and collection weeding. The author does not provide any in-depth insights on any of these topics, though.

Collection Directions: Some Reflections on the Future of Library Collections and Collecting

1. Greg Seppi

2. Dempsey, L., Malpas, C., and Lavoie, B. (2014). Collection Directions: Some Reflections on the Future of Library Collections and Collecting. Originally published in portal: Libraries and the Academy 14(3), 1-44. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED564803.pdf

3. This high-level analysis of 2014’s trends in library collecting was written by three OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) researchers. It documents and comments extensively on trends in general library collecting policies and procedures and how they are changing as networks between librarians are changing library collection development.

Dempsey et al. argue that libraries need to rethink collection orientation—that while we have traditionally used an “outside-in” model of acquisition, where material created by others is brought into the library, we need to shift to an “inside-out” model where “digitized special collections, research and learning materials, [and] researcher expertise profiles are shared with an external audience” (6). Alongside this reevaluation of internal content, they also recommend that institutions shift their perspectives from “institutionally-organized stewardship toward group-scaled solutions,” in other words, to think collaboratively about their collections and how to meet their collection development goals (7).

This type of institutional re-thinking, Dempsey et al. suggest, will allow collection management decisions to become more intricate as well—that collections might be managed at a local, group, regional, or even global level.

Changing the way libraries think about collection development, Dempsey et al. argue, is possible because of three broad shifts in the existential context of libraries: the ability to unbundle and rebundle with regard to transaction costs and systemic reorganizations; the “informationalization” of decisions via automation and data driven decisions; and the changing “research and learning behaviors” of library patrons (7).

4. The authors’ conceptualization of research activities was particularly helpful. A very nice chart of the research process guides the text’s discussion of the place of libraries in contemporary scholarship, and was my favorite part of the text (p. 14). A very solid, well-thought article.

Beyond the Library of Congress: Collecting Practices of South Asia Area Specialist Librarians

1. Seppi, Greg
2. Thacker, M. (2015). Beyond the Library of Congress: Collecting Practices of South Asia Area Specialist Librarians. Library Resources & Technical Services 59(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/lrts.59n2.72
3. The main thrust of the article is identifying to what extent Southeast Asia area librarians “rely on” the Library of Congress’ Cooperative Acquisitions Programs (LC CAP in this article), with the goal of identifying best practices. The survey attempts to identify the benefits of working through the LC CAP, whether it is worthwhile to use other selection methods, and identifying what kinds of materials are impossible to collect regardless of methodology (p. 2).

The literature review surveys other collecting areas, noting a number of approaches to collection development in different areas of geopolitical collecting. Thacker writes:

There is a rich literature on building area studies collections, and much of it is centered on cooperative collection development, foreign language collections, and challenges associated with working with overseas vendors.:l These topics are ancillary to a larger question: what methods do other area specialists use to build collections? Given the idiosyncrasies between different geographic areas, what methods work across areas and what is unique to a particular region? (p. 2).

Nine institutional bibliographers responded to the survey, which seems like a problematically small sample size (p. 4). That being said, the data gathered was still interesting. Respondents “praised the efficiency of using LC’s cooperative plans,” though they noted that following such acquisitions plans to the letter resulted in homogeneity in collections, lack of flexibility, and inability to acquire out-of-print items, local and micro-histories, pop culture-related publications, and other nontraditional or rare media.

A wide variety of additional sources were used to supplement LC CAP, including an Indian acquisitions firm, D.K. Agencies, as well as input from students, faculty, and outside researchers and a number of websites. Local contacts were used by at least one organization. In terms of difficult materials to acquire, Columbia had a hard time getting religious ephemera, Yale was interested in Buddhism in Bangladesh, and other librarians reported additional difficulties in acquiring ephemera from Southeast Asia.

Thacker concludes that SE Asia collection developers are too reliant on a small number of sources for the bulk of their texts, probably resulting in large amounts of duplication between universities. He suggests a follow-up study to examine the “scope of collections” at different universities, and how these collections are organized and defined (p. 6).

4. The study surveyed bibliographers belonging to CONSALD, the South Asia bibliographic professional organization. The sample size was rather small—only thirty-two bibliographers at twenty-eight institutions were represented, and they were hit with forty-seven questions! That seemed a tad excessive to me, especially since Thacker reported that some questions were confusing (p. 3). Overall I consider this article very informative but niche in its subject matter.

5. 

Where do I start? A school library handbook produced by the Library Services Staff of the Santa Clara County Office of Education

Library Services Staff of the Santa Clara County Office of Education. (2000). Where do I start?

A school library handbook. San Jose: Santa Clara County Office of Education.

This is the first edition of the handbook; a second edition, published in 2012, is available for purchase on amazon.com.

While this 156-page handbook is helpful for any library service staff entering into work with schools, I focus my attention here on two sections: Library Overview (which includes sections on copyright and acceptable use, and selection policies) and Library Collection.  The areas I read but am NOT covering here are Library Space (organization, displays, safety), PR/Marketing, Library Programs, Internet and Technology, Library Procedures (purchasing, filing rules), and Library Automation, and contains an index and glossary for easy reference.  

Within the handbook the SCCOE Library Services Staff has several sample policies and guidelines.  The first that I found particularly helpful is part of the section called “Library Overview.”  In it is the Sample Library Selection Policy, wherein the purpose is noted thus: “To ensure that students and teachers are provided access to a wide variety of appropriate print and nonprint resources” (p.9).  It goes on to detail the procedure by which new materials are selected for the collection.  Ironically, our district LMT group was scrambling recently to locate a similar document--not that any complaints have been made, but in preparation for the possible eventuality.  This guide and the sample policy will really help us to cement our district procedures.

The collection development section of the handbook identifies four activities that work in a circular path (nothing new here--we’ve already learned this from Dr. L): knowing patrons, their needs and interests, knowing the purpose/mission/vision of the library (on its own, and as related to school mission/vision), knowing what’s in the collection and getting rid of the stuff that doesn’t belong, and knowing how to select the best materials to fill in gaps in the collection (p. 57).  Just as we’ve done in Dr. L’s class, the handbook suggests surveying teachers about what they need from us!  While it’s important to study the standards and frameworks, it’s important to recognize the leeway granted by CCSS and NGSS to allow teachers flexibility in the way they teach toward essential learning outcomes (ELOs).  Aside from textbook selection, which is often in the hands of subject departments and the teaching and administrative staff, there is the development of the library collection.  In chapter 2 of our Collection Development Using the Collection Mapping Technique text, we are counseled to form library advisory committees, who help with collection development.  Many of our California libraries are impacted by lack of funding, and although the numbers are shifting toward more library service, a majority of schools lack sufficient library service representatives to form advisory committees.  So the school library handbook also recommends both checking district selection policies and seeking counsel from other district librarians (if available) before making library selections, especially if the library in question is being run by volunteers or paraprofessionals. (p.1,3, 75).  

Ultimately, the handbook’s goal is to provide library service training to this group of people, those who are handed a key to the library, but who are given very little training on how to implement school library services and programs.  Inasmuch as library courses in the iSchool program offer to fill the gaps that a handbook like this leaves, I find the manual to be instructive in the essentials.

Single Service Points in Libraries: A Review

Denise Lester
Frederiksen, L. (2016). Single service points in libraries: A review. Journal of Access Services, 13(2), 131-140. Retrieved from http://sfx.calstate.edu:9003/sanjose?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&ctx_id=10_1&rft.auinit=L&rft.volume=13&rft.issn=1536-7967&rft.genre=article&rft.issue=2&rft.pages=131-140&rft.eissn=1536-7975&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fwww.exlibrisgroup.com%3Abx-menu&rft.stitle=J%20ACCESS%20SERV&rft.aufirst=Linda&rft_id=urn%3Abx%3A118986955&rft.atitle=Single%20service%20points%20in%20libraries%3A%20A%20review.&rft.aulast=Frederiksen&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20access%20services&rft.coden=JASOCV&rft.date=2016-04-01&rft.au=Frederiksen%2C%20Linda&rft.epage=140&rft.spage=131&rft.auinit1=L&rft.object_id=991042727100190&rft_dat=urn%3Abx%3A118986955&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&sfx.previous_request_id=4843387

The authors discuss the implementation of single service initiatives being adapted in libraries to better manage resources (staff, budgets, etc).  The single service model looks to provide one place where patrons can get help for almost all of their library needs. The model opposes traditional library set ups of separate units such as reference, circulation, tech support, etc. to offer a more centralized, integrated user experience.  While smaller, public libraries have been using this model due to space limitations, recently medium to large academic and research libraries have begun adapting consolidated desks for many different reasons such as, re-design of space, merger of libraries, staff shortage or decreased budgets.  

Some benefits to this model include a well cross-trained staff and their ability to answer and assist patrons and a clarified service point which reduces confusion to patrons about where to get information.  The authors provide suggestions and actual library examples on the best ways to successfully implement this increasing popular model.

How To Build a High Quality Library Collection in a Multi-Format Environment: Centralized Selection at University of Wyoming Libraries

Denise Lester
Barstow, S., Macaulay, D., & Tharp, S.How to build a high-quality library collection in a multi-format environment: Centralized selection at university of wyoming libraries. Journal of Library Administration, 56(7), 790-809. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2015.1116336

The article begins with a brief history on the methodologies used in the academic library's materials selection process since few scholarly articles can be found in this area.  It continues to track the increasingly important role of the librarian and collection development from the 1950's to 1979. Specific concerns over poor communication between faculty and the library, the issue of quality control, quantity over long term and transitioning to having scholars as selectors are discussed.

Pioneers of academic collection development and their methodologies for collection management are listed and progression in thinking is seen from one model to the next, However it is not until the 2000's that academic collection development and management shifts to a centralized model that allows librarians to make decisions quickly instead of using a decentralized model where faculty/scholars choose materials which risked an unbalance collection and allocation of funds.

Finally, as electronic resources became more prominent in collection development, their management took on a different resource management system and a new position, Electronic Resource Librarian,(ERL) developed to specifically develop and manage electronic materials. Subsequently, specific subject area librarians become selectors for materials instead of one librarian selecting for all areas which later morphed into the current practice of a group of librarians who collaborate with academic departments and help build the collection more effectively.

Managing Electronic Resources: A LITA Guide

Weir, Ryan, O. (2012). Managing electronic resources: A LITA guide. Chicago: American Library Association.

     This book goes more in depth about managing electronic resources, and includes all libraries. The author talks about the balancing act librarians are faced with due to budget cuts, "on the one hand, patrons have a higher expectations for instant access to electronic resources; on the other hand, libraries have to deal with budget cuts and rising continuations pricing" (pg. 19). The book offers up ways of saving money by partnering with consortia, interlibrary loan, pay-per-view options, and patron driven acquisition.
     The author talks about copyright versus licensing and how important it is to negotiate and to be specific so everything you want as far as, "access and flexibility of use for a specific resource is spelled out in the final license document" (pg. 55).  One of the chapters I liked the best was a day in the life of an electronic resources manager. It seemed hectic and one definitely needs a high set of organizational skills to keep all the transactions in order.