[Original posting appeared on this topic in COLLDV-L no. 1862 and is
reproduced below; the responses follow it.]
From: Nancy Carriar <ncarriar_at_d.umn.edu>
Sorry if this has already been discussed before, but I have just renewed
my membership on this list after a lapse of several years.
Question: wouldn't it be better to retain books which were once on the
books for small/medium-sized library lists and have been removed than to
keep the many books which never made the lists??? Is this too simplistic
a way to weed? Or, doesn't weeding involve a number of criteria
determined by the library doing the weeding?
Nancy Carriar
U of MN - Duluth
===========================================================================
(1) From: Earl Lee <ewayne_at_mail.pittstate.edu>
This seems like a very inappropriate way to weed a collection. You
really need to tie in use statistics, and even then you need to double
check with faculty so that you don't discard an underused but valuable
resource. I am also very much against relying on "lists" or judging
books by whether or not they make some generic list-- witness the
controversy over the recent 100 best books list
Earl Lee
=========================================================================
(2) From: "James Tobin" <RJT_at_gml.lib.uwm.edu>
You surely do want to use multiple criteria. In general weeding should be
on a book-by-book basis, considering:
(1) the physical condition of the book;
(2) the inherent worth of the book; even past designation on the lists you
refer to provides presumptive evidence of this. Some books do depreciate
in what might be called "intellectual value" over time, though, and some
more than others. This will vary notably by subject matter, among other
considerations: an old literary work is much more likely to be of
continuing value than an outdated medical work, for instance. The more
subject expertise you can bring to this difficult and important decision
process the better.
(3) likely or possible future use of the book by the clientele the library
serves. The more limited your space the more you will have to gauge
likely, rather than possible, use in a non-research collection. In a small
collection this may require painful decisions to weed some good books. In
an academic library you will want to weigh quality considerations over
space needs to the utmost extent possible.
James Tobin
Collection Management Librarian
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
=========================================================================
(3) From: Prof Richard H Werking <rwerking_at_nadn.navy.mil>
Of course, you're absolutely right. It's a simple and true point, but
not at all simplistic.
Richard Werking
U.S. Naval Academy
Received on Thu Nov 05 1998 - 17:35:16 EST