- Email: [email protected]
Updating conspectus for a digital age
Pergamon Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services 26 (2002) 253–258
Updating conspectus for a digital age Peter Claytona, G.E. Gormanb,* a
b
University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington Cenral, New Zealand
Abstract The RLG Conspectus is a method of describing collection strengths in a standardized manner. Introduced at the end of the print-only era, its promise has never been fulfilled, and interest in it is clearly waning. The authors’ view is that, while it has limitations as a tool facilitating coordinated regional and national collection development, it should still be useful in its primary role of collection description. However, in its present form it is collection-centered rather than resource access-centered, and now urgently needs to be updated to take into account the availability of digital data if it is to be of continuing relevance to the library community. This article proposes just such an updated version of Conspectus. © 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The Research Libraries Group (RLG) Conspectus has often been recommended as a way of describing library collection strengths and collection building intentions for various subject areas. [1] Recently, Gorman and Miller have suggested that ‘the Conspectus approach continues to find favor in the professional community, particularly in the US, where even smaller libraries are now using this method’. [2] But despite its initially enthusiastic reception in several countries, others have been more wary. A check of the published literature shows that there has been a substantial diminution of books and articles on Conspectus, suggesting that its time may now have passed. [3] We believe that this may well be because it does not make provision for electronic resources.
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (G.E. Gorman) 1464-9055/02/$ – see front matter © 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 1 4 6 4 - 9 0 5 5 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 2 4 8 - 8
254
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
2. Conspectus in an electronic age This is not the place to review the advantages and disadvantages of Conspectus. [4] Its limitations as a tool facilitating coordinated regional and national collection development seem clear. Overall, it seems that many of the various benefits claimed for Conspectus are, if anything, further reduced by the widespread availability of online library catalogs on the Web. Who now needs to consult Conspectus data to see which libraries have strong resources in an area when collection building? Who now needs these data for inter-library resource sharing, or to direct clients to strong collections? All of this information is already available electronically – often via online public access catalogs (OPACs) on the Web. Indeed, the whole resource-based approach of Conspectus reflects a pre-digital age. Look at the descriptions of the various levels: arguably an experienced librarian with a PC and an Internet connection could provide information to at least Level 2b (Basic Information: Augmented), and in some areas even to Level 3a (Intermediate: Introductory). Whether a typical library end-user could do as well in gathering current electronic information is, of course, another matter. Level 3a is supposed to describe the type of collection most undergraduates require. In fact, anyone working in higher education will know of some undergraduates who appear to be able to complete some courses quite satisfactorily with very much less than they could get from the Web. [5] Of course there has been some significant work on Conspectus which has taken advantage of its new digital environment. For example, there has been a sustained effort to reduce the cost of collection assessment and the subjectivities involved through automated products, principally from the US. OCLC and the AMIGOS Bibliographic Council developed a product called the OCLC/AMIGOS Collection Analysis Compact Disc to assist libraries in measuring their collections against those of other institutions. [6] Vellucci suggested this could also be used for course analysis, generation of desiderata lists and management information data. [7] WLN has also produced Conspectus software. [8] However, such products would appear to have limited application elsewhere in the world – and do not address the central problem under discussion here: the collection-centered rather than resource access-centered nature of Conspectus itself.
3. Resource description We live and work in an era when accountability and evaluation of service provision is expected of all types of organizations. Libraries are not exempt from this, and no library evaluation can exclude the collection, whether real or virtual. Indeed – unlike that on Conspectus – the literature on resource evaluation continues to grow and develop. [9] How does one measure resource adequacy? The oldest measure has, of course, been size. However, comparative library statistics really do only say, ‘My library is bigger than your library’, not ‘My library is better than your library’, and in a digital age, size is irrelevant – what is crucial is access. Perhaps in the past size has really been a surrogate measure for budget size. Even here, though, there are problems. Budgets are an input measure, may fluctuate wildly, are subject to manipulation through such measures as outsourcing (enabling
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
255
labor costs to be counted as materials costs), ignore the increasing amount of gratis information available online – and, of course, do not into take account how well the resources budget has been expended. For this, we need performance measures – and the literature on library performance measures is large indeed, and growing. [10] For a resource collection, we have to measure the degree to which a library acquires, or acquires access to, the materials it intends to in accordance with stated parameters (usually in a collection development policy). How does a library state these parameters? For some time the accepted answer has been, by describing the library’s intentions using the Conspectus levels, as applied to particular subject areas. There is a continuing need to be able to describe the range and depth of materials potentially available to a library user. Ideally such descriptions will use standardized terminology. Whatever one thinks of Conspectus, there is still no viable, well-recognized or widely used alternative to it for describing the present strength, current acquisitions or future intentions for a library’s information resources in particular subject areas. What is needed, then, is a re-worked statement of Conspectus levels which takes into account the availability of digital data. Note here that digital data has only to be available, not ‘owned’ in the sense that print resources must be in order for them to be available. In fact, with multiple access to digital data possible, it can be argued that it can be made more readily available then even the undergraduate short loan print collections of old. As no such revised statement of Conspectus has yet appeared, adapting it to the digital age, we offer this as Fig. 1. For terminology such as ‘The collection includes. . . ’, we have substituted ‘The library provides access to. . . ’, and so on. Using this statement, or one adapted from it, we suggest that a Conspectus-like approach might be adopted for the description of the specific areas in which a library has and will acquire collections, or will arrange access to resources. Given that access to many electronic resources is ephemeral – the databases a library subscribes to today, it may not have access to tomorrow, a cancelled CD-ROM set may have to be returned to the vendor – such an approach will have real limitations for describing ECS (Existing Collection Strengths). However, it should prove more useful than statements over two decades old for describing CCI (Current Collection Intensity), and ideal for any library deciding upon its DCI (Desired Collection Intensity).
4. Conclusions This suggested revision of the Conspectus levels will itself need further revision as the balance of material availability shifts further and further toward electronic media. Despite the zealots on both sides of the debate, no collection is now adequate which does not provide access to at least some electronic resources. On the other hand, it will be a very long time, if ever, before a collection can be considered adequate without providing access to at least some print resources. If the resources available in and through libraries are to be assessed and evaluated using some common terminology, then either a totally new tool will have to be invented – and so far, none has – or we need an adaptation of the old Conspectus descriptions along the lines of the one proposed here.
256
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
Figure 1 Proposed Conspectus descriptions for levels of access Level 0 Level 1 Level 1a Level 1b Level 2
Level 2a
Level 2b
Level 3
Level 3a
Out of Scope The library does not collect or provide access to resources in this area; electronic access is limited to Internet resources. Minimal A collection for which few selections are made beyond introductory/very basic material; electronic access is limited primarily to Internet resources. Minimal with Uneven Coverage Few selections are made and there is uneven representation of a subject; electronic access is limited primarily to Internet resources. Minimal with Even Coverage Few selections are made, but key authors, some core works, or a spectrum of views are represented; electronic access is limited primarily to Internet resources. Basic Information Access to up-to-date materials, print and electronic, which serve to introduce and define a subject and to indicate the varieties of information available elsewhere. It may include dictionaries, encyclopedias, access to appropriate bibliographic databases (including on CD-ROM), standard and significant works, handbooks, manuals, films, sound recording, a few popular or major serials and access to Internet resources. A basic information resource can support general enquiries, school and some undergraduate instruction, and information at a popular level, but is not sufficiently intensive to support advanced undergraduate courses. Basic Information: Introductory The emphasis at this level is on providing resources which introduce and define a subject. A collection at this level includes basic reference sources and explanatory works, such as textbooks, historical descriptions of the subject’s development, general works devoted to major topics and figures in the field, selective major periodicals, and access to Internet resources. This level is sufficient to support clients attempting to locate general information about a subject or students enrolled in introductory level courses. Basic Information: Augmented At this level, basic information about a subject is provided on a wider range of topics and with more depth. There is a broader selection of basic explanatory works, historical descriptions, reference sources (including on CD-ROM) and periodicals that serve to introduce and define a subject. This level is sufficient to support students in basic courses as well as supporting the basic information needs of clients in public and special libraries. Intermediate Includes a broad range of resources adequate to support undergraduate and most graduate instruction, sustained independent study, work-based interests or specialised enquiries; that is, adequate to impart and maintain a knowledge of a subject in a systematic way at less than research intensity. It includes a wide range of basic works in appropriate formats, the fundamental reference sources and bibliographical works (including on CD-ROM), a significant number of classic retrospective materials, complete collections of the works of more important authors, selections from the works of secondary writers, a selection of representative journals, and access to appropriate online databases as well as the Internet. Intermediate: Introductory At this level resources adequate for imparting and maintaining knowledge about the primary topics of a subject area are provided. Access to a broad range of basic works in appropriate formats, classic retrospective materials, all key journals on primary topics, selected journals and seminal works on secondary topics, the fundamental reference sources and bibliographical works (including on CD-ROM) and access to appropriate online databases as well as the Internet. Resources are adequate to support undergraduate instruction, as well as most independent study and work-based needs of the clientele of public and special libraries; but not adequate to support postgraduate courses. (continued on next page)
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
257
Figure 1 (continued) Level 3b
Level 4
Level 5
Intermediate:Augmented This level provides resources adequate for imparting and maintaining knowledge about the primary and secondary topics of a subject area. Access is available to a significant number of seminal works and journals on the primary and secondary topics in the field; a significant number of classic retrospective materials; a substantial collection of works by secondary figures; works that provide in-depth discussions of research, techniques and evaluation; the fundamental reference sources and bibliographical works (including on CD-ROM) and access to appropriate online databases as well as the Internet. The resources are adequate to support all undergraduate and most postgraduate coursework, as well as the more advanced independent study and workbased needs of the clients of public and special libraries. Research At this level access is provided to both current and retrospective resources, including historical material. Information available supports postgraduate and independent research. Access is to the major published source materials required, including all important reference works (both print and electronic), a wide selection of specialised monographs, a very extensive collection of journals (including electronic journals) and immediate access to bibliographies, abstracting and indexing services in the field, materials containing research findings and non-bibliographic databases. Resources available will include materials in all appropriate formats and languages, including original materials and ephemera. Comprehensive Resources which include, as far as is reasonably possible, all significant works of recorded knowledge (publications, manuscripts, electronic media and other forms) in all applicable languages, for a necessarily defined and limited field. This level of collecting intensity is one that maintains a special collection, complemented by all available online resources; the aim, if not the achievement, is exhaustiveness.
The future of libraries will be an inclusive one, where readers will use and expect resources to be made available to them regardless of format. Collection management and development policies and collection assessment tools which ignore this will be increasingly irrelevant, however useful they once seemed.
References [1] Recent writers on Conspectus include Sridhar, M. S. (1997). Role of conspectus in collection management, and resource sharing. Library Science with a Slant to Documentation and Information Studies, 34 (2), 91–99; Biblarz, D. The role of collection development in a teaching library, European Research Libraries Cooperation, 7 (2), 397– 422; Davis, B. (1998). How the WLN conspectus works for small libraries. Acquisitions Librarian, 20, 53–72; and Russell, J. (1999). Collection profiling, SCONUL Newsletter, 16, 26 –30. A recent bibliography is provided by Miller in ‘The Recent Literature’, the last chapter of Gorman, G. E., & Miller, R. H. (eds.), Collection management for the 21st century: A handbook for librarians Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1997. [2] Gorman, G. E., & Miller, R. H. Changing collections, changing evaluations. In International Yearbook of Library and Information Management 2000/2001: Collection Management, Gen. Ed., G. E. Gorman. London: Library Association, 2000, p. 314. [3] Searching both titles and abstracts on the LISA database in June 2002, there were 78 items listed for the years 1991–1995; 19 for 1996 –2000; and only a handful for 2001.
258
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
[4] For this, see Chapter 3, ‘Conspectus.’ In Clayton, Peter, & Gorman, G. E. Managing Information Resources in Libraries: Collection Management in Theory and Practice (London: Library Association Publishing, 2001). [5] The statement in the Dearing Committee report, Higher Education in the Learning Society (London: HMSO), that undergraduates are heavily dependent on access to printed textbooks is, of course, normative. Research in several countries has found only limited or no correlation between library use and academic success. See, for example, J. Wells. (June 1995). The influence of library usage on undergraduate academic success. Australian Academic & Research Libraries 26 (2), 121–128. That report also cites several earlier studies in the area. [6] Harrell, J. (1992). Use of the OCLC/AMIGOS collection analysis CD to determine comparative collection strength in English, and American literature: A case study. Technical Services Quarterly, 9, 1–14. [7] Vellucci, S. L. (1993). OCLC/AMIGOS collection analysis CD: broadening the scope of use. OCLC Systems and Services, 9, 49 –53. [8] Forsythe, D. (1999). OCLC/WLN merger provides new opportunities for libraries. OCLC Newsletter, 239, 42–3. See also Davis, B. (1998). How the WLN conspectus works for small libraries. Acquisitions Librarian 20, 53–72; and Davis, B. (1998). Using local marketing characteristics to customize the conspectus for fiction assessment. Acquisitions Librarian, 19, 29 – 44. [9] See, for example, (Fall 2000). Assessing digital library services. Peters, T. A., issue editor; Library Trends, 49 (2), 221–390. [10] Some entry points to this literature are provided by D. Spiller, Providing Materials for Library Users (London: Library Association Publishing, 2000); Barton, J., & Blagden, J. (1999): Academic Library Effectiveness: A Comparative Approach (British Library Research and Innovation Centre, 1996); Joint Funding Councils’ Library Review Group, Report (Follett Report) (London: HEFCE, 1993).
Updating conspectus for a digital age Peter Claytona, G.E. Gormanb,* a
b
University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington Cenral, New Zealand
Abstract The RLG Conspectus is a method of describing collection strengths in a standardized manner. Introduced at the end of the print-only era, its promise has never been fulfilled, and interest in it is clearly waning. The authors’ view is that, while it has limitations as a tool facilitating coordinated regional and national collection development, it should still be useful in its primary role of collection description. However, in its present form it is collection-centered rather than resource access-centered, and now urgently needs to be updated to take into account the availability of digital data if it is to be of continuing relevance to the library community. This article proposes just such an updated version of Conspectus. © 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The Research Libraries Group (RLG) Conspectus has often been recommended as a way of describing library collection strengths and collection building intentions for various subject areas. [1] Recently, Gorman and Miller have suggested that ‘the Conspectus approach continues to find favor in the professional community, particularly in the US, where even smaller libraries are now using this method’. [2] But despite its initially enthusiastic reception in several countries, others have been more wary. A check of the published literature shows that there has been a substantial diminution of books and articles on Conspectus, suggesting that its time may now have passed. [3] We believe that this may well be because it does not make provision for electronic resources.
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (G.E. Gorman) 1464-9055/02/$ – see front matter © 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 1 4 6 4 - 9 0 5 5 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 2 4 8 - 8
254
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
2. Conspectus in an electronic age This is not the place to review the advantages and disadvantages of Conspectus. [4] Its limitations as a tool facilitating coordinated regional and national collection development seem clear. Overall, it seems that many of the various benefits claimed for Conspectus are, if anything, further reduced by the widespread availability of online library catalogs on the Web. Who now needs to consult Conspectus data to see which libraries have strong resources in an area when collection building? Who now needs these data for inter-library resource sharing, or to direct clients to strong collections? All of this information is already available electronically – often via online public access catalogs (OPACs) on the Web. Indeed, the whole resource-based approach of Conspectus reflects a pre-digital age. Look at the descriptions of the various levels: arguably an experienced librarian with a PC and an Internet connection could provide information to at least Level 2b (Basic Information: Augmented), and in some areas even to Level 3a (Intermediate: Introductory). Whether a typical library end-user could do as well in gathering current electronic information is, of course, another matter. Level 3a is supposed to describe the type of collection most undergraduates require. In fact, anyone working in higher education will know of some undergraduates who appear to be able to complete some courses quite satisfactorily with very much less than they could get from the Web. [5] Of course there has been some significant work on Conspectus which has taken advantage of its new digital environment. For example, there has been a sustained effort to reduce the cost of collection assessment and the subjectivities involved through automated products, principally from the US. OCLC and the AMIGOS Bibliographic Council developed a product called the OCLC/AMIGOS Collection Analysis Compact Disc to assist libraries in measuring their collections against those of other institutions. [6] Vellucci suggested this could also be used for course analysis, generation of desiderata lists and management information data. [7] WLN has also produced Conspectus software. [8] However, such products would appear to have limited application elsewhere in the world – and do not address the central problem under discussion here: the collection-centered rather than resource access-centered nature of Conspectus itself.
3. Resource description We live and work in an era when accountability and evaluation of service provision is expected of all types of organizations. Libraries are not exempt from this, and no library evaluation can exclude the collection, whether real or virtual. Indeed – unlike that on Conspectus – the literature on resource evaluation continues to grow and develop. [9] How does one measure resource adequacy? The oldest measure has, of course, been size. However, comparative library statistics really do only say, ‘My library is bigger than your library’, not ‘My library is better than your library’, and in a digital age, size is irrelevant – what is crucial is access. Perhaps in the past size has really been a surrogate measure for budget size. Even here, though, there are problems. Budgets are an input measure, may fluctuate wildly, are subject to manipulation through such measures as outsourcing (enabling
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
255
labor costs to be counted as materials costs), ignore the increasing amount of gratis information available online – and, of course, do not into take account how well the resources budget has been expended. For this, we need performance measures – and the literature on library performance measures is large indeed, and growing. [10] For a resource collection, we have to measure the degree to which a library acquires, or acquires access to, the materials it intends to in accordance with stated parameters (usually in a collection development policy). How does a library state these parameters? For some time the accepted answer has been, by describing the library’s intentions using the Conspectus levels, as applied to particular subject areas. There is a continuing need to be able to describe the range and depth of materials potentially available to a library user. Ideally such descriptions will use standardized terminology. Whatever one thinks of Conspectus, there is still no viable, well-recognized or widely used alternative to it for describing the present strength, current acquisitions or future intentions for a library’s information resources in particular subject areas. What is needed, then, is a re-worked statement of Conspectus levels which takes into account the availability of digital data. Note here that digital data has only to be available, not ‘owned’ in the sense that print resources must be in order for them to be available. In fact, with multiple access to digital data possible, it can be argued that it can be made more readily available then even the undergraduate short loan print collections of old. As no such revised statement of Conspectus has yet appeared, adapting it to the digital age, we offer this as Fig. 1. For terminology such as ‘The collection includes. . . ’, we have substituted ‘The library provides access to. . . ’, and so on. Using this statement, or one adapted from it, we suggest that a Conspectus-like approach might be adopted for the description of the specific areas in which a library has and will acquire collections, or will arrange access to resources. Given that access to many electronic resources is ephemeral – the databases a library subscribes to today, it may not have access to tomorrow, a cancelled CD-ROM set may have to be returned to the vendor – such an approach will have real limitations for describing ECS (Existing Collection Strengths). However, it should prove more useful than statements over two decades old for describing CCI (Current Collection Intensity), and ideal for any library deciding upon its DCI (Desired Collection Intensity).
4. Conclusions This suggested revision of the Conspectus levels will itself need further revision as the balance of material availability shifts further and further toward electronic media. Despite the zealots on both sides of the debate, no collection is now adequate which does not provide access to at least some electronic resources. On the other hand, it will be a very long time, if ever, before a collection can be considered adequate without providing access to at least some print resources. If the resources available in and through libraries are to be assessed and evaluated using some common terminology, then either a totally new tool will have to be invented – and so far, none has – or we need an adaptation of the old Conspectus descriptions along the lines of the one proposed here.
256
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
Figure 1 Proposed Conspectus descriptions for levels of access Level 0 Level 1 Level 1a Level 1b Level 2
Level 2a
Level 2b
Level 3
Level 3a
Out of Scope The library does not collect or provide access to resources in this area; electronic access is limited to Internet resources. Minimal A collection for which few selections are made beyond introductory/very basic material; electronic access is limited primarily to Internet resources. Minimal with Uneven Coverage Few selections are made and there is uneven representation of a subject; electronic access is limited primarily to Internet resources. Minimal with Even Coverage Few selections are made, but key authors, some core works, or a spectrum of views are represented; electronic access is limited primarily to Internet resources. Basic Information Access to up-to-date materials, print and electronic, which serve to introduce and define a subject and to indicate the varieties of information available elsewhere. It may include dictionaries, encyclopedias, access to appropriate bibliographic databases (including on CD-ROM), standard and significant works, handbooks, manuals, films, sound recording, a few popular or major serials and access to Internet resources. A basic information resource can support general enquiries, school and some undergraduate instruction, and information at a popular level, but is not sufficiently intensive to support advanced undergraduate courses. Basic Information: Introductory The emphasis at this level is on providing resources which introduce and define a subject. A collection at this level includes basic reference sources and explanatory works, such as textbooks, historical descriptions of the subject’s development, general works devoted to major topics and figures in the field, selective major periodicals, and access to Internet resources. This level is sufficient to support clients attempting to locate general information about a subject or students enrolled in introductory level courses. Basic Information: Augmented At this level, basic information about a subject is provided on a wider range of topics and with more depth. There is a broader selection of basic explanatory works, historical descriptions, reference sources (including on CD-ROM) and periodicals that serve to introduce and define a subject. This level is sufficient to support students in basic courses as well as supporting the basic information needs of clients in public and special libraries. Intermediate Includes a broad range of resources adequate to support undergraduate and most graduate instruction, sustained independent study, work-based interests or specialised enquiries; that is, adequate to impart and maintain a knowledge of a subject in a systematic way at less than research intensity. It includes a wide range of basic works in appropriate formats, the fundamental reference sources and bibliographical works (including on CD-ROM), a significant number of classic retrospective materials, complete collections of the works of more important authors, selections from the works of secondary writers, a selection of representative journals, and access to appropriate online databases as well as the Internet. Intermediate: Introductory At this level resources adequate for imparting and maintaining knowledge about the primary topics of a subject area are provided. Access to a broad range of basic works in appropriate formats, classic retrospective materials, all key journals on primary topics, selected journals and seminal works on secondary topics, the fundamental reference sources and bibliographical works (including on CD-ROM) and access to appropriate online databases as well as the Internet. Resources are adequate to support undergraduate instruction, as well as most independent study and work-based needs of the clientele of public and special libraries; but not adequate to support postgraduate courses. (continued on next page)
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
257
Figure 1 (continued) Level 3b
Level 4
Level 5
Intermediate:Augmented This level provides resources adequate for imparting and maintaining knowledge about the primary and secondary topics of a subject area. Access is available to a significant number of seminal works and journals on the primary and secondary topics in the field; a significant number of classic retrospective materials; a substantial collection of works by secondary figures; works that provide in-depth discussions of research, techniques and evaluation; the fundamental reference sources and bibliographical works (including on CD-ROM) and access to appropriate online databases as well as the Internet. The resources are adequate to support all undergraduate and most postgraduate coursework, as well as the more advanced independent study and workbased needs of the clients of public and special libraries. Research At this level access is provided to both current and retrospective resources, including historical material. Information available supports postgraduate and independent research. Access is to the major published source materials required, including all important reference works (both print and electronic), a wide selection of specialised monographs, a very extensive collection of journals (including electronic journals) and immediate access to bibliographies, abstracting and indexing services in the field, materials containing research findings and non-bibliographic databases. Resources available will include materials in all appropriate formats and languages, including original materials and ephemera. Comprehensive Resources which include, as far as is reasonably possible, all significant works of recorded knowledge (publications, manuscripts, electronic media and other forms) in all applicable languages, for a necessarily defined and limited field. This level of collecting intensity is one that maintains a special collection, complemented by all available online resources; the aim, if not the achievement, is exhaustiveness.
The future of libraries will be an inclusive one, where readers will use and expect resources to be made available to them regardless of format. Collection management and development policies and collection assessment tools which ignore this will be increasingly irrelevant, however useful they once seemed.
References [1] Recent writers on Conspectus include Sridhar, M. S. (1997). Role of conspectus in collection management, and resource sharing. Library Science with a Slant to Documentation and Information Studies, 34 (2), 91–99; Biblarz, D. The role of collection development in a teaching library, European Research Libraries Cooperation, 7 (2), 397– 422; Davis, B. (1998). How the WLN conspectus works for small libraries. Acquisitions Librarian, 20, 53–72; and Russell, J. (1999). Collection profiling, SCONUL Newsletter, 16, 26 –30. A recent bibliography is provided by Miller in ‘The Recent Literature’, the last chapter of Gorman, G. E., & Miller, R. H. (eds.), Collection management for the 21st century: A handbook for librarians Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1997. [2] Gorman, G. E., & Miller, R. H. Changing collections, changing evaluations. In International Yearbook of Library and Information Management 2000/2001: Collection Management, Gen. Ed., G. E. Gorman. London: Library Association, 2000, p. 314. [3] Searching both titles and abstracts on the LISA database in June 2002, there were 78 items listed for the years 1991–1995; 19 for 1996 –2000; and only a handful for 2001.
258
P. Clayton, G.E. Gorman / Libr. Coll. Acq. & Tech. Serv. 26 (2002) 253–258
[4] For this, see Chapter 3, ‘Conspectus.’ In Clayton, Peter, & Gorman, G. E. Managing Information Resources in Libraries: Collection Management in Theory and Practice (London: Library Association Publishing, 2001). [5] The statement in the Dearing Committee report, Higher Education in the Learning Society (London: HMSO), that undergraduates are heavily dependent on access to printed textbooks is, of course, normative. Research in several countries has found only limited or no correlation between library use and academic success. See, for example, J. Wells. (June 1995). The influence of library usage on undergraduate academic success. Australian Academic & Research Libraries 26 (2), 121–128. That report also cites several earlier studies in the area. [6] Harrell, J. (1992). Use of the OCLC/AMIGOS collection analysis CD to determine comparative collection strength in English, and American literature: A case study. Technical Services Quarterly, 9, 1–14. [7] Vellucci, S. L. (1993). OCLC/AMIGOS collection analysis CD: broadening the scope of use. OCLC Systems and Services, 9, 49 –53. [8] Forsythe, D. (1999). OCLC/WLN merger provides new opportunities for libraries. OCLC Newsletter, 239, 42–3. See also Davis, B. (1998). How the WLN conspectus works for small libraries. Acquisitions Librarian 20, 53–72; and Davis, B. (1998). Using local marketing characteristics to customize the conspectus for fiction assessment. Acquisitions Librarian, 19, 29 – 44. [9] See, for example, (Fall 2000). Assessing digital library services. Peters, T. A., issue editor; Library Trends, 49 (2), 221–390. [10] Some entry points to this literature are provided by D. Spiller, Providing Materials for Library Users (London: Library Association Publishing, 2000); Barton, J., & Blagden, J. (1999): Academic Library Effectiveness: A Comparative Approach (British Library Research and Innovation Centre, 1996); Joint Funding Councils’ Library Review Group, Report (Follett Report) (London: HEFCE, 1993).