[Original post followed by responses.]
When approval displays disappear
From: Roberta Astroff <Roberta.Astroff_at_utsa.edu>
Hi,
As part of the process of streamlining acquisitions and
cataloging, we have been told there will no longer be an approval
display for our subject specialists. That means they will not
see the books sent to us by our approval plan vendor. Our return
rate is very low and we have continued to tweak the approval
plan, obviously to good results. I am wondering though how other
academic libraries who have done away with approval displays
continue to evaluate the books sent to them. Do your subject
librarians look at shipping lists? At new book lists generated
from the catalog? Do you know (or care) whether the librarians
are monitoring what is coming in?
Thanks
Roberta J. Astroff, PhD, MLS,
Head of Collection Development
University of Texas San Antonio Library
One UTSA Circle
San Antonio, TX 78249-0671
(210) 458-6682 voice
(210) 458-4577 fax
roberta.astroff_at_utsa.edu
==1==
From: "Smith,Patricia" <Patricia.Smith_at_ColoState.EDU>
At Colorado State, we have had what we call "purchase plans"
since the 1990's. Books come shelf ready and we don't return
anything (we once did a pilot study and realized that books that
would have been rejected by the selector actually circulated at
the same rate as the ones the selector approved).
Our selectors do not review the book anymore--our monograph
technician produces an excel list of the titles that are received
each week and sends it to the selectors She also maintains it
on our Wiki for the year. This list is sorted by "profile" which
roughly relates to each campus department. We have Innovative
and can produce this list easily.
Possible reference candidates are noted by acquisitions staff and
shown to the reference selector (a small number).
Acquisitions Staff also note other irregularities but this is rare.
We also have a new book display shelf for the public where most
of the new books are put. Theoretically, the selectors could
look at these shelves but my sense is that the weekly lists are
sufficient.
This system seems to work pretty well. We try to have the vendor
rep come in once or twice a year to review profiles with
selectors. Overall, the circulation rates for materials that
come on the purchase plan are high at least in comparison to most
libraries. It's over 60%--just about the same rate as for the
titles that are firm-ordered.
Unfortunately, my final note is that we are facing the same
budget cuts that other libraries are facing and we are greatly
reducing the number of print monographs purchased.
Pat
Patricia (Pat) Smith
Coordinator, Collections and Contracts
Colorado State University Libraries
Ft. Collins, CO 80524
Phone: 970-491-1856, Fax: 970-491-4611
==#2==
From: "Skib, Bryan" <bskib_at_umich.edu>
We stopped review of anglo-american autoship approvals when we
moved to Coutts, and staff review new titles in several ways.
Coutts sends us a detailed weekly report on approval titles
shipped which is shared with selectors. You can also generate
such lists directly through Coutts' OASIS. Some peruse this type
of list. Others look at feeds for newly-cataloged materials,
while others scan the new book shelves. These strategies include
firm orders, as well. We continue to set out foreign language
approvals for more traditional processing, but I see this
declining over time.
I continue to defend the value of some form of review of new
titles as part of understanding publishing in assigned subject
areas. There's a lot to learn about research trends and local
authors from skimming selected new titles, whether physically or
virtually. The importance of this review may vary by subject, and
in fact the time staff spend on this type of work tends to be
quite small. The point of this review seems to me much less about
rejecting titles or gatekeeping, than about subject expertise. At
the same time, we need to seek new ways to monitor publishing
output and to stay on top of things such as books and book
chapters authored by our faculty.
Having said all this, at what point does monitoring local
receipts lose its value, when compared with monitoring publishing
and research trends more generally?
Bryan Skib
Collection Development Officer
818 Hatcher Library
University of Michigan
(734) 936-2366
==#3==
From: "Golomb, Liorah" <Liorah.Golomb_at_wichita.edu>
As a subject specialist, one of the benefits of looking at the
actual book is that occasionally, I can match titles to my
liaison faculty's interests. I'd hate to lose that opportunity. I
don't think a shipping list would serve the same purpose.
Liorah Golomb, PhD, MLS
Assistant Professor and Humanities Librarian
Wichita State University
1845 Fairmount
Wichita, KS 67260
316.978.5077
liorah.golomb_at_wichita.edu
Find us in Facebook under Wichita State University Libraries
==#4==
From:
Deg Farrelly <deg.farrelly_at_asu.edu>
ASU Libraries moved to shelf-ready about a year ago. At the West
campus' Fletcher Library, all new books, both approval and firm,
are placed on a review shelf in a staff area. They remain there
for approximatley 3-5 days with selectors notified when new
shipments arrive.
Additionally, our Acquisitions librarian typically sends out a
title list of new orders on an occasional basic.
As a selector myself, I do care about seeing the new titles
coming in, particularly because my subject (Communication
Studies) is very interdisciplinary, and I notify faculty of new
titles.
--
deg farrelly, Chair
Fletcher Library Collections Council
Arizona State University at the West campus
PO Box 37100
Phoenix, Arizona 85069-7100
Phone: 602.543.8522
Email: deg.farrelly_at_asu.edu
==#5==
From: Arlene Sievers-Hill <axs23_at_case.edu>
Hi,
We still put out the books for about a week for collection
managers to look at. The time may only be a couple of days and
the shelves are used more as a staging area than a real display,
but anyone can look who wants to. We return no books, so that
isn't an issue. Collection managers can see online what is
coming through, but they can look at the books. Particularly our
Social sciences, English and Art History librarian - that's me-,
find looking at the books useful for keeping ourselves and
faculty informed. As to your question - some look, some don't,
but humanities and social science folks do like to look. It is an
issue I relate to and I feel strongly about as a collection
manager. I want to see my books. It is also a better way to see
if you need to tweak the profile.
Arlene Moore Sievers-Hill
Head, Acquisitions Dept./Art History and Art Librarian
Case Western Reserve University
Kelvin Smith Library
Cleveland, OH 44106
Telephone: 216 368 3328
==#6==
From: John Abbott <abbottjp_at_appstate.edu>
Having a review shelf in Acq for CD selectors
to review was eliminated on a cost/benefit
basis.
Costs:
Like UTSA, our return rate was low and the overhead
for Acq to shelve approval books for CD, keep track
of what was shelved when, take the books down,
haul the books to circ for shelving on the New Books
shelf became an extravagance. Most of our selectors
have many departments and many faculty, and pulling
book titles for notification of faculty was a relative
rarity. Additionally, we moved to shelf-ready and
the lag on the review shelf slowed books to patrons.
Benefits:
Convenience for the CD librarians vs. reviewing the
New Book Shelf or list. Minimal fine-tuning of the
plan.
Like CSU, quick looks at the circ data indicate the
approval books, firm orders, and gifts circulate
at similar rates.** Once the vendor profile plan
is tuned, the review is not worth the time of
all involved to separately shelve and review
approvals. Following the New Books shelves or
list is sufficient for most selectors.
Books! An informal Clickr poll of 17 junior
Communications students here asked them if
they could access most of the paper books in the
Library from GoogleBooks or similar. 15 of 17
thought they could.
**Does this signal the death of CD as we know it?
No, Approval books tend to be more undergrad
materials. Firm orders tend to be more research
level. Gifts are a small sliver of the pie.
John P. Abbott, MS MSLS
Coordinator, Collection Management
University Library
Appalachian State University
218 College Street
Boone, NC 28608
Received on Mon Jun 08 2009 - 09:39:49 EDT