Original posting on this topic is reproduced below; the responses follow it:
=====================================================
From: Hannah Bennett <livy_at_mindspring.com>
Hello Librarians:
I am playing devil's advocate in a LIS debate on approval plans; I'm
arguing that approval plans hand over too much responsibility for
collection development to vendors. As practicing librarians, do you feel
there is any merit to this position? If so, why?
Any thoughts are appreciated.
Cordially,
Hannah Bennett
(1)===================================================
From: "Tracy, Carla" <alict_at_augustana.edu>
After many, many hours of work (choosing a vendor, creating a profile,
etc.) the Augustana College Library is just about to "turn on" an approval
plan with Blackwell's. So perhaps I am not the most objective responder!
That said, however: I think that the only way that an approval plan would
place too much responsibility in the hands of the vendor would be if the
librarians simply did not do their jobs well. As with the GIGO (garbage in,
garbage out) principle for using computers, if an approval plan profile is
poorly constructed or if the plan is poorly monitored, the vendor will be
doing the library's collection development by default.
I see an approval plan as just another possible tool. Like review sources,
catalogs, book jackets, etc., it can be used well or used badly. In a time
when all libraries are trying to do more with less, excellent use of
appropriate tools is essential.
Carla Tracy
Collection Development Coordinator
Augustana College Library
Rock Island, IL 61201
(2)===================================================
From: Ruth Wallach <rwallach_at_usc.edu>
You are right on the one hand. But on another, librarians do not have time
(if they ever did) to review the output of the many presses in this and
other countries, and having relatively well defined approval plans takes
this burden off of us. Also, our researchers expect to see publications
from mainstream academic and trade presses anyway, whether or not they then
end up using only 10% of the collection intensively.
What interests me, though, is to what extent our reliance on approval plans
may have displaced other, more specialized collection development efforts.
Ruth Wallach
University of Southern California
(3)===================================================
From: "Helen Anderson" <HAnderson_at_rcl.lib.rochester.edu>
A quick case study...
I did title by title selection for in Slavic area studies in an ARL library
for 10 years before an approval plan was introduced for English language
monographs. At the time, it seemed a loathsome innovation. I felt as though
one of the most interesting and professional parts of my job were being
taken away. I stopped feeling that way when I realized that the fact that
we had an approval plan did not mean that I would no longer be responsible
for following what was being published in my areas of responsibility, but
rather that I was being given an extra tool to work with.
I do think it would be a problem, as an administrator now, if I expected my
bibliographers to have more time freed up because they would no longer be
responsible for following scholarship in their fields, did not have the
opportunity to reject approval titles, contribute to the moderation of the
profile and supplement the plan with firm orders.
Helen Anderson
Head, Collection Development
River Campus Libraries
University of Rochester
(4)===================================================
From: "Kevil, L H." <KevilL_at_missouri.edu>
Here is the short answer.
With approval arrangements or any other form of outsourcing, the library
should be making wise and approriate use of external expertise and
capability, but of course should not abandon its responsibility to monitor
the quality of vendor performance. So, no, I do not see any real merit in
the argument, otherwise we could not use OCLC, library-automation software,
or many other services and products provided from the outside. I personally
see the argument as a shop-worn version of the notion that vendors seeking a
profit are somehow unclean and do not belong in the library sanctuary. In
practice the many benefits of approval (cheaper than individual firm orders;
streamlined procedures; &c) can be translated into cost and other savings.
L. Hunter Kevil
Collection Development Librarian
176 Elmer Ellis Library
University of Missouri-Columbia
Columbia, MO 65201
KevilL_at_missouri.edu
573-884-8760 voice
573-882-6034 facsimile
(5)===================================================
From: Suzanne Wise <WiseMS_at_conrad.appstate.edu>
If set up correctly, an approval plan actually improves selection. It insures
that the obvious choices arrive quickly and without expending collection
develpment staff time to submit order information. The savings in time frees
collection development librarians to ferret out the non-mainstream materials
that truly enrich a collection.
Suzanne Wise
Appalachian State University
Received on Mon Sep 18 2000 - 13:15:22 EDT