- Email: [email protected]
Highlights of the ALCTS CMDS collection development issues for the practitioner committee meeting
316
Conference Reports / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 24 (2000) 267–350
income from the store funds one salary line plus several student workers. Another participant mentioned that her institution was in the process of opening such a store. Several examples of library stores that raised significant amounts of money were cited. Book sales were also mentioned and suggestions for increasing sales were given. The sale of valuable materials to dealers was also discussed. No one in the group had extensive experience with that; although Wachel said that several dealers patronize her library’s sales. Mention was made that the sale of weeded library materials is, most often, prohibited, and participants reported having to box and conceal all discarded materials before disposal to avoid having it recovered from the trash and returned to the library. As the discussion came to a close, Johnson suggested that next year’s program cover tax regulations pertinent to gifts & exchange or the running of library stores. Both topics seemed to be of interest. It was mentioned, in closing, that several libraries have their gift policies on their web sites. More information is also available through AcqWeb. Louise Plodinec Mitchell Memorial Library, Box 5408 – Hardy Rd., Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Plodinec). Highlights of the ALCTS CMDS collection development issues for the practitioner committee meeting Suzanne Freeman (Virginia Museum of Fine Arts) presided over this meeting which consisted of hearings on two books to be published in the ALCTS Collection Management and Development Guides series. Discussion of the first title, Guide to Collection Development and Management Administration, Organization, and Staffing, was led by the authors, Mary H. Munroe (Northern Illinois University) and John M. Haar (Vanderbilt University); the third author, Peggy Johnson (University of Minnesota) was unable to attend. Munroe began by explaining the context for the publication. She stated that the face of collection development has changed enormously over the last five to seven years, going from a rather esoteric activity that was performed off to one side to dealing with major issues concerning licensing and budgeting. The guide’s intended audience is any one from a director to a new collection development librarian. The authors have included issues related to school, public, and academic libraries. Basically, they have attempted to address conceptually the major models of collection development. Haar stated that in keeping with other ALCTS guides, this one reflects reality over theory, is descriptive rather than prescriptive, and attempts to simplify a complex reality. It is the authors’ hope that this book would be of use to higher level administrators who suddenly find themselves in charge of collection development. Next, Haar briefly went through the guide chapter by chapter. After an introduction in chapter one, the second chapter describes the components of collection, including collection building, collection management, and liaison activities. Chapter three covers the typical administrative responsibilities of a head of collection development. The authors consider the next chapter to be the heart of the guide, as well as the hardest to write. It covers the most
Conference Reports / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 24 (2000) 267–350
317
common organizational models of collection development: functional, geographic and clientbased, and hybrid. For each model there is a description, examples given, and advantages and disadvantages outlined. In a similar manner, chapter five outlines the two types of reporting structures in collection development: hierarchical and distributed. The last chapter looks at approaches for linking collection development librarians across the various models. The guide closes with a bibliography. The authors then opened the floor for comments and questions. General consensus was that this would be a very useful publication. There was a great deal of concern expressed that there is no longer many higher level positions left that focuses solely on collection development. This guide could be a resource that collection development librarians could pass on to administrators to show them the typical models of collection development, as well as let them know what collection development librarians do. In response to various questions, the authors provided additional information. There is a section in the guide that discusses what collection development librarians should tell users about scholarly communication, specifically addressing issues such as pricing and licensing. Ideally, the bibliography would be kept up-to-date on the web, but they do not have concrete plans for this yet. Publication of the guide is expected in January 2000. Finally, there was a request that functional assessment and special collections within collection development also be added. Mary Bushing (Montana State University) and Joanne Anderson (San Diego Public Library) led discussion on the second title, a revision of the 1989 Guide to the Evaluation of Library Collections. They have brought it up-to-date and given it a new title, Guide to the Evaluation of Library Information Resources. The new title indicates their incorporation of electronic resources into this new edition. Bushing mentioned that the revision resulted in some unanticipated work. One unexpected task involved changing the tone of the earlier edition, which had an almost apologetic tone justifying the use of collection evaluation, to a more positive one reflecting the changed environment. There is now a sense that the evaluation of information resources is an accepted and routine part of our professional responsibility. Anderson was struck by how electronic resources have changed our methods of evaluation. We can now get access to a great deal of data fairly easily. Even so, she believes that the basic principles are still the same, and in revising the guide, they have stayed with established methods. The fact that many things may change by the time this book is published gave Bushing and Anderson another reason to focus on general principles rather than specific details. The bibliography for this guide is very long, as there is a long history for this topic. Alluding to discussion engendered by the first guide’s hearing both felt that perhaps this guide’s bibliography should also be on the web. Additionally, the point was raised that perhaps an index across the whole Collection Management and Development Guides series would be very useful. Again, in response to various questions, the authors provided additional information. The authors consider this book to be a general introduction for a new librarian and, thus, does not contain information on specific methodologies. The book does discuss the “logical conclusions” of evaluating a collection, i.e., what can be done as a result of collection evaluation as well as specific titles of other guides to point the reader in appropriate directions. Publication of this title is also expected sometime before June 2000.
318
Conference Reports / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 24 (2000) 267–350
Glorian Sipman Business and Economics Bibliographer, University of Georgia Libraries, Athens, GA 30602-1641, USA E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Sipman). Selection for preservation in the digital age: a report from ALCTS preservation and reformatting section commercial technical services committee This well-attended program was organized by the ALCTS Preservation and Reformatting Section, Commercial Technical Services Committee. The emergence of digital imaging technology has provided libraries with greater options for preserving paper and film-based collections. Therefore, we should explore the implications of digital imaging within the context of traditional preservation programs and the need for modifying selection techniques to take full advantage of this new technology. The attendees of the program were expected to gain the knowledge necessary to begin evaluating the needs of their collections and the role digital imaging can play in aiding preservation through the program. The 2-hour session met their expectations. Steve Dalton, Program Chair, opened the session by posing a series of questions to the attendees: how are we going to allocate library resources for digital images? How much do we need to invest in such images? Where should we get input to make sound decisions when we need to choose digitization as a preservation option? After these questions, three librarians shared their philosophies and practices from their respective institutions with the audience. Janet Gertz (Preservation Librarian, Columbia University) spoke on the selection criteria for digital conversion and preservation. Gertz believes that preservation means guaranteeing a long-lived version of the intellectual content. A digital version of materials will not be guaranteed to survive as long as that of the microfilm version. Digital conversion alone does not constitute preservation. It should be combined with other approaches of traditional preservation to provide enhanced access to preserved materials. Is the process of selection for digitalization significantly different from that for traditional preservation activities? Gertz offered selection criteria for both traditional preservation and digital conversion. The selection criteria for tradition preservation are essentially: Y Preserved materials should be any item or collection that has been damaged or endangered. Y These items should have sufficient enduring value to justify preservation, such as artifactual features, uniqueness and historical importance, distinguished long-term intellectual content for teaching and research, consonance with the mission of the institution, and contribution to or support for historically important areas. Y The options for preserved items should be given to their physical nature, importance, and current and future use. Y The expenses of preservation options should match the monetary and intellectual value of the preserved items.
Conference Reports / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 24 (2000) 267–350
income from the store funds one salary line plus several student workers. Another participant mentioned that her institution was in the process of opening such a store. Several examples of library stores that raised significant amounts of money were cited. Book sales were also mentioned and suggestions for increasing sales were given. The sale of valuable materials to dealers was also discussed. No one in the group had extensive experience with that; although Wachel said that several dealers patronize her library’s sales. Mention was made that the sale of weeded library materials is, most often, prohibited, and participants reported having to box and conceal all discarded materials before disposal to avoid having it recovered from the trash and returned to the library. As the discussion came to a close, Johnson suggested that next year’s program cover tax regulations pertinent to gifts & exchange or the running of library stores. Both topics seemed to be of interest. It was mentioned, in closing, that several libraries have their gift policies on their web sites. More information is also available through AcqWeb. Louise Plodinec Mitchell Memorial Library, Box 5408 – Hardy Rd., Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Plodinec). Highlights of the ALCTS CMDS collection development issues for the practitioner committee meeting Suzanne Freeman (Virginia Museum of Fine Arts) presided over this meeting which consisted of hearings on two books to be published in the ALCTS Collection Management and Development Guides series. Discussion of the first title, Guide to Collection Development and Management Administration, Organization, and Staffing, was led by the authors, Mary H. Munroe (Northern Illinois University) and John M. Haar (Vanderbilt University); the third author, Peggy Johnson (University of Minnesota) was unable to attend. Munroe began by explaining the context for the publication. She stated that the face of collection development has changed enormously over the last five to seven years, going from a rather esoteric activity that was performed off to one side to dealing with major issues concerning licensing and budgeting. The guide’s intended audience is any one from a director to a new collection development librarian. The authors have included issues related to school, public, and academic libraries. Basically, they have attempted to address conceptually the major models of collection development. Haar stated that in keeping with other ALCTS guides, this one reflects reality over theory, is descriptive rather than prescriptive, and attempts to simplify a complex reality. It is the authors’ hope that this book would be of use to higher level administrators who suddenly find themselves in charge of collection development. Next, Haar briefly went through the guide chapter by chapter. After an introduction in chapter one, the second chapter describes the components of collection, including collection building, collection management, and liaison activities. Chapter three covers the typical administrative responsibilities of a head of collection development. The authors consider the next chapter to be the heart of the guide, as well as the hardest to write. It covers the most
Conference Reports / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 24 (2000) 267–350
317
common organizational models of collection development: functional, geographic and clientbased, and hybrid. For each model there is a description, examples given, and advantages and disadvantages outlined. In a similar manner, chapter five outlines the two types of reporting structures in collection development: hierarchical and distributed. The last chapter looks at approaches for linking collection development librarians across the various models. The guide closes with a bibliography. The authors then opened the floor for comments and questions. General consensus was that this would be a very useful publication. There was a great deal of concern expressed that there is no longer many higher level positions left that focuses solely on collection development. This guide could be a resource that collection development librarians could pass on to administrators to show them the typical models of collection development, as well as let them know what collection development librarians do. In response to various questions, the authors provided additional information. There is a section in the guide that discusses what collection development librarians should tell users about scholarly communication, specifically addressing issues such as pricing and licensing. Ideally, the bibliography would be kept up-to-date on the web, but they do not have concrete plans for this yet. Publication of the guide is expected in January 2000. Finally, there was a request that functional assessment and special collections within collection development also be added. Mary Bushing (Montana State University) and Joanne Anderson (San Diego Public Library) led discussion on the second title, a revision of the 1989 Guide to the Evaluation of Library Collections. They have brought it up-to-date and given it a new title, Guide to the Evaluation of Library Information Resources. The new title indicates their incorporation of electronic resources into this new edition. Bushing mentioned that the revision resulted in some unanticipated work. One unexpected task involved changing the tone of the earlier edition, which had an almost apologetic tone justifying the use of collection evaluation, to a more positive one reflecting the changed environment. There is now a sense that the evaluation of information resources is an accepted and routine part of our professional responsibility. Anderson was struck by how electronic resources have changed our methods of evaluation. We can now get access to a great deal of data fairly easily. Even so, she believes that the basic principles are still the same, and in revising the guide, they have stayed with established methods. The fact that many things may change by the time this book is published gave Bushing and Anderson another reason to focus on general principles rather than specific details. The bibliography for this guide is very long, as there is a long history for this topic. Alluding to discussion engendered by the first guide’s hearing both felt that perhaps this guide’s bibliography should also be on the web. Additionally, the point was raised that perhaps an index across the whole Collection Management and Development Guides series would be very useful. Again, in response to various questions, the authors provided additional information. The authors consider this book to be a general introduction for a new librarian and, thus, does not contain information on specific methodologies. The book does discuss the “logical conclusions” of evaluating a collection, i.e., what can be done as a result of collection evaluation as well as specific titles of other guides to point the reader in appropriate directions. Publication of this title is also expected sometime before June 2000.
318
Conference Reports / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 24 (2000) 267–350
Glorian Sipman Business and Economics Bibliographer, University of Georgia Libraries, Athens, GA 30602-1641, USA E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Sipman). Selection for preservation in the digital age: a report from ALCTS preservation and reformatting section commercial technical services committee This well-attended program was organized by the ALCTS Preservation and Reformatting Section, Commercial Technical Services Committee. The emergence of digital imaging technology has provided libraries with greater options for preserving paper and film-based collections. Therefore, we should explore the implications of digital imaging within the context of traditional preservation programs and the need for modifying selection techniques to take full advantage of this new technology. The attendees of the program were expected to gain the knowledge necessary to begin evaluating the needs of their collections and the role digital imaging can play in aiding preservation through the program. The 2-hour session met their expectations. Steve Dalton, Program Chair, opened the session by posing a series of questions to the attendees: how are we going to allocate library resources for digital images? How much do we need to invest in such images? Where should we get input to make sound decisions when we need to choose digitization as a preservation option? After these questions, three librarians shared their philosophies and practices from their respective institutions with the audience. Janet Gertz (Preservation Librarian, Columbia University) spoke on the selection criteria for digital conversion and preservation. Gertz believes that preservation means guaranteeing a long-lived version of the intellectual content. A digital version of materials will not be guaranteed to survive as long as that of the microfilm version. Digital conversion alone does not constitute preservation. It should be combined with other approaches of traditional preservation to provide enhanced access to preserved materials. Is the process of selection for digitalization significantly different from that for traditional preservation activities? Gertz offered selection criteria for both traditional preservation and digital conversion. The selection criteria for tradition preservation are essentially: Y Preserved materials should be any item or collection that has been damaged or endangered. Y These items should have sufficient enduring value to justify preservation, such as artifactual features, uniqueness and historical importance, distinguished long-term intellectual content for teaching and research, consonance with the mission of the institution, and contribution to or support for historically important areas. Y The options for preserved items should be given to their physical nature, importance, and current and future use. Y The expenses of preservation options should match the monetary and intellectual value of the preserved items.