ACQNET: Re: Allocation Formulas (3 replies)

Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 16:11:17 -0400  
From: Patricia Pettijohn <ppettijohn_at_fmhi.usf.edu>
Subject: RE: ACQNET: Monographic Allocation Formula (Reply #1)

Potential drawbacks include failure to support research faculty; inadequate
support of departments teaching required courses, but with relatively few
majors or graduates; inadequate support of interdisciplinary programs and
minors; existence of discipline-specific endowed funds for some departments,
and not others; and the discrepancy between what faculty need and want, and
the number of graduates from their department.

For example, although business schools may have many graduates, actual use
of monographic titles by business faculty and students may not require a
large monographs allocation.  History departments, often with a heavy
teaching load in required courses, may not have enough graduates to support
the kind of allocation they need to stay abreast in a field dominated by
monographic publication.

In some cases, as with physics and math, although they may teach many
(required and freshmen) courses, they may have few majors, and fewer
graduates; in the case of math and physics, their actual use, and perceived
need, for monographs is often low, so an emphasis on the number and status
of graduates would work, but only coincidentally.

What outcome measures, other than the number of graduates, do departments
consider, and why?  The number of graduates is less central to the mission
of departments with a large number of research faculty, whose central
mission may be obtaining outside grants and funding, and whose need for
monographs may not be met by formulae emphasizing numbers of grads.

Also of consideration is the model of new fields advocated by Keresztesi,
where one of the early developmental stages of a new field emphasizes
monographs, so that new fields require additional funding of monographs
sometime after they are new and before they are established.

Finally, applied and multi-disciplinary fields have needs that are not
necessarily well reflected by numbers of graduates, since they may issue
graduate certificates.

I am interested in your question, and would be interested in responses sent
to you off list.  Please post the answers you receive to the list.
Thanks,

Patricia Pettijohn
Research Librarian
Louis de la Parte FMHI Research Library
University of South Florida
13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd.
Tampa, FL  33612
Phone 813-974-8400
Fax 813-974-7242
ppettijohn_at_fmhi.usf.edu
***********************************************************************
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 06:48:45 -0500                
From: Betty L. Nirnberger <bln_at_psulias.psu.edu>
Subject: ACQNET: Monographic Allocation Formula (Reply #2)


Penn State University Libraries uses a weighted formula based
      approach for our Campus College Libraries that utilizes the
      factorsyou are interested in.


Major Factors and Weights:
 *  Degree Enrollment (Head Count) - Weight = 3
 *  Credit Hours by Course Level - Weight =3
                Internal Weighting: 0-399(1); 400-499(2); 500+(3)
 *  Programs by Level of Degrees - Weight=8
                Internal Weighting:
                      Science and Engineering Programs (+.5 multiplier)
                      AA(1); B(2), M(3)
                      Other Programs
                      AA(1); B(2), M(3), D(4)

 *  Faculty - Weight =2
 *  Circulation - Weight =2
We use only official source data primarily obtained by Penn State
University Budget Office. I hope this is helpful to you. If you are
interested in further information, please contact Bonnie MacEwan,
Assistant Dean for Collections.

Betty Nirnberger, Budget Coordinator
Fiscal and Data Services
(814) 865-1858 
**********************************************************************
 Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 09:52:52 -0500        
From: Roy Ziegler <rziegler_at_mailer.fsu.edu> 
Subject: Allocation formulas revisited (Reply #3)

Thank you for your comments and suggestions regarding allocation formulas
for the monographs budget.  The most important component that I wanted
feedback on was building the formula from a degrees conferred
base.  Several of you have advised me against such a thing for some well
argued reasons.

I will be returning to the drawing board along with a few other pencil
holders this time to see what we can come up next. Your comments will be
along for the ride and will be useful to us as we proceed with our
discussions. Will let you know when we've arrived at the perfect formula
(for us).

Roy Ziegler
Collection Development Unit
Florida State University