[Eril-l] FW: [EXTERNAL] request for examples of libraries almost entirely non-firm ordering, print and e

Wed May 10 13:17:34 PDT 2017

At Illinois Wesleyan University, our practices and philosophy very much
mirror those of Tufts Library.  We have had a robust liaison program for
many years, so library faculty are intimately connected with our faculty
and students (teaching, reference, departmental search committees, research
consultations with students, service on major campus committees, etc etc)
.  Library faculty do some selection on their own (less and less of this),
but most is done in collaboration with teaching faculty and with knowledge
of the curriculum.  We are very flexible in fund allocations and in format
preference, depending on discipline and use.  For example, in addition to
continuing with firm orders purchases for print and e-books, CDs, DVDs,
etc., we have redirected funds to Kanopy PDA, JSTOR DDA, ACLS Humanities
ebooks, Get It Now, and Knowledge Unlatched (to support open access
efforts).  We have not opted for large ebook packages/programs.

And yes, we are a small private institution.  However, we are definitely
NOT among the wealthy; our collections budget was reduced and has now been
flat for several years, nor do we have any endowed library funds.  Which
means we are very intentional about where we put our money.  We take full
advantage of usage reports but that is just one factor among many in our
assessments.  So wealth is not at all a factor in our collection
philosophy.  However, we are small (1800), we do not have a graduate
program, nor do we have an online program.

Marcia Thomas
Collections Librarian
Ames Library
Illinois Wesleyan University
Bloomington, Illinois
309-556-3808
mthomas at iwu.edu

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Diane Westerfield <
Diane.Westerfield at coloradocollege.edu> wrote:

> It’s true that we are a small private liberal arts school, heavily
> residential, sitting on a big endowment. Our library has endowed funds that
> are restricted to book purchases, but almost none of those funds are
> restricted to a particular subject so there’s no strife over who spends
> what.  We are often encouraged to keep on spending those funds down as much
> as possible.
>
>
>
> We are also small enough that all librarians besides the director wear
> many hats – we have liaison duties, reference desk shifts, and particular
> specialties; most of us are supervisors. Humanities librarian also
> supervises Circulation, Gov Docs librarian has Econ/Business as a
> department, etc.  We had a massive weeding project and were all expected to
> work on our areas and chip in on the “ownerless” sections.
>
>
>
> While weeding Sociology I noticed that almost all the books who still had
> date due slips had checkout stamps on them; some of them circulated quite a
> bit. Being a smaller institution we couldn’t go with the university “buy
> all the books” strategy; the sociology librarians of times past were very
> focused on maintaining a collection that was actually used.
>
>
>
> We are a  small high-touch campus. You get to know a lot of the faculty
> even outside your department and to know “Professor XYZ has the same class
> very year, and always assigns papers on political history of a particular
> geographical area and time range”. You get similar questions every year,
> for years. So if you stumble across a newly published book that could be
> useful to a student in the class and it’s not in the collection, you might
> as well buy it even if it’s not in your subject area. Particularly when
> it’s interdisciplinary, the title may not come up on anybody’s regular
> notifications. Keeping the students supplied with research material is a
> team effort.
>
>
>
> I feel like my electronic resource work does give way (some) to my other
> duties but on the other hand, the e-resource work is heavily informed by
> the public-facing and collection development work. So it’s a balancing act
> of time and priorities, while at the same time one corner of work enhances
> all the others. Admittedly, I enjoy selecting (and weeding!) books so this
> “Let it all go to DDA and packages” philosophy seems rather unpleasant.
>
>
>
> Diane Westerfield, Electronic Resources & Serials Librarian
>
> Tutt Library, Colorado College
>
> diane.westerfield at coloradocollege.edu
>
> (719) 389-6661
>
> (719) 389-6082 (fax)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Eril-l [mailto:eril-l-bounces at lists.eril-l.org] *On Behalf Of *Karen
> Jensen
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 10, 2017 12:55 PM
> *Cc:* eril-l
> *Subject:* Re: [Eril-l] FW: [EXTERNAL] request for examples of libraries
> almost entirely non-firm ordering, print and e
>
>
>
> Are we seeing a difference in philosophy here due to the nature of the
> institution? Smaller, wealthier schools maintaining traditional selection
> methods and favoring print, versus larger state-funded institutions going
> for the best bang for the buck? It is not inexpensive to have a host of
> subject librarians selecting printed books title by title, nor cataloging
> and shelving them, whether they are ever used or not. Much of what we have
> chosen to do has been driven by financial necessity, but also by patron
> demand; they want e-books and lots of them, and DDA allows us to make more
> titles available for consideration - 10 times more titles (or more!) than
> we could ever dream of acquiring in print. I'm not getting much faculty or
> student feedback for print; what print requests we receive, we purchase as
> requested. But the DDA e-book models are much used here, for the reasons
> stated above.
>
>
> Karen Jensen
> Collection Development Officer
> Rasmuson Library
> University of Alaska Fairbanks
>
> 907-474-6695 <(907)%20474-6695>
>
> kljensen at alaska.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Steve Oberg <steve.oberg at wheaton.edu>
> wrote:
>
> This is a good discussion and I just wanted to briefly point out that our
> library has deliberately chosen _not_ to go in this direction. I realize
> this is contrary to what Melissa originally asked about. We looked
> carefully at ebook DDA a few years ago, along with considering how we’d
> like to handle ebooks vs. print books overall, and concluded that ebook DDA
> was not well suited to our environment and/or philosophies for collections
> and user access. So aside from purchasing an occasional large ebook set
> (think Springer Nature, e.g.), most of our ebooks are individually
> selected, and we have specific criteria in our collection development
> policy for when ebooks are preferred rather than print. Put another way, we
> still prefer print over e in the main for monographs. Our subject
> librarians make most selections with a few minor exceptions.
>
>
>
> The opposite is true for journals, where we prefer e subscriptions and
> have a big pay-per-view initiative for journal articles that’s going into
> its sixth year. In addition, we have had a successful print DDA program for
> a few years now.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
> Steve Oberg
> Assistant Professor of Library Science
> Group Leader for Resource Description and Digital Initiatives
> Wheaton College (IL)
> +1 (630) 752-5852
>
> NASIG Vice-President/President-Elect
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Eril-l mailing list
> Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org
> http://lists.eril-l.org/listinfo.cgi/eril-l-eril-l.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Eril-l mailing list
> Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org
> http://lists.eril-l.org/listinfo.cgi/eril-l-eril-l.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20170510/f34acde8/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 17489 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20170510/f34acde8/attachment-0001.png>