Collection Development
LIS510
Collection of a Modern Library
Includes:
• Tangible objects (books, videos, sound
recordings, etc.) that the library owns
• Local intangible (electronic) resources
owned and controlled by the library (CDROMs and the like)
• Tangible objects owned by other libraries,
but accessible to local patrons by means of
union catalogs and interlibrary lending
schemes
Collection of a Modern Library
Includes (cont.):
• Remote intangible resources not owned by
the library but to which the library gives
access
Access vs. Ownership
• Ownership
– Print collections
locally stored and
browsable
– Size of collection =
Value
– Just in case acquisition
policy
• Access
– Electronically
browsable networked
collections
– Availability and
deliverability = Value
– Just in time acquisition
policy
Digital Library Collection Might
Include Links to
• Print resource directories or bibliographies
which have been converted to electronic
form
• A range of services that may have been
adapted to an online environment such as
reference service, interlibrary loan and
document delivery request services
Digital Library Collection (cont.)
• Internal resources that have been digitized
such as pathfinders, reserves lists, floor
plans, images, descriptive information about
the library, etc.
• Content specifically developed for the Web
environment such as interactive tutorials,
hyperlinked papers and online textbooks,
course and workshops
Digital Library Collection (cont.)
• Value added collections of links to Web
based resources organized in a manner that
is meaningful to the library user population
• Free and/or fee-based electronic resources
delivered over the Web such as full-text,
bibliographic or image databases
Collection Development Plan
• No library acquires everything published in
traditional formats
• Selection decisions are made
• Materials acquired are made MORE
accessible than materials not acquired
• Inconvenient to consult materials not
acquired
Collection Development (cont.)
• Library users rely on collection
development librarians to acquire useful
materials
• Collection development librarians serve as
as filters between users and torrent of
publications
Roles for a Collection
Development Librarian
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Liaison with the library’s users
Circulation and user studies
Evaluating the collection
Liaison with other libraries/resource sharing
Writing collection policies
Selecting current materials
Retrospective collection
Roles for a Collection
Development Librarian (cont.)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Selection for preservation
Weeding
Vendor relations
Acquisitions tasks
Censorship and intellectual freedom issues
Budgeting, including justification and
monitoring
Public Library Collection Needs
•
General reading
–
–
•
Special interests
–
–
–
–
–
–
•
Business
Home repair
Hobbies
Travel
Cooking
…
Educational use
–
–
–
•
Information
Entertainment
Elementary school
High school
College
Special groups
–
–
–
Children (various ages)
Non-English
Handicapped
School Library Collection Needs
• Support of instruction
– Supplementary reading
– AV
– Student research projects
• General student use
– Self-instruction
– Entertainment
• Teacher use
– Class preparation
– Professional development
– Professional awareness
College Library Collection Needs
• Support of instruction
–
–
–
–
Supplementary reading: reserves
AV
Student research projects
Student research
• General student and faculty use
– Self-instruction
– Entertainment
• Faculty use
– Class preparation
– Professional development
– Professional awareness
Research Library Collection Needs
• Support of instruction
–
–
–
–
Supplementary reading: reserves
AV
Student research projects
Student research
• General student and faculty use
– Self-instruction
– Entertainment
• Faculty use
–
–
–
–
–
Class preparation
Professional development
Professional awareness
Future faculty research
Archival familiarity
Basic Criteria for Selection
•
•
•
•
•
•
Needs of users
Balance
Suitable academic levels
Quality
Timeliness
Permanent value
Criteria for Selection: Librarian’s
Role
•
•
•
•
•
•
Meet expressed needs of users
Meet implied needs of users
Anticipate needs of users
Meet needs of all groups of users
Improve “quality” available to users
Meet needs that should have but don’t
How to Judge Needs
•
•
•
•
Use of similar items
Specific requests
Prior requests for similar items
Community analysis
Criteria for Selection: Cost and
Format
• Cost
– Cost per use
– Means of payment
•
•
•
•
Subscription
One-time
Pay-per-use
Purchase + annual fee
• Format
– Size
– Manageability
– Media requirements
How to Judge
• Direct examination
–
–
–
–
Approval
Exhibits
Other collections
Dealers
• Partial examination
– Tables of contents
– Excerpts
• Precedent
– Previous editions
– Similar items
How to Judge
• Advice
– Faculty
– Library specialists
– Other libraries
• Reviews
– Intended for libraries
• Choice
• LJ
– Intended for readers
• NY Review of Books
• NY Times Book Review
• Professional journals
Significant Details
•
•
•
•
Publisher
Place
Date
Paperback/Hard cover
– Reprint?
• Size
– Too large/too small
• Price
– Too expensive
• Scholarly apparatus
– Index, bibliographical references
• Author/Author’s affiliation
• Source of reviews
How to Find Out
• Advertisements
–
–
–
–
Publishers catalogs
Fliers
E-mail
Phone
• Listings
–
–
–
–
Dealer’s slips
Dealer’s e-mail listings
Dealer’s notification services
American Book Publishing Record
How to Judge Quality
• Academic level
• Content
– Relevance
– Coverage
– Timeliness
• Reputation
–
–
–
–
–
Publisher
Author
Author’s institution
Contributors
Series
Deselection
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Excess (superseded) copies
Superseded editions
Out-of-date items
Material no longer used
Subjects no longer relevant
Temporary medium to be replaced
Damaged items (or replace)
Superseded medium
Alternatives
– Storage area
– Storage library or regional storage facility
Shelving Alternatives
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Closed stack
Closed stack, except selected users
Closed stacks, except selected materials
Compact shelving
Regular shelving
Special shelving: reference, etc.
Display shelving
Storage libraries
Processing Alternatives
•
•
•
•
•
•
Pre-processed
Keep as paperback
Pamphlet bind
Library binding
Reinforced binding
Periodicals?
Circulation Alternatives
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Limited time
Different loan periods for different groups
Short loans
Reserve
Reference
Building use
Non-circulating
Non-circulating, but …
ILL Alternatives
•
•
•
•
•
Speed
Copyright
Use of commercial sources
Charging
Unmediated
Document Delivery Alternatives
•
•
•
•
•
Express mail
Fax
Internet fax (Ariel)
PDF attachments
Direct to user
Collection Development Policies:
Three Approaches
• Making electronic resources fit into the
patterns of tradition policies
• Creating separate policies dealing only with
electronic resources
• Mainstreaming electronic resources into a
reworked, integrated collection
development policy
Organization of Collection
Development
• Research: Asst. Dir. with FT bibliographers and
PT selectors
• Special: Users select, Librarian acquires
• College: Committee and/or selectors share with
faculty
• Public: centralized with branch profiles or
individual selectors (with community)
• School: Centralized or individual selectors (with
teachers)
Depths (& Levels) of Collecting
• Conspectus (Research
Libraries)
–
–
–
–
–
0 = out of scope
1 = minimal
2 = basic
3 = instructional
4 = research
• Plus (College, public &
school)
– a = basic
– b = intermediate
– c = advanced
• Or (Public …)
–
–
–
–
Recreational
Informational
Instructional
Reference
Traditional Selection: Title by Title
Firm Order
•
•
•
•
•
•
Read all reviews
Examine book
Read book
Read reviews
Compare reviews
Decide based upon
criteria
• NOT POSSIBLE
Vendors and Libraries Work
Together
• Blanket and standing orders
• Examination plans
• Approval plans
Traditional Collection Development
Policies
• Informing and directing
– Describe the library’s user community,
institutional mission and user needs
– Provide selection criteria and guidelines
– Identify appropriate selection tools
– Define process for identifying materials for
weeding, cancellation, storage and replacement
– Facilitate consistency and communication
among selectors
Traditional Policies (cont.)
• Informing and directing (cont.)
– Establish who is responsible for various aspects
of the collection development process
– Serve as a training document for new selectors
– Provide guidelines for dealing with complaints
about materials
– Provide guidelines for dealing with gifts
– Identify strengths and weakness of current
collection
Traditional Policies (cont.)
• Informing and directing (cont.)
– Serve as communication vehicle
• Protecting
– Protect intellectual freedom
– Inform library’s governing and/or funding body
of the library’s current direction
– Provide clear and carefully described rationale
for the library’s collection goals and practices
Traditional Policies (cont.)
• Protecting (cont.)
– Make clear the principles under which
decisions are made to protect the library against
charges of bias and irresponsible behavior
– Protect library from pressure to acquire or
provide access to inappropriate or irrelevant
sources
– Act as an information tool
Traditional Policies (cont.)
• Issue to address for electronic resources
– Cancellation or retention of print resources
when electronic version available
– Provisions of limitations on remote access to
electronic resources owned or licensed by
library
– Justification of new costs
– Location of resources and cost of maintaining
links
Traditional Policies (cont.)
• Issue to address for electronic resources
– Possible duplication of e-journals or databases
based on bundles purchased from aggregators
– Negotiation of terms of licenses
– Consideration of preservation and long-term
access to resource
– Technical requirements for access
– Cancellation problems which include whether
library loses all rights to materials previously
licensed
Traditional Policies (cont.)
• Issue to address for electronic resources
– Performance questions
– Training of staff and users in use of new
resources
– Access and organizational issues concerning
whether catalog
– Cooperative collection development issues such
as ability to provide copies on ILL
Separate Policies
• Can work, but usually only if the library has
plans to obtain a limited amount of
electronic information
• As more and more electronic resources are
acquired, need for integrated policy
becomes more apparent
• On balance, separate policies should be
avoided
Integrated Policies
• Integrate electronic resources into library’s
overall collection development policy
• Advantage: allows for electronic resources
to be placed into plan for overall goals of
library
• Leads to unity of resources
• Avoids potentially unfocused grouping of
electronic resources in various “spots”
Integrated Policies (cont.)
• Considerations for integrated policy
– Provisions allowing selectors to learn about and
see which electronic resources would fill gaps
in the library’s print collection
– Provision for inclusion of information about
selection tools for electronic resources
– Allowance for more rational approach to
funding purchase of resources, both print and
electronic, when viewed as whole
Integrated Policies (cont.)
• Considerations for integrated policy (cont.)
– Provision to help staff when challenged by
users who may resist inclusion in the collection
of electronic resources
– Allowance for more flexibility regarding new
formats and types of resources
– Encouragement of collection development
across formats
Integrated Policies (cont.)
• Issues unique to electronics resources to be
added to integrated policy
–
–
–
–
Licensing issues
Selection tools
Selection criteria
Selection by item or by collection of resources
(such as a Web site containing lits of links) or
both
Integrated Policies (cont.)
–
–
–
–
–
Bibliographic access issues
Access vs. ownership
Selection issues: which format
Preservation issues
Duplication/overlap issues between print and
electronic resources
– Potential changes in selection process
(committee vs. individual)
– Technical issues
Additional Issues
• Acceptable use policies
– May be needed as appendix to collection
development policy
– ALA guidelines for public libraries
• Revision of collection development policies
– Policies should be reviewed and revised
regularly
– Policy should be dynamic
Responsibility for Selection
• Subject Specialists/Bibliographers
+ Have the knowledge of their disciplines and specialized
user needs
+ Can involve faculty in selection decisions
+ Are in a good position to publicize new acquisitions
+ Can help distribute the workload
+ Understand budget issues and collection policies
– May not understand all the access and licensing issues
– May defer to traditional or primary responsibilities
– Will not participate equally, resulting in uneven
offerings
Responsibility for Selection (cont.)
• Electronic Resources Coordinator
+ Has the motivation and commitment
+ Will understand the issues, the technology, and library
systems
+ Is in a position to develop access interfaces
± May or may not have authority to make budgetary
decisions
– Lacks the subject expertise for most of the subjects
– Will not be able to do it all alone, may lack help
– May not understand collection policy/budgetary issues
Responsibility for Selection (cont.)
• Acquisitions/Serials Librarian
+ Will understand pricing and licensing options
+ Will understand serials access issues
+ Is in touch with vendors and aware of the
marketplace and pricing issues
± May or may not have prior involvement with
collection development
– Will usually not have direct experience with
users
Responsibility for Selection (cont.)
• Reference Librarians
+ Will probably have experience selecting and supporting
electronic resources
+ Have close contact with users
+ Are accustomed to the collaborative approach
+ Can help distribute the workload
± May or may not be subject specialists
– May not participate equally
– May defer to primary responsibilities
Responsibility for Selection (cont.)
• A Designated Group or Team
+
+
+
±
±
Can draw upon cross-functional expertise
Can act as communication conduit throughout the library
Can share the workload
May or may not generate synergy, build consensus
May or may not have the authority to make budgetary
decisions
± May or may not have clearly defined leadership
– May be slow to make decisions
– May lack subject expertise or collection development
experience
Five Criteria for Web Evaluation
Evaluation of Web
documents
1. Accuracy of Web
documents
– Who wrote the page and
can you contact him or
her?
– What is the purpose of
the document and why
was it produced?
– Is this person qualified to
write this document?
How to interpret the
basics
1. Accuracy
– Make sure the author
provides e-mail or a
contact address/phone
number
Five Criteria for Web Evaluation
2. Authority of Web
documents
– Who published the
document and is it
separate from the
"webmaster"?
– Check the domain of the
document; what
institution publishes it?
– Does the publisher list
his or her qualifications?
2. Authority
– Know the distinction
between author and
Webmaster.
– What credentials are
listed for the author(s)?
– Where is the document
published? Check URL
domain
Five Criteria for Web Evaluation
3. Objectivity of Web
Documents
– What goals/objectives
does this page meet?
– How detailed is the
information?
– What opinions (if any)
are expressed by the
author?
3. Objectivity
– Determine if page is a
mask for advertising; if
so, information might
be biased.
– View any web page as
you would an
infomercial on
television. Ask
yourself why was this
written and for whom?
Five Criteria for Web Evaluation
4. Currency of Web
Documents
– When was it produced?
– When was it updated?
– How up-to-date are the
links (if any)?
4. Currency
– How many dead links
are on the page?
– Are the links current or
updated regularly?
– Is the information in
the page outdated?
Five Criteria for Web Evaluation
5. Coverage of the Web
documents
– Are the links (if any)
evaluated and do they
complement the
documents' theme?
– Is it all images or a
balance of text and
images?
– Is the information
presented cited correctly?
5. Coverage
– If page requires special
software to view the
information, how much are
you missing if you don't
have the software?
– Is it free, or is there a fee to
obtain the information?
– Is there an option for text
only, or frames, or a
suggested browser for better
viewing?
Putting It All Together
• Accuracy: If your page lists the author and
institution that published the page and
provides a way of contacting him/her, and
…
• Authority: If your page lists the author
credentials and its domain is preferred
(.edu, .gov, .org, .net), and …
Putting It All Together
• Objectivity: If your page provides accurate
information with limited advertising and is
objective in presenting the information, and
…
• Currency: If your page is current and
updated regularly (as stated on the page)
and the links (if any) are also up-to-date,
and …
Putting It All Together
• Coverage: If you can view the information
properly--not limited to fees, browser
technology, or software requirements, then
…
• You may have a higher-quality Web page
that could be of value to your users.
Putting It All Together
• After some practice and experience, selecting electronic
resources will become second nature
• We are continuing a tradition of selecting quality resources
for our users based on same criteria we have always used
to build quality collections for our users
– contains useful information
– language and level appropriate
– easy to use
– produced by knowledgeable experts
– enhances existing subject holdings
– subject matter is supportive of user community needs
Questions for Class Discussion
• What is the difference between electronic
publishing and digital libraries?
• Who is responsible for ensuring access to
information – the creator, publisher,
librarian, archivist, other?
• Isn’t digitization a preservation strategy?