1 / 30

Carol Hansen Montgomery, Ph.D. Dean of Libraries, Drexel University June 3, 2002

An Electronic Journal Impact Study: The Factors that Change when an Academic Library Migrates from Print. Carol Hansen Montgomery, Ph.D. Dean of Libraries, Drexel University June 3, 2002 Funded in part by a grant from the IMLS, NR-00027. Introduction. Institutional Environment

gianna
Télécharger la présentation

Carol Hansen Montgomery, Ph.D. Dean of Libraries, Drexel University June 3, 2002

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. An Electronic Journal Impact Study: The Factors that Change when an Academic Library Migrates from Print Carol Hansen Montgomery, Ph.D. Dean of Libraries, Drexel University June 3, 2002 Funded in part by a grant from the IMLS, NR-00027

  2. Introduction • Institutional Environment • Developing E-Journal Collection • Operational Impact IMLS-funded Research • Impact on Users • Lessons Learned • Next Steps

  3. Drexel University • Technologically Oriented • Urban • Undergraduates: 10,000 • Graduate Students: 2,500 • Faculty: 500 • Research Intensive

  4. W.W. Hagerty Library • Centralized • 100K square feet • 400K volumes • 40 FTE staff • $4M budget for 2001/02 • Fully wired & wireless network • 100 public access desktop computers • 50 circulating laptops

  5. E-Journal Collection Goal in 1998: Migrate to an all electronic journal collection as quickly as possible

  6. E-Journal Migration

  7. Institutional Readiness • Administrative support • Computer literate users • Infrastructure in place • Poor current journal collection • Major budget increase • Distance education programs • Resource-rich environment

  8. Developing the E-J Collection • Much more complex • Many more variables than print • Purchased in package “Deals” • Price/Contract negotiation ------------------------------------------------ • Database to manage selection • Large transition period complete

  9. Additional Variables • Comparability • Subscription or full-text • Competitive sources • Pricing plans • Access restrictions • Provision of statistics • Linking capabilities ------------------------------------------------ • Archiving policy • Lending via ILL

  10. Print Collection 2002 • “Browsing” Journals • Fashion and Design Journals • Core Library Science Journals • Other Journals not yet Available Electronically

  11. IMLS Project Goals Case Study • Impact on staff activities • Impact on costs: reduced, increased, re-allocated? Stimulate Research • Develop a methodology

  12. Methods* • Calculate capital costs, amortize Space for print Computing infrastructure for electronic • Calculate operational costs Staff costs Other operational costs e.g. subscriptions, binding • Calculate subscription costs • Compute/organize use data *Using King model.

  13. Impact on Staff & Costs: Measured by Department • Administration • Technical Services • Infrastructure/Systems & Space • Circulation/Access • Information Services ------------------------------------------------- • Document Delivery

  14. Analyzed by Function • Re-organized staff data to: Acquisitions Collection development Physical processing Record-keeping Reference Teaching Communications Public relations

  15. Research Question • Hypothesis: Electronic journals are less expensive than print journals.

  16. DEFINITIONSWhat is an Electronic Journal? • E-Journal [pure]: Individual subs or publisher packages • Aggregator: Individual journals from different publishers • Full text database: Search tool with selected full-text

  17. DEFINITIONSWhat is a Print Journal [Serial]? • Continuations/Annuals? • Newsletters? • Newspapers?

  18. DEFINITIONSWhat costs matter? • What is the unit of measure? Cost per: Journal title? Journal volume? Journal issue? Journal article? Journal “pages”? “words”? Article use?

  19. DEFINITIONSWhat is a Use? • Print Re-shelving an issue or volume? • Electronic Opening html file? Downloading a PDF document? Click on E-J database link More than X time spent viewing? What about duplicate views/session?

  20. Impact: Per Title Costs Vary [2002] • Print “only” 370 $112/title • E-subscriptions 2,542 $137/title • Aggregator 347 $ 83/title • Full-text database* 11,200 $ 5/title *Allocated half the cost of the database to the electronic journals. Non-unique.

  21. Use Data • Print (98/99) Bound & Current Use • All 1,710 titles 45,000 • Print (00/01) • All 300+ titles 34,000 • E-Journals (00/01) Measurable Use • Individual sub. 2,542 titles 100,881 • Aggregator 347 titles 23,058 • Full-text dbase 11,200 titles* 269,555 *Not unique.

  22. Cost per Use (00/01) • Print Journals $1 • Individual subscriptions $3 • Aggregator $1 • Full-text database* $0.21 * Allocated half the cost of the database.

  23. Cost/Use Range • Print $1 to $50 • Individual subscriptions $2 to $18 • Aggregator $0.42 to $ 5 • Full-text database $0.11 to $ 1

  24. Impact: E-Journal Operational Costs Offset Print Savings • Higher level staff required • Selection/acquisitions costs high • Statistics collection not automatic • Onerous “claiming” procedure • Inventory control made difficult by E-Journal “volatility” • Demanding of administrator time

  25. Impact: Lower Use of Print Re-Shelving Statistics

  26. Impact: Development Costs High E-J Management Database • MSQL database • PEARL to create html • Features: Creates web pages Search for print or E-J title Allow updating by non-techie

  27. Impact: Users Prefer E-Journals • 84% prefer E-Journals to print • Increasing use of E-Journals • Need for training/awareness

  28. Impact: Users Satisfied[1=no agreement; 10=strong agreement] Mean • E-Journals save time 7.7 • E-Journals make work easier 8.6 • E-Journals result in better quality research 8.1 • E-Js enable me to find more 8.5

  29. Lessons Learned • Don’t depend on full-text databases for core journals • Keep a larger browsing collection • Assume a limited paper archiving responsibility if justified • Re-develop all related policies, e.g. binding

  30. Next Steps • Complete analysis • Compare to previous studies of print journal economics • Measure cost to users of electronic vs print journals

More Related