CDL:(Responses) Automated jrnl use data

From: John Abbott <abbottjp_at_conrad.appstate.edu>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 16:35:26 -0400
To: Colldv-l <COLLDV-L_at_usc.edu>
From: Beth Jacoby <bjacoby_at_hshsl.umaryland.edu>

There were MANY responses to our query concerning the 
automation of (print) journal use studies.   Thanks to all who 
responded.   A summary follows.

* Do you count usage for bound journals?  
Unbound? Both?

    Everyone who responded scanned both bound and 
    unbound, and in some cases microform as well.

* How many times a year do you do it?

    All but one library scans the used journals 
    continuously (at least once a day, in many 
    cases several times a day) as the journals 
    are being re-shelved.   One library does a 
    month-long count each semester.  Two 
    libraries scan the items as they circulate.  

* Describe your methodology.
 
    Most libraries use their integrated library 
    systems to record the usage data. Some use 
    portable scanners to scan barcodes, then 
    upload the data (either daily or less often) 
    into the circulation module.  Others load the 
    journals on a truck and scan the journals on 
    the truck at a stationary ILS computer.  
    Several libraries reported using handheld 
    scanners, then loading the data into a 
    relational database such as Access or 
    spreadsheet like Excel where the data can be 
    manipulated in varying ways.  Another library 
    mentioned using the Videx system (2 wands, 2 
    rechargers, a cable, and a program for MS 
    DOS) for data gathering, then loading the 
    data into Access.    Several libraries scan 
    the data into their ILS, but then migrate the 
    data to a relational database periodically 
    where they can manipulate the data.

    The ILS circulation modules have functions 
    such as “internal use count”, “browse”, or 
    “non-circulation count” depending on the ILS. 
     Reports can be generated from the ILS 
    depending on local systems staff expertise 
    and the existence of a report writer.

    The placement of barcodes varies.  Many 
    libraries barcode their bound journals, 
    create item records in their ILS, then scan 
    usage into their ILS.  For unbound issues and 
    microform, most libraries use a notebook or a 
    rolodex with one barcode for each title 
    rather than barcoding the issues themselves.  
    For those using the ILS to record use, there 
    is one generic item record for the unbound 
    issues of each title with names such as 
    “current” or “current use”.  Other libraries 
    have applied barcodes to the current 
    periodical shelves, one per title, which 
    works well in conjunction with handheld 
    scanners.    Three libraries do not apply 
    barcodes to any pieces, but to a separate 
    notebook or rolodex for bound, unbound, and 
    microform.

* Do you collect data for each title for each 
year, or by spans of years (e.g. 1980-1990)?   If 
so, which spans of years do you use, and why?

    In many cases, stats are lumped together for 
    all years.  At least one library is able to 
    get year by year data from their ILS.  Two 
    libraries keep usage stats for only the past 
    three years.
    One library wanted to distinguish spans of 
    years, but couldn’t figure out how to do it 
    with their current methodology.

* What equipment and software do you use?

    The ILS’s mentioned include Innovative, 
    Dynix, Notis, DRA, Winebago, SIRSI.

    Handheld scanners:  Tricoder, Percon, 
    PalmPilot, Compsee Apex II 

    Videx system


* What are the pros and cons of your automated 
method?

    Set up for automating takes a fair amount of 
    time, but once it’s done, it much faster and 
    more accurate than the manual “tick-mark” 
    method.

    Provides vital data for retention and 
    cancellation decisions.

    Potential for shelving backlogs due to time 
    spent scanning.

    Slight error rate in barcode scanning 
    accuracy, but more accurate than manual 
    method.


* Other comments

    One library was struggling with how to define 
    “current issues”, which varies depending on 
    the binding schedule.

    Several libraries mentioned that they post 
    signs asking patrons not to re-shelve their 
    own journals, but some patrons do anyway.

    After automating the process, one library 
    found that the manual method for counting 
    usage resulted in usage stats that were way 
    too low.

    Useful citation:  Rick Ralston.  “Use of a 
    relational database to manage an automated 
    periodical use study at Ruth Lilly Medical 
    Library”,  Serials Review, v.24, no.3/4 
    (1998), p. 21-32.



Beth Jacoby
Head of Acquisitions/Serials
Health Sciences and Human Services Library
University of Maryland
601 W. Lombard St.
Baltimore, MD  21201-1512
Phone: 410-706-8856    
Fax: 410-706-8860
-- 
John P. Abbott
  Coordinator, Collection Development		
  ASU Libraries                           
  Appalachian State University            
  Boone, NC  28608-2026                   

phone:  828-262-2821  
fax:    828-262-3001  
email:  abbottjp_at_appstate.edu
Received on Wed May 24 2000 - 13:37:27 EDT