CDL: Collection Analysis tools (summary of replies)

From: John P. Abbott <AbbottJP_at_appstate.edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:04:52 -0500
To: COLLDV-L_at_usc.edu
Collection analysis tools
From:  "Cecilia Harel" <harel_at_univ.haifa.ac.il>

Dear Friends,
I am happy to share with you replies received to my query regarding Collection Analysis 
Tools. Thank you to all those who contributed from their knowledge and experience.
Best regards,
Cecilia

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cecilia Harel
Head of Foreign Acquisitions, Collection Development, Gifts & Exchange University of Haifa 
Library, Haifa, Israel 31905
tel: +972-4-8249324  fax: +972-4-8249170 http://lib.haifa.ac.il/library_eng.html
=======================================

---Responses below----

Hello Cecilia,

This link goes to a website on collection assessment. Though it is not completely 
finished, here you will find a number of non-commercial tools and methods for analyzing 
collections:

http://www.library.northwestern.edu/eraca/data_bank_info/top_level/nul_datab
ank.html

I hope this is useful for you.
Lucy
----------------------------------------
Lucy Eleonore Lyons
Coordinator for Collection Analysis
& Subject Specialist
University Library
Northwestern University
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL 60208-2300   l-lyons_at_northwestern.edu
======================================================


I would be interested in hearing the responses, if you don't mind sharing. We have had 
both OCLC's product and the Bowker product in the past. My experience with the Bowker 
product (BBAS) is that they may have made improvements in the last two years, but when I 
used it the product could only match ISBN, not ISBN and title. This resulted in the 
product reporting that our library did not own any item that didn't happen to have the 
exact same edition that was in the BBAS database. (A real problem, but especially 
troublesome for the classics.) OCLC's product is better, but it doesn't compare to a core, 
just other schools. It's useful for new program development. At this time, we are not 
using either.

Suzanne Mangrum [smangrum_at_mtsu.edu]
=========================================

The OCLC product is invaluable if you can go in simultaneously with a dozen or so peer 
institutions who would have access to one another's data.

Paul Metz, Assistant to the Dean for Special Projects University Libraries / Virginia Tech 
P.O. Box 90001 / Blacksburg, VA / 24062-9001
Ph: (540) 231-5663   FAX: (540) 231-3694   email: pmetz_at_vt.edu

==============================================

I recommend WorldCat Collection Analysis, especially if you also use ILLiad for 
interlibrary loan.  The ILL statistics, along with the collection statistics, provide good 
visual representations of your lending and borrowing in various subject areas.  My only 
caveats are that you can't search ILL statistics for specific titles (although you can 
browse by subject area to find titles), and there are some odd groupings of some of the 
subjects (several different groups that all refer to health and medicine).

We've used these statistics, along with circulation and universal borrowing statistics, to 
focus our approval plan only on subjects most in need of monographs, and to show us which 
areas are most in need of journals.

I'd be happy to share sample graphs/screenshots if you like.
Jonathan

********************************
Jonathan H. Harwell
Collection Development & Assessment Librarian Zach S. Henderson Library Georgia Southern 
University PO Box 8074 Statesboro, GA 30460-8074
(912) 478-5114
fax (912) 478-0289
jharwell_at_georgiasouthern.edu
http://mesoj.edublogs.org
Subject Specialist for Music, Sociology, & Anthropology

=======================================

If you have access to FirstSearch, you may want to experiment with the "Expert Search" 
feature. It isn't as powerful as OCLC's Collection Analysis Tool, but at no cost to us, 
the price was right. We are a seminary and have been comparing our collection in the area 
of Biblical Studies (LC class "BS") with 6 other institutions that have have strong 
collections in this area.

The following search parameters tells FirstSearch to return a list of:
*all bibliographic records published in a specified year, *with an LC class number that 
begins with BS, *or that contains the word "Bible" in a subject, *that is not held by our 
library KAT *but that is held by the 6 other libraries.


Search For:
bs1* or bs2* or bs3* or bs4* or bs5* or bs6* or bs7* or bs8* or bs9* or su:bible not li:kat

Indexed In:
Library of Congress Call number (lc:)

Year:
2009

Limit type to:
not juvenile
not fiction
not microform

Library Code:
pts or vut or ebo or emt or mr4 or bha

Once the list has been created, we export it into the Freeware called JTacq. JTacq is then 
used to do an automatic check of our local database to determine if we have other editions 
of the titles. Once that is done we use it find out where the titles can be purchased for 
the lowest available price and then we purchase them. You can find out more about JTacq at 
http://www.jtdata.com/jtacq.html

Using this methodology has made it possible for us to very quickly and efficiently fill 
the gaps in our collection. I hope it will be helpful for you as well.

Don

Don Butterworth
Faculty Associate. Librarian III
B.L. Fisher Library
Asbury Theological Seminary
don.butterworth_at_asburyseminary.edu
(859) 858-2227
=============================================

Are you asking about a comparison of your holdings against some sort of objective 
standard, or are you looking at a more use-driven model?

I have read a couple of articles about the OCLC collection analysis system. As I recall 
the big problem is the quality of many bibliographic records in the World Cat holdings. As 
i recall, OCLC Collection Analysis takes one bibliographic record of a 'core' title, and 
sees if your library has that title linked to the same bibliographic record. For example, 
if you have a copy of 'Future of an Illusion' by Freud, and your edition is the same as 
the one OCLC picks as the representative copy, then it says "good'. But, if you have a 
different edition, the Collection Analysis method says 'bad- you don't have this book'.

If you want I can dig up the articles, I think.

For use analysis, I like F.W.Lancaster's "If you want to analyze your collection" as a 
good book to read before beginning.  A more practical volume is "Analyzing library 
collection use with Excel" by Greiner and Cooper. (Myself being Greiner.)

Good luck- Tony Greiner, Portland Community College Library, Portland Oregon. USA 
anthony.greiner_at_pcc.edu
==============================================

We are currently using the Bowker Book Analysis System (BBAS). I work at a large community 
college (2 year institution). As you may know BBAS compares your library collection with 
either Wilson Catalogs (for public & school libraries) or Resources for College Libraries 
(RCL). We are using BBAS with RCLWeb and RCLWeb Career Resources. I have found it to be a 
very useful tool but see it as only a starting point. It seems the major limitation for 
BBAS for your library would be that the RCL collection is tailored to the undergraduate 
library and may not meet the needs of your graduate programs.

I think that BBAS is very easy to use and it is easy to understand the results. The 
reports and booklists have been very useful tools to engage subject faculty in collection 
development. We are still in the process of doing our analysis using BBAS, so I don't have 
any final conclusions to share- but we do plan to use the data to inform the collection 
development policy that we are currently crafting. We have also already used it to support 
collection development decisions. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any other 
questions.
Chisa

E. Chisato Uyeki
Reference and Collection Development Librarian Mt. San Antonio College cuyeki_at_mtsac.edu
909-594-5611 x4257
=========================================
Received on Thu Dec 17 2009 - 03:06:01 EST