Weeding the Reference Collection: A Case Study of Collection Management

Francis, Mary

doi:10.1080/02763877.2011.619458

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If a print reference collection is still necessary, the literature suggests the necessity of paring it down. Francis (2012, p. 220), while noting the esteem with which librarians hold reference collections, also maintains that “a bloated reference collection focused on the needs of patrons from 20 years ago offers little service to the current patrons”. Detmering and Sproles emphasize a similar approach to weeding their institution’s reference collection: […] with usage data showing limited use of print reference books and anecdotal evidence from […] librarians indicating that they rarely employ such books when providing research assistance, it became clear that the library no longer needed a huge print reference collection (2012, p. 19).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning commons reference collections in ARL libraries

Pierard

Bordeianu

2016

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-This paper explores the changing role of the reference collection in learning commons at ARL member libraries. Design/Methodology/Approach-A 15 question survey was sent to managers at academic research libraries with membership in the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Respondents were asked about their learning commons and reference collections. To increase the sample size, the researchers conducted phone interviews using the same questions with a random sample of individuals from the same target population. Findings-Most respondents had or were planning learning commons for their libraries. The role of reference collections varied. Of those who had retained a print reference collection, the majority believed them to be little-used. The researchers believe this may signal an end to a formerly cherished idea: the primacy of the reference collection within a library learning space. Research limitations/implications-This study involved a random sample of public service managers at North American ARL academic libraries. While the sample is believed to be representative of the broader population, findings may not be generalizable to all ARL libraries or to other academic libraries. Originality/value-Many papers have been written about information or learning commons spaces and their distinctive elements. Others have discussed the changing role of reference collections. This paper is unique in examining the changing role of the reference collection within learning commons spaces.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning commons reference collections in ARL libraries

Pierard

Bordeianu

2016

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The critical importance of weeding print titles in the reference collection is stressed by Francis (2012), in a case study focusing on her experience at the library at Dakota State University. She cautions against the lack of collection management in this area because it will ultimately render the collection outdated and useless.…”

Section: Replacing Print Reference Titles With E-booksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deselection of print monographs in the humanities and social sciences in the digital age

Oliva

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose For most college and university libraries, deselection of monographs should be an essential component of collection development. Few of these libraries have unlimited space for book stack expansion. This research study aims to cover the reasons why this should be undertaken and how it can be accomplished in the humanities and social sciences. At the main campus of Adelphi University Libraries, a conservative approach was used to identify and carefully review monograph titles that were published more than 50 years ago, and, in most cases, this resulted in their deselection without significantly affecting the collection. For some of these titles, the author determined that they might be worth replacing with available e-books and the author did so. Design/methodology/approach A brief overview is provided to delineate why deselection is important, and how it can be accomplished. A literature review was prepared. It included a review of deselection at small-, medium- and large-sized college and university libraries. The pros and cons of print versus e-books for collection development were reviewed, including four case studies. The feasibility of replacing print reference titles with e-books was also covered. A review of the monograph weeding project at the Adelphi University Library in the humanities and social sciences is provided. Conclusions and a projection of next steps are also included. Findings An overwhelming majority of the monograph titles reviewed were deselected without adversely affecting the overall quality of the collection. A small number of available e-book editions were selected to replace some of these deselected titles. Research limitations/implications All of the titles deselected were published more than 50 years ago. All of these titles were in the social sciences and humanities. The deselection review was limited to philosophy, religion, history, political science, sociology, education and psychology. There were limitations on the amount of time available to review titles in most of these fields, and as a result, only a small percentage of the titles in our collection could be reviewed. Practical implications The library has very serious space constraints, which has made it difficult to provide the needed study space for members of the Adelphi University community. Some sections of the book collection are jam packed, with no room for expansion. Deselecting older less used titles and eliminating some sections of book shelves help address both of these problems. Replacing some of these print titles with e-books contributes as well. This deselection project has reduced the holdings of monograph print titles significantly. In the future, the author hopes to rely less on print titles and more on e-books for collection development. Social implications In most fields, college and university students would be better served for their research by more recently published titles. Older, less used titles, as well as those not used at all, should be deselected to make room for more useful and up-to-date titles. As more and more titles become readily available as e-books, the collections of print titles can be reduced. Being able to use e-books even when the library is closed is a great advantage. It should also be noted that these titles can be used by more than one user simultaneously. Originality/value In conducting the literature search, the author discovered that there were a large number of titles on deselecting print titles. There was also considerable research on e-book collection development. However, there were few that linked these two important topics. In this research article and case study, the author hopes to have made a significant contribution to linking them together.

show abstract

“…Additional reasons for weeding include a desire to make the collection easier to use and conversion of titles to electronic format (Francis, 2012;Frase & Salit-Mischel, 2007). Low use and these last two reasons were what prompted our desire to start a comprehensive review and deselection process, although in the end, space considerations and an impending renovation unexpectedly came into play.…”

Section: The Collection Is Big But Is It Used?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dismantling the Reference Collection

Johnson

Finley

Sproles

2015

The Reference Librarian

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2008, the University of Louisville's (UofL) Ekstrom Library printed reference collection numbered almost 30,000 volumes. Copious collecting and sparse weeding built up the collection during the era before the Internet. There had been considerable reluctance to address its more outdated sections due to competing priorities and inertia. A change of leadership as well as the recognition of changing use patterns had lessened the need for such a large collection. In 2011, three librarians began a title-by-title review process that resulted in an 86% reduction of the reference collection by 2014. This article describes that process, summarizes the results, and discusses the benefits and disadvantages of this approach. Background Ekstrom Library is the main, or flagship, institution of the University of Louisville (UofL) Libraries, a large system which retains about 2 million volumes and membership in the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Other UofL libraries are Anderson (Music), Brandeis (Law), Bridwell (Art), Kornhauser (Health Sciences), and Archives & Special Collections. Located on the school's urban campus, Ekstrom was built in 1981 to house the university's humanities and social sciences collections. In early 2006, the library added a 42,500 square-foot wing with automated storage equipment, known as a robotic retrieval system (RRS), capable of holding 600,000 books initially, and the potential to be expanded to store as many as 1.2 million volumes. At about the same time, the university closed Kersey Library (engineering and physical sciences) and moved approximately

show abstract

Weeding the Reference Collection: A Case Study of Collection Management

Cited by 6 publications

References 15 publications

Learning commons reference collections in ARL libraries

Learning commons reference collections in ARL libraries

Deselection of print monographs in the humanities and social sciences in the digital age

Dismantling the Reference Collection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About