Bringing Selection out of the 90’s! : lessons learned from an interdepartmental collaboration
Rhonda Glazier (University of Colorado Colorado Springs) & Larry Eames (University of Colorado Colorado Springs)
Keywords: selection; collection strategy; management; interdepartmental collaboration
This session will examine how a mid-sized, R2 academic library revamped and redeveloped their collection development and selection procedures in the context of staffing and budget constraints through interdepartmental conversation and collaboration. The library has been using the same liaison model since the late 90’s. Because of budget cuts, increased reliance on eBook packages, changing collection needs and a need to make the selection process more efficient overall we decided to reexamine and revamp the selection procedures used in the library. A task force consisting of acquisitions staff, Director of Collection Development, Interlibrary Loan staff, and two liaison librarians was created to devise a streamlined process for selecting and ordering materials.
The Kraemer Family Library (KFL) had used a traditional liaison model with one collections librarian allocating the materials budget to be spent by liaison librarians in their subject areas. There was a general collection development policy in place, but materials selection was ultimately fully at the discretion of subject librarians. Two acquisitions staff members were then responsible for purchasing titles and informing liaison librarians of any issues that arose. This outmoded process meant an unpredictable workload for acquisitions and cataloging staff as liaison librarians struggled to spend budgets that may or may not reflect the needs and habits of their departments. Something had to change.
Presented by the Director of Collection Development and an instruction/liaison librarian, this presentation will highlight lessons learned as we made changes to procedures that had not been updated in over 30 years. We will cover the impact of these changes on liaison duties and relationships both within the library and across campus. Details of our workflows and development strategies will be highlighted. As this is an evolving process, we will close with our initial impressions of changes made and anticipated next steps.
--- From Introspection to action, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Collection Development Pilot at the University of California, Davis
Belen Fernandez (University of California Davis) & Alison Lanius (University of California Davis)
Keywords: Diversity Equity Inclusion Collection Development
From introspection to action, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Collection Development Pilot Project at the University of California, Davis
Academic libraries are in a period of serious introspection as collections and collection development processes are now being studied through the lens of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion principles. It is critical that this period of introspection lead to collection development policies that have an ongoing commitment to the inclusion of historically underrepresented voices.
As a result of the unique and complex nature of university library collections, there are no methodologies that have universal applicability. For our pilot project, we are conducting a collections analysis of a defined set of titles, determining titles and related subjects that require development and devising metrics to assess progress. To develop these steps, we have reviewed the library literature, received technical assistance from a vendor and taken into consideration the demographics of our campus and region.
In our proposed presentation, we will discuss the goals, development, implementation of our Diversity, Equity and Inclusion collection development pilot project.
--- DEI 2.0: What’s Next with Content, Indexing and Collaboration
Mark Puente (Purdue University) & Barbara Olson (Clarivate)
Keywords: Diversity, Equity, inclusion, Collection Development, University Leadership
Through collections and services, libraries have a unique platform to support diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, ensuring representation of diverse voices. The Purdue University Libraries and School of Information Studies are building a comprehensive action plan tied to an organizational strategy that centers DEI efforts, imbedding the work into all aspects of the organization’s mission. Core to this strategy is assessing and building collections that are reflective of a full range of social identities and interests that address a holistic approach to research, teaching, learning and engagement for all campus stakeholders. Attendees will learn about some of the unique challenges and opportunities that arise from building DEI collections on a sci-tech campus, how addressing representation in collections can be part of broader efforts to effect systemic change, and also learn about trends in new buying models and collections that support DEI initiatives.
--- Unlocking the Archives: Enhancing Discoverability of Special Collections
Andrew Barker (Lancaster University), Fiona Henry (Lean Library) & Mark Sinclair (Lean Library)
Keywords: special collections; user-centricity; collections; discoverability; demand-driven acquisition
As more and more information is digitized, certain areas of the library are becoming less discoverable. At the same time, according to a 2021 survey, patron workflows now begin outside the library, with 79% of faculty and 74% of students beginning search outside of the library on websites such as Google Scholar. Today’s consumers are used to ‘point of need’ information, getting the content and information where and when they need it, rather than having to leave their natural workflow and look for it elsewhere. And many libraries have struggled to embed their services around the workflow of their users.
Lancaster University’s vision for 2025 includes a specific focus on user-centered strategies and ensuring visibility of content at the point of need. As the research heart of the university, they are beginning to think differently about what the library does and how it engages with its users and have begun to use workflow tools to support adopting user-first strategies and expanding focus into new areas of library provision, such as surfacing special collections.
As a small research-intensive university, Lancaster University collaborated with the University of Cambridge on the Lancaster Digital Collections, based on a digital collection that Cambridge created to raise visibility of their distinct collections. Where special collections and archives were previously locked away in rooms, they can now surface this content online and, using new tools, deliver to patrons at the point of need.
This presentation will present two use cases for surfacing digital collections online, using the latest workflow tools, and an overview of how Lancaster University has worked with vendors to increase discoverability of their special collections, ensuring these resources remain easily accessible to patrons in their workflow, and fostering an open, collaborative community.
--- Supporting Accreditation through Library Collections: Articulating Impact to Academic Administrations
Kelly LaVoice (Vanderbilt University) & Mark Williams (Vanderbilt University)
Keywords: accreditation, articulating impact, scholarly engagement
Universities regularly go through accreditation processes to receive recognition from an accreditation agency that their institution meets a set of educational standards. Individual programs within a larger University system can go through separate processes by discipline-specific organizations at the international, national, and regional levels. The process can take months, even years of preparation.
When accreditation groups discuss elements of library work without mentioning traditional library vernacular, academic leadership may not recognize the value of the library to accreditation. While there is strong coverage in library literature about information literacy efforts to support accreditation, we will focus on the value of collections to support accreditation.
Mentions of library collections in accreditation standards varies greatly by discipline. Standards might ask your institution for specific information, such the size of collections, holding information for specific journal titles, or the number of research specialists on staff. Standards may ask for rankings of journals faculty publish in, but not explicitly mention the research collections faculty utilized to create the publications. Criteria may be more vague- asking the institution to articulate the value of their resources to support research and learning. A general shift from an emphasis on prescriptive inputs to open-ended outputs in accreditation documentation may have librarians struggling to articulate where they fit into revised accreditation standards.
We will highlight examples for how librarian liaisons to a college of law and a college of business provide value to accreditation by:
- Spotlighting accreditation standards related to library collections from the American Bar Association (ABA) and the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)
- Highlighting how we articulate value to these standards to administration, including the types of information and documentation we provide about our collections and research engagement
- Offering recommendations for increased library participation in accreditation processes