oclc online computer library center nast report attributes ala midwinter 2007 meeting january 21,...
TRANSCRIPT
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
NASTReport Attributes
ALA Midwinter 2007 Meeting
January 21, 2007
David Millikin
Product Manager, Library Logistics
OCLC
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Report Attributes – Agenda
Objectives
Methodology
Discussion Group Findings
Storage Facilities Overview
Report Attributes Desired
Attributes Needing Further Discussion
“Nice to Have’s”
Alternative Report Uses
Next Steps
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Objectives
Test usefulness of a report with potential users
Shared database of collections in storage
Offer tools and reports for comparing stored collections across institutions / groups
Libraries could use this information to inform their collection development decision
Determine attributes desired on report
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Methodology
Two Discussion Groups
Current storage issues
Usefulness of report concept
Specific report attributes desired
Review Results
NAST report team
OCLC Collection Analysis, Market & Data Analysis
This advisory group
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Methodology – Discussion Groups
First Group: Members of libraries who are very familiar with discussions
University of California
California Digital Library
Library of Congress
The Ohio State University
Vanderbilt University
Washington Research Library Consortium
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Methodology – Discussion Groups
Second Group: Members of libraries who have not participated in discussions
Boston College
University of Guelph
Purdue University
University of Texas at Austin
University of Washington
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Methodology – Review Results
NAST report team
Melissa Trevvett, Paul Gherman, Constance Malpas, Glenda Lammers
Ensure progress & preview findings
OCLC Collection Analysis, Market & Data Analysis
Glenda Lammers, Rob Ross, Janet Hawk, Joanne Cantrell
Review discussion group findings
Confirm attributes identified are detailed enough to take action
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Methodology – Review Results
This advisory group
Review report attributes
Discuss questionable attributes
Confirm next steps
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Discussion Group Findings – Facilities
Common Findings
All institutions interviewed have stored collections
All institutions circulate stored collections
Exceptions: Photos, Special, Rare Collections
Storage facilities are nearing capacity
Most have plans for increase of storage capacity
Storage initially filled without consistency in selecting items for storage
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Discussion Group Findings – Facilities
Disparate Findings
Facility Layout / Design
Environmental Conditions of Facilities
Weeding Practices of Facilities
Methods of Addressing Space Limitations
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Discussion Group Findings – Report
Institutions employ various techniques to make weeding / collection decisions
Benchmarking
Circulation Statistics
Item Age, Condition
Availability as e-Content (e-Journals; e-Books less frequent)
Preservation Goals
Report would be useful that draws from other institutions’ collection data for weeding and/or collection decision-making
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Discussion Group Findings – Report
Report Attributes Desired
Physical Location / Ownership of Stored Items
Age of Stored Items
Item is in a Special Collection
Condition of Storage Facilities
Physical Condition of Stored Items
Number of Stored Items
Ability to Export Report to Spreadsheet
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Discussion Group Findings – Report
Report Attributes Desired (Policies)
Knowledge of: Institutions that don’t weed
Formalized lending, weeding & retention policies
Preservation policies
Last-copy policies
Circulation Availability: Circulation policies (Does the item circulate?)
Lending policies (How quickly will I receive item I requested; how long will I have the item?)
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Discussion Group Findings – Report
Report attributes needing further discussion
1. Number of Copies per Institution
2. Physical Location of Copies within an Institution
Second Group felt distinction that an item is in Storage versus regular circulating collection is not needed
If it exists within partner’s circulation, assume accessibility to the item
3. Knowledge of Circulation Frequency (low-circulating items)
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Discussion Group Findings – Report
Report “Nice to Have’s”
Knowledge of other institutions’ collection interests
Geographic proximity of other institution
Flag when an item exists in few institutions (rarity)
Scheduled reporting
Consortium-centric reports Ensure copy preservation within a consortium
Consortial lending agreements
Extra-consortial reports
Preferred partners registry to inform reports
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Discussion Group Findings – Report
Alternative Report Uses
Retention & preservation decisions
Collection development (possibly via integration with ILL policies registry)
Inform other institutions about holdings to increase usage of stored collections
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
Next Steps
Confirm questionable report attributes
Identify preliminary steps / groundwork of data / databases needed
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
THANK YOU!