taking a step back

Charleston Conference 2010

Stephen Dew

Collections and Scholarly Resources Coordinator

Mike Crumpton

Assistant Dean for Administrative Services

The University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Taking a Step Back,

To Move Forward

Library Space is Limited

No longer collection storage only!

New models have emerged for collection

management

More electronic resources

Off site storage and collaborative options

Quantitative volume counts less important

Learning assessment based on student outcomes

Collection space shared with “Users”

Building additions, expansions and remodels

competing with other projects in a tough economy

Library as Place

Space attributes being assessed, i.e. LibQUAL+

Space that inspires study and learning

Comfortable and inviting

Quiet space for individual contemplation

Community space for group and collaborative learning,

study and related activities

Space that serves as a gateway and accessibility for

study, learning, research and related resources

Third place space

Fosters community spirit and involvement

Encourages creative and collaborative thinking

Aged Space is Unappealing

Basement Stacks Government Documents

Creating appealing space

Changing User Needs

Collections Based User/Learner Focused

▫ All materials warehoused and available quickly

▫ Collection selected and endorsed by faculty as extension of classroom resources

▫ Collection built to support research with primary sources

▫ Significant financial investment made to process, deliver and maintain collection

▫ Dedicated space to support learning needs

▫ Technology driven attributes to access needed resources

▫ Group space to meet and work collaboratively with classmates

▫ Individual study with tools/conveniences to support technology

▫ Financial resources stretched to cover larger breadth of collaborative/technological needs

The Price of Space• Maintaining print

collections

▫ Processing

▫ Access/delivery

▫ Shelving and repair

• Storage and retrieval costs

• New technologies

• Infrastructure needs

• Updated furnishing

“Limited funding forces libraries to make financial choices”

How Space is Used

Usable floor space Sq. Ft How space is used Sq. Ft

Tower stacks 55,980 Book Shelving 57680

Tower Lobbies 4,116 Staff/offices 16500

Main – B,1 and 2 77592 Specialty areas* 46632

Main – 3rd Floor 8772 SCUA 11000

Total usable space 146,460 Common user spaces 14648

Total 146,460

*this includes reference,

reading room, Jarrell Hall,

Gov Docs

What Students Want

Small group work spaces

Access to tutors, experts, and faculty in the learning space

Table space for a variety of tools

Integrated lab facilities

IT highly integrated into all aspects of learning spaces

Availability of labs, equipment, and access to primary resources

Accessible facilities

Shared screens (either projector or LCD); availability of printing

Workgroup facilitation

Learning Spaces Educause 2006

Campus Priorities and Plans

Library Addition

UNCG has identified the expansion of Jackson

Library as one of its top priorities. The proposed

design:

Expanding the tower for book stacks.

Create a new center of academic and student

life.

Secondary transit hub will be adjacent to

Jackson Library addition reinforcing the critical

role of the building to the life of the campus.

Public spaces of the library should be located in

conjunction with the transit hub.

Proposed Library Addition

Existing Main and Tower

Weeding Justifications

Volume count is a less important metric in ranking

(not part of strategic plan)

Space for collections is becoming a lower priority

on campus

Electronic resources are improving access to

same or similar materials

Continuation of same strategy has a finite end so

alternatives must be considered now.

Slote principles Reasons to weed

Increases book usage

Increases user satisfaction Saves staff time Makes room for new

technologies

Resistance to weeding stems from: Emphasis on numbers -

“bigger is better” Professional work pressure

- “not enough time” Fear of public displeasure -

“letters to the editor”

Sacredness of collection - Conflicting criteria

Impact of E-books and E-journals–

increased and flexible access

Reference – moving from “building use only” to

available at home 24/7

Technology and other subjects that date quickly

Test manuals

Strong user preference for e-journals over print

Space savings for all

Bang for the buckIndividual monograph

weeding Serials weeding

Labor intensive for decisions

Labor intensive for record modification

Hard to gain enough space

Unlikely to have electronic back up

Book sale and recycling options

One decision can cover multiple volumes

One record change covers multiple volumes

Gains more space more quickly

Biggest gains from print/electronic duplication

Limited options for discards

Low hanging fruit

Duplicate formats and copies

Outdated editions

Obvious solutions to some – aren’t obvious to all

Disciplinary differences

Impact and Assessing Situations

ASERL unique monograph list

Binding investment

Economy on politics

Economy on buying (growth projection)

Remote collections

Receiving gifts

Cautionary Tales

Level of detail for weeding varies by person doing

the weeding, i.e. reference librarian looks

holistically vs. tech service personnel looking at

call numbers and item numbers

Personal biases can play a role

Groups need to be unified by common goal

Communication constantly maintained to

establish procedures and resolve problems

Entire operation needs to be transparent

Collaborations

Large scale serials

weeding procedures

Bigger is better?

Judgment factor?

Space Gainers

Special Collections and Archives

Unique signature to institution

Undergrads with technology

Technical enhancements for collaborative devices is

part of learning environment

Undergrads without technology

Old fashion need for privacy and quiet

All Users

Community center focused space

UNCG Groups to consider

Space Planning Committee – oversight group,

including wide representation

Collection Management Committee – Subject

Liaisons

Technical Services Staff

Access Services Staff

University Groups

Teaching Faculty

Students!

Green Weeding

Library and campus are committed to

sustainability

Recycling and Reusing accomplished by: Connections with Recycling Office

Better World Books

AVOID THE DUMPSTER

UNCG Solutions

Identified duplication

Monographs

Journals owned electronically and in print

Identified low use monographs

Weeding with specific goals

ID target call number ranges

Partnered with departmental liaisons

Prioritized storage availability

Compact shelving pros and cons

Journal De-Duplication Project

2007

Reasons to De-Duplicate Journal Subscriptions

Annual price increases for journals have significantly exceeded

inflation Need to keep journal budget under control and not take

from other resources

The vast majority of users want and expect electronic copies - why

pay for a duplicate print copy that nobody uses

With e-only, there is no longer a need for processing, claiming,

binding, etc., so there will be additional monetary savings and staff

time will be freed for other tasks

With e-only, shelving space is freed for other use

Other Institutions Going to

Electronic Journal Subscriptions in 2007

University of South Carolina

Appalachian State University

East Carolina University

Drexel

UC Davis

UNC Charlotte

American University

Binghamton University

University of Maryland

Central Michigan (moving 70% to online by 2008)

Kansas State University

College of Charleston

Logistics of the De-Duplication Project

Coordinated by Collection Management Committee--AD for Collections, librarians who are department liaisons, and the heads of cataloging, acquisitions, and access services.

Developed a spreadsheet of 850 journals for which the Libraries subscribed to both the print & electronic versions and the journals offered an e-only subscription option

At UNCG, most journal subscriptions are assigned to a particular academic department, and the spreadsheet was sorted by department (3 letter code)

Logistics of the De-Duplication Project

A template letter that explained why print subscriptions should be dropped in favor of e-only subscriptions was prepared and shared with liaisons

Some liaisons revised the template for their own style, but everyone provided essentially the same message

During first week of March 2007, liaisons sent letters and spreadsheets to department chairs and representatives for their review and comment

Results from De-duplication

Project For 813 journals, print subscriptions were

cancelled and an e-only subscriptions

maintainedSavings on subscription cost

Shelf space freed in Current Periodicals area

Shelf space freed in Stacks

No Processing Costs

No Claiming Costs

No Binding Costs

We lose no content, remove duplication, & still

provide what our users want most: Electronic

access to the information

Journal Cancellation & Budget

Reduction Project

2009

North Carolina State Budget Crisis 2010

Due to a significant shortfall in tax revenues, on

April 6, 2009, the state ordered all agencies to

freeze purchasing

As of that date, the Libraries lost whatever

collection funds it had remaining for the fiscal

year and could not make anymore purchases or

pay any incoming invoices

The Libraries had to prepare for a possible 15-to-

20 percent budget cut for fiscal 2009-10

Logistics of the Journal Cancellation &

Budget Reduction Project

Coordinated by Collection Management Committee

Developed a spreadsheet of 1,750 journals

Libraries had a direct subscription (not a package deal)

The current issues of the journal were available in PDF in a protected aggregator database

The spreadsheet was sorted by department and reviewed by liaisons, who made recommendations on cancelling/keeping

Departments & faculty were notified about recommendations

Protected Aggregator Databases

Results from the Journal Cancellation and

Budget Reduction Project

700 journal subscriptions cancelled

$175,000 reduced from the serials budget of

$1.52 million

We lose no content, remove duplication, & still

provide what our users want most: Electronic

access to the information (do lose ownership)

Weeding & Space Repurposing

Project

2008 to Date

Space Based on Print Collections

All materials warehoused in building (shelves/cabinets)

Significant financial investment made to process, deliver,

& maintain collection

Library prestige & ranking dependent upon physical size,

total volumes, etc.

Print collection takes more & more space, taking away

from student study, collaborative space, and other uses

Print Replaced by Electronic

Frees space to support a more conducive learning

environment--more individual study space, more group

study space, more computers, etc.

Frees financial resources for other needs

Library prestige more dependent on electronic resources

provided and the building’s learning environment

Coordination of the

Weeding & Space Re-Purposing Project

Space Planning Committee (July 2008) --the oversight group responsible for planning renovation of space, setting priorities, and scheduling when certain call-number ranges of the collection would be reviewed for weeding

Collection Management Committee –responsible for reviewing the journals, making recommendations, communicating with departments and faculty, and coordinating the actual weeding and transfer

We Are Not a Museum

We cannot afford to become a museum for

printed journals that are available electronically.

We cannot afford to become a museum for old

books that are duplicates, out-of-date, or out-of-

scope.

Our current patrons do not use them

We can expect the same behavior from our future

patrons.

Weeding Totals for Journals

7,000 linear feet of bound journals weeded from Jackson Library

1,500 linear feet of bound journals weeded from Storage

1,000 linear feet of bound journals removed from Jackson to Storage

Weeding Totals for Books &

Microforms

700 linear feet of books weeded from Jackson

Library

2,500 linear feet of books weeded from Storage

(review still in progress)

50 linear feet of microforms weeded from Jackson

25 microform cabinets removed from Jackson to

Storage

Goal = 50% increase in User

Space

Proposed use of space Sq. Ft

Book Shelving 43680 All materials in tower

Staff/offices 16500

Specialty areas* 37860

SCUA 18000 Acquire 3rd floor main

Common user spaces 30420 User service pts in basement including

Gov docs and larger CITI lab

Total 146,460

*this includes reference, reading room,

Jarrell Hall,

Selected SourcesDubicki, Eleonora. “Weeding : Facing the Fears.” Collection Building 27, no. 4

(2008): 132-135.

Lugg, Rick and Ruth Fischer. “Future Tense – The Disapproval Plan: Rules-Based

Weeding & Storage Decisions.” Against the Grain 20, no. 6 (2008-2009): 74-78.

Metz, Paul and Caryl Gray. “Public Relations and Library Weeding.” The Journal of

Academic Librarianship 31, no. 3 (2005): 273-279.

Oblinger, Diana G, ed. Learning Spaces. Educause, 2006.

http://www.educause.edu/LearningSpaces

Penniman, Sarah and Lisa McColl. “Green Weeding: Promoting Ecofriendly

Options for Library Discards.” Library Journal 133, no. 15 (2008): 32-33.

Schonfeld, Roger C. and Housewright, Ross. “What to Withdraw? Print Collection

Management in the Wake of the Digital Age, ITHAKA S+R, September 2009

Slote, Stanley. Weeding Library Collections, 4th ed. Englewood: Libraries Unlimited,

1999.

Wakaruk, Amanda. “Dissecting the Disconnect : Thinking about Public Space in

Academic Libraries.” College and Research Libraries News 70, no. 1 (2009) 16-

18.