1 / 0

Navigating Collection Development Trends: Print to Electronic Transition

Explore the evolution from print to electronic collections in libraries, with insights on adapting acquisitions budgets. Learn how this transition impacts students, faculty, and library resources at Grinnell College.

pete
Télécharger la présentation

Navigating Collection Development Trends: Print to Electronic Transition

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. Charting our Course: Print to Electronic and Evolving Collection Development

    Kevin Engel Grinnell College
  2. Grinnell College Libraries Back in 2006-07 – Student FTE: 1,570 Faculty: 146 Acquisitions Budget (%’s of budget): 27.5% Books 70.2% Serials & Databases 2.3% AV Book volumes (print) added by purchase: 9,998 Binding (books and serials): $37,200
  3. Fall 2007 Implemented ILLacq—when meeting certain criteria, purchasing rather than borrowing books requested via ILL. Elsevier announced the end of ScienceDirect Web Editions (would end in Spring 2008). At the time, we subscribed to 70 print journals from Elsevier; 2008 cost was $145,000. Online options promoted by Elsevier meant paying even more for less access than we had had. Were these 70 journals core to our curriculum? No (used ILL data, etc. to determine) Was there an alternative to subscription model? Yes, use pay-per-view for high-priced, low-use journals. An opportunity …
  4. ScienceDirect Pay-Per-View Process Met with three academic divisions during Feb. 2008 to discuss our plan: Cancel at least $100,000 worth of current Elsevier print subscriptions and use that money to fund pay-per-view access. Benefits: Access to more Elsevier journals (and ebooks) and more years of those journals than we could possibly afford through the traditional subscription mode—plus faster access to them than through traditional ILL delivery. Risks: There would be nothing to put on the shelf after purchase; each new reader of an article/chapter would need to get a download. Model: faculty and staff would do direct downloads; student downloads would be mediated by librarians, student research tutors, and library staff. Discovery done through Serials Solutions …
  5. Discovery--ScienceDirect
  6. ScienceDirect Pay-Per-View Process (2) Worked with individual academic departments during spring 2008 to come up with list of journals to be cancelled. Initially, 55 subscriptions were cancelled and 15 were retained in print (today, only 5 of those print subscriptions remain). Has this worked? Yes -- no complaints; it has worked and has been cost-effective; not the final solution to journal access—but it has been a good move for us for the time-being. The numbers …
  7. ScienceDirect PPV Started June 2008: 27 downloads/$594 July 2008-June 2009: 1,414 downloads/$31,108 July 2009-June 2010: 1,475/$32,450 July 2010-June 2011: 1,221/$26,862 July 2011-June 2012: 1,376/$31,373 July 2012-March 2013: 897/$20,631 Per-article download price started at $22; now $23. Total (June 2008-March 2013): 6,410 downloads/$143,018 **about the same that we paid for 70 print subscriptions in 2008; project that we would have spent $892,226 for those 70 subscriptions 2009-2013**
  8. Spring 2008 In addition, the Libraries became a member of the Center for Research Libraries—which allows access to CRL’s unique tangible collections, digitization programs, and group database purchase offers. Things looking up; just as this started though …
  9. Fall 2008—Economic Crash! Dark clouds on College budget horizon; led to Serials Review … With a smaller Library budget in 2009-10 and additional anticipated budget reductions in years ahead, we undertook a comprehensive review of all library subscriptions during the 2009-10 academic year. We worked closely with all academic departments and eventually (Spring 2009) compiled a list of possible database and journal subscription cancellations that was made available on the Libraries’ web site for additional rounds of feedback. The end result was …
  10. 2009-10 Serials Review $187,207 in immediate savings from journal and database cancellations and format changes (mainly print to online-only); we used part of this savings to purchase some new subscriptions (journals and databases) that faculty had requested. The time of this Review seemed to mark a turning point in faculty feelings toward and acceptance of online access to journals and other information. Most of the academic departments and individual faculty who had been solidly print-centric in previous years seemed to finally embrace online access and were ready to give up print subscriptions. In fact, faculty supported another pay-per-view effort …
  11. Wiley Pay-Per-View Using a process very similar to what we had done earlier with Elsevier (but focused more on the Science departments this time), faculty recommended cutting enough Wiley journal subscriptions to start a Wiley Pay-Per-View service. At the finishof the process, faculty agreed to end27 Wiley subscriptions costing approximately $55,000. Discovery was again done via Serials Solutions …
  12. Discovery--Wiley
  13. Wiley PPV The numbers … September 2010-June 2011: 287 downloads/$3,874.50 July 2011-June 2012: 617 downloads/$13,394 July 2012-February 2013: 473/$8,277.50 Per-article download price has changed from $13.50 to $23.45 to now $17.50 (it has averaged $18.55)—based on amount of deposit purchase. Total (September 2010-February 2013): 1,377 downloads/$25,546 **$55,000 in Wiley journal subscriptions were cancelled to fund this service; project that we would have spent $189,196 for those subscriptions 2011-2013** This has also proved successful—which led to …
  14. Credit Card In December 2010, our librarians started doing additional on-demand purchasing using a College credit card. This is not a formal pay-per-view program and is used more sparingly. But, when the circumstances are right, it allows us to buy materials and get them into the hands of our students and facultymore rapidly (when needed) and more cheaply than ILL may allow. The numbers … December 2010-March 2013: 110 transactions/$2,995.26 **average price/download -- $27.23**
  15. A New Way In fall 2011, we began discussions about formally changing our philosophy and practices to fit a different way of doing acquisitions. Learning from our efforts of recent years (use of pay-per-view for journals, rapid purchasing and processing of books—rather than borrowing them through ILL, etc.), we began a move to an even more on-demand model … which led to …
  16. Circulation and Space Analysis In November 2011, our colleague Beth Bohstedt did a 10-year analysis of our circulation patterns … At the same time, we knew that we were/are running out of shelf space especially in our main library (Burling) but also in our off-site storage facility. What did we find … and what could we do?
  17. We were overbuying …
  18. Doing okay some places; but had very low circulation in many other areas …
  19. Formal Changes … Starting January 2012, we made title-by-title ebook purchasing (using Ebrary) a regular part of our acquisitions process. There has not been consistent demand for ebooks on our campus, but they will have to become a larger part of our collection as time goes on—both for space reasons and because of publisher evolution. Starting late spring 2012 and especially fall 2012, we made a conscious decision that our consulting librarians would do much less buying to “build the collection.” Faculty have always been involved in collection development; now we are pushing more book and book review information to them electronically using Choice Online and GOBI (and working more closely with them) to particularly encourage them to recommend/buy the books, films, etc. they need for their teaching and class assignments. We would like faculty to be the main source of purchase decisions.
  20. Choice Online
  21. GOBI
  22. The Reality and the Goal Faculty buying has been very uneven in the past; Will they become more consistent in the future—with our help? Time will tell … We are looking for the “sweet spot”—the optimal amount of librarian buying in combinationwith faculty recommendations to bring the right books, journals, databases, av formats, etc. to campus that our community needs and will actually use …
  23. What else have we done? During Fall 2012 and Spring 2013, we have undertaken a thorough review of every serial shelved in the reference area and every library standing order (700+ of them). We have also continued to make some journal cuts (on a case-by-case basis) for journals that have increased in price by 8% or more. 2012-13 savings from these reviews have been over $42,000 from journal and database cancellations and format changes, and an estimated $12,700 for standing order cancellations. This has helped blunt recent yearly serials inflation of 8%. In 2012, we helped start and became part of the “Midwest College Group” consortium for access to 1,800+ Springer journals from 1997 forward (group deal with annual commitment).
  24. Discovery--Springer
  25. What would we like to do in the near future? Demand-driven acquisition for ebooks (using GOBI/YBP—hope to start yet this spring) Demand-driven acquisition for print books (probably using GOBI/YBP—perhaps start in summer/fall)
  26. Where are we now? Remember Grinnell in 2006-07 – Student FTE: 1,570 Faculty: 146 Aquisitions Budget (%’s of budget): 27.5% Books 70.2% Serials & Databases 2.3% AV Book volumes (print) added by purchase: 9,998 Binding (books and serials): $37,200
  27. Grinnell College in 2013 (from 2007) Student FTE: increased 2.6% to 1611 Faculty: increased 15.1% to 168 Acquisitions Budget: Books decreased to 21.6% Serials & Databases increased to 76.9% AV decreased to 1.5% Book volumes (print) added by purchase: decreased 50.5% to 4,951 Binding (books and serials): decreased 62.8% to $13,823
  28. Thoughts—what will the future hold? We will make more of our acquisitions/collection development decisions based on data. We are buying and will buy fewer books in all formats. But, we will buy more of those books on demand/just-in-time. We will spend more money on serials and databases due, in many cases, just to price inflation (more money but the same or less content). We will buy more online primary source collections. We will buy fewer tangible videos and recordings but spend more money on streaming media. We will buy more articles and other non-book materials on demand, just in time; there will continue to be less emphasis on buying formats to put on our shelves. We will do more (and we will have to do more) cooperative work with other libraries in order to succeed and prosper (and just plain survive)—group buying, shared print, shared online. What are your thoughts? Agree? Disagree?
  29. Thank you! Kevin Engel engelk@grinnell.edu 641-269-4234
More Related