Several pricing models exist for providing access to electronic journals. Models may be based on the composition of a package of resources, the size of the purchasing institution, or other factors. Libraries combining to form consortia may realize pricing benefits. In this workshop these factors were considered from the perspectives of the access provider, the publisher, and the consortium, with feedback from librarians.

In recent decades, the composition of academic library collections has shifted toward electronic formats, resulting in a more complicated publication landscape to be navigated by selectors. Additionally, the workload of public services librarians has become more weighted toward instruction and research support, putting more pressure on the time of liaison librarians tasked with collection development responsibilities. These shifts have prompted academic institutions, including University of Wyoming Libraries, to consider a restructuring of collection development responsibilities. This article describes the evolution and implementation of a centralized model of selection at UW Libraries.Since the latter half of the twentieth century, the traditional model of collection building in academic libraries has relied largely on the work of multiple subject bibliographers, whose responsibility for selecting materials in specific areas of study has typically been "tacked on" to their primary duties. In recent decades, the composition of academic library collections has shifted toward electronic formats, resulting in a vastly more complicated publication landscape to be navigated by selectors; at the same time, the workload of public services librarians has become more heavily weighted toward instruction and research support, putting considerably more pressure on the time of liaison librarians tasked with collection development duties. This shift has prompted numerous institutions, including University of Wyoming (UW) Libraries, to consider reorganizing collection development responsibilities according to a more centralized model, with the intention of focusing and streamlining the work of selecting library materials as well as better integrating these tasks with ongoing processes of collection management. This article discusses the evolution of thinking about organization of selection work and electronic resources management (ERM) in academic libraries and describes the implementation of a centralized model of selection at the University of Wyoming. Literature ReviewNearly a century ago, Bascom (1922) wrote that selection "…should be accepted as a regular part of the day's work, not considered an added burden to be postponed until necessity forces it into the schedule, to the detriment of other duties" (p. 11). At the time, Bascom was talking about selection as it related to public libraries. In 2015, we're still trying to articulate selection's evolving role in libraries, especially academic libraries. Where centralized selection is 3 concerned, there's a limited amount of scholarly work on the topic as it relates to academic libraries. A good deal of existing scholarship focuses on the ways in which public libraries have put centralized selection to use. For instance, Sullivan (2004) discussed the Phoenix Public Library system's implementation of a centralized model. She noted, "Ultimately, we have found that centralized selection promotes diversity of materials because the selectors have the funds, the perspective, and ...

No abstract

The purpose of this workshop was to emphasize the importance of written procedures manuals for technical services, using anecdotal evidence to demonstrate the difficulties that can arise when workplace policies are not documented. In the subtitle of the workshop, the forest represents the big picture (having any kind of written policies or procedures); the trees represent the policies to which the staff can refer in doing their work; and the critters are items not normally addressed in manuals, the absence of which can cause unexpected problems for unwary managers.

The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.