CDL: Collection Assessment tools (response 1)

From: John P. Abbott <AbbottJP_at_appstate.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:43:54 -0400
To: Colldv-l <colldv-l_at_usc.edu>
[Original posting followed by response.  JA]

Subject: CLD- Collection Assessment tools
From: l-lyons_at_northwestern.edu

Dear Colleagues,

Have you examined and/or made a determination in regard to the newest 
collection analysis tools from OCLC and Library Dynamics?  There does 
not seem to be a great deal of information about these software 
products and I was wondering if any of you have heard more, tried any, 
or are planning to commit to one.

OCLC is now offering "WorldCat Collection Analysis," a 
subscription-based Web product ( 
http://www.oclc.org/collectionanalysis/) and

Library Dynamics offers the successor to the NATC (now named NATCP) as 
well as Spectra (see both at http://www.librarydynamics.com/index.htm ).

Thank you for any information or comments you provide,
Lucy

Lucy Eleonore Lyons
Collection Analysis & Planning
and Subject Bibliographer
University Library
Northwestern University
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL 60208              l-lyons_at_northwestern.edu
http://www.library.northwestern.edu/collections/polisci/index.html



==#1===

From:
Kevin Hastings-Merriman <khastings-merriman_at_mcneese.edu>

Lucy -

Let me put my postscript first:
I am VERY excited about the Library Dynamics resuming the ALCTS NATC 
and hope to participate! We already run our own NATC report but it is 
great to think the numbers are going to be updated!

But back to your question:

I have been to demonstrations of both products and have found both the 
be interesting but limited.

One Library Dynamics product I saw (Spectra) was still a young product 
that showed great promise...
(demonstrated at the Louisiana Library Network Users Group Annual 
Conference last year)

LD can compare your collection (per your catalog) to a database of 
titles reviewed in Choice...
but they didn't have the option of excluding titles reviewed and NOT 
recommended, let alone singling out titles recommended for your 
particular library type.

Another option for comparison includes their database of titles
dropped from /Books for College Libraries /between the second and 
third edition.
(Thus suggesting that you likewise should weed the title...)

They could also compare multiple libraries in a consortium for unique 
titles, etc.  The make-up of their interface and graphic analysis was 
impressive, but  the ways they offered to analyse the data didn't 
seems so helpful (to me).  I'm sure this has changed over the past 
year and they probably some interesting new solutions.
I /think /the units of analysis are based on straight drill-down call 
numbers.

I just attended the online demo of the OCLC product.
This analysis is based on Worldcat holdings and comparing your 
holdings to other libraries, primarily in title scope and publication 
year.  Curiously, the "peers" you select for comparison
don't have to be participating, they only need to have their holding 
in Worldcat.  Other options which don't seem helpful to our mid-sized, 
primarily undergrad library, is the analysis of format and language 
(as we are almost exclusively English - print and some video).
The units of analysis are based on OCLC Conspectus (LOC) groupings.

Each seems to have different strengths to me and may be helpful
depending on your collection philosophies,
your relationship to others in a consortium or reciprocal borrowing 
arrangement,  and whether you have a clear idea of what a peer library 
is and how you should compare to it.

I know this isn't a great deal of new information, but I hope it 
helps.  Do let me know what anyone else might contribute!
We are still evaluating these products, but not using either one yet.

- Kevin
Received on Fri Apr 29 2005 - 01:18:13 EDT