Collection

Development
and Management
for 21st Century
Library
Collections
 ALA Neal-Schuman purchases fund advocacy, awareness,
and accreditation programs for library professionals worldwide.
 Collection
Development and
Management
for 21st Century
Library Collections
AN INTRODUCTION

S EC O N D E D I T I ON

Vicki L. Gregory

CHICAGO :: 2019
 VICKI L. GREGORY has both an MLS degree and an MA in history from the
University of Alabama, and a PhD in communication, information, and library studies
from Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. She is currently a professor in the
School of Information at the University of South Florida, where she teaches collection
development, digital librarianship, and library administration. She was previously
head of Systems and Operations (which included collection development, acquisitions,
cataloging, serials, and computer technology) at Auburn University at Montgomery,
Montgomery, Alabama. She has written five previous books and numerous journal
articles, and she has delivered conference presentations both nationally and
internationally. This is her fourth year on the ALA RUSA Notable Books Council.

© 2019 by the American Library Association

Extensive effort has gone into ensuring the reliability of the information in this book; however,
the publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.

ISBNs
978-0-8389-1712-1 (paper)
978-0-8389-1761-9 (PDF)
978-0-8389-1760-2 (ePub)
978-0-8389-1762-6 (Kindle)

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Gregory, Vicki L., 1950– author. | American Library Association, issuing body.
Title: Collection development and management for 21st century library collections : an introduction /
Vicki L. Gregory.
Other titles: Collection development and management for twenty-first century library collections
Description: Second edition. | Chicago : ALA Neal-Schuman, an imprint of the American Library
Association, 2019. | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018010395 | ISBN 9780838917121 (print ; alk. paper) | ISBN 9780838917602 (epub) |
ISBN 9780838917619 (pdf ) | ISBN 9780838917626 (kindle)
Subjects: LCSH: Collection management (Libraries) | Collection management (Libraries)—United States. |
Collection development (Libraries) | Collection development (Libraries)—United States.
Classification: LCC Z687 .G68 2018 | DDC 025.2/1—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018010395

Cover image © peshkova.

Book design and composition by Karen Sheets de Gracia in the Cardea and Acumin Pro typefaces.

This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48–1992 (Permanence of Paper).

Printed in the United States of America

23 22 21 20 19 5 4 3 2 1
 C ON T EN T S

L ist of f igures xi
P reface to the s econd e dition xiii
a cknowLedgments xvii

1 The Impact of New Technologies on

Collection Development and Management 1
Overview 1
E-Books and Libraries 2
Self-Publishing and Libraries 3
The “Long Tail” 5
Web 2.0 and Social Networking 7
The Information Commons, Open Access Serials, and Open Source Software 8
Globalization 9
Discussion Questions 11
References and Selected Readings 11

2 Assessing User Needs and Marketing the Collection to Those Users 13

Overview 13
Who and What Will Be Studied? 14
Where Are Data Collected? 16
When Should the Data Be Collected? 17
How Are the Data Interpreted? 18
Tips for a Good Study 18
Marketing Your Collection 19
Summary 23
Activities 23
Discussion Questions 25
References 25
Selected Readings 26

/ v /
vi / C ON T E N T S

3 Collection Development Policies 29

Overview 29
Purpose of Collection Development Policies 31
Basic Elements of a Collection Development Policy 33
Activities 47
Discussion Questions 47
References 47
Selected Readings 48

4 Selection Sources and Processes 49

Overview 49
Considerations in the Selection Process 49
Selection Criteria 53
Selection Teams 57
Selection Differences for Internet Resources 58
Tools for Acquiring and Selecting Materials 59
General-Review Sources Online 66
Other Selection Means 67
Open Access Movement 68
Summary 69
Activity 70
Discussion Questions 70
References 70
Selected Readings 71

5 Acquisitions 73
Overview 73
The Principal Goal of Library Acquisitions 73
The Nature of Library Resources 74
Methods of Acquiring Materials 76
Sources of Library Materials 77
Out-of-Print Purchasing 83
Gifts and Exchanges 84
A Word on Formats 88
Summary 89
Discussion Questions 89
References 90
Selected Readings 90
 C ON TE N T S / vii

6 Budgeting and Fiscal Management 93

Overview 93
Accountability 94
Fiscal Year 95
Types of Budgets 95
Budget Scenarios 96
Setting Budget Priorities 97
Gathering Information for a Library Materials Budget Request 98
Consortium Purchases 100
Bookkeeping Terminology 101 100
Activity 102
References 103
Selected Readings 103

7 Assessment and Evaluation of the Collection,

Including Deselection (Weeding) 105
Overview 105
Evaluating or Assessing the Collection 106
Deselection or Weeding the Collection 111
Summary 117
Discussion Questions 117
Activity 118
References 118
Selected Readings 119

8 Cooperative Collection Development

and Resource-Sharing 121
Overview 121
Library Consortia 121
Cooperative Collection Development Defined 122
Benefits and Challenges of Cooperative Collection Development 123
Consortial and Access Relationships 124
Interlibrary Loan 125
Summary 125
Case Study 126
Discussion Questions 126
References 126
Selected Readings 127
vi i i / C ON T E N T S

9 Legal Issues in Collection Development 129

Overview 129
Copyright and Licensing 130
Digital Rights Management 141
Donations: Legal and Tax Issues 147
Diversity Issues 150
Americans with Disabilities Act Issues 151
Activities 154
Discussion Questions 155
References 155
Selected Readings 155

10 Professional Ethics and Intellectual Freedom 159

Overview 159
Professional Ethics 159
Intellectual Freedom and Censorship 163
Self-Censorship 167
Summary 170
Discussion Questions 171
Activity 171
References 171
Selected Readings 172

11 Preservation 173
Overview 173
Preservation of Books and Other Physical Objects 174
Preservation Microfilming 176
Disaster Plans 176
Preservation of Digital Objects 177
Is Digitized Information Preserved (or Preservable)? 179
Who Should Archive an Electronic Resource? 181
Who Should Be Concerned with Preservation Issues? 182
Summary 184
Activity 184
Discussion Questions 185
References 185
Selected Readings 186
 C ON TE N T S / ix

12 The Future of Collection Development and Management 187

Overview 187
Views on the Future of Collection Development 188
By Type of Library 190
Summary 191
Discussion Questions 191
References 192
Selected Readings 192

B iBLiograPhy 195
a PPendix
List of Library Vendors: Publishers, Wholesalers, and Vendors 223

i ndex 245
 F IG U R E S

FIGURE 1.1 Normal distribution of popular titles in a subject area 6

FIGURE 3.1 Hard versus soft science 30
FIGURE 3.2 Conspectus-like example using Dewey Decimal Classification
(large academic library): Sea (naval) forces and warfare 38
FIGURE 3.3 Conspectus-like example using Dewey Decimal System
(small- to medium-size public library): Public administration
and military science 39
FIGURE 3.4 Conspectus-like example for a library using Library of Congress
classification: Books (general, writing, paleography) 40
FIGURE 3.5 Subject descriptions of a senior high school collection 41
FIGURE 3.6 Example from a senior high school collection mapping 43
FIGURE 3.7 Sample challenge form 45
FIGURE 5.1 Major library vendors 78
FIGURE 5.2 Representative pricing samples for electronic serials 81
FIGURE 6.1 Typical public library materials budget ($) 99
FIGURE 7.1 Shelves in need of weeding 112
FIGURE 9.1 Sample digital rights management process 142
FIGURE 9.2 OCLC FirstSearch DRM, periodical owned by local library 146
FIGURE 9.3 Sample InfoTrack DRM document delivery option for periodical not
owned by local library 147

/ xi /
 PR E FAC E TO T H E
S EC O N D EDI T ION

T his second edition of Collection Development and Management for 21st Century Library
Collections: An Introduction describes how librarians select, acquire, and maintain
resources in all formats.
Unlike previous textbooks in this area, the approach used here is not strictly based
on formats per se, but rather on the processes that librarians need to use in evaluating,
gathering, maintaining, and preserving materials. In other words, there are no separate
chapters dedicated to books, serials, and electronic resources; instead, each conceptual
chapter covers multiple formats. As has always been the case, but especially as witnessed
over the last forty years spanning my professional career, the formats of the materials
collected and used by libraries have changed, but the overall processes used to select and
evaluate those materials have tended to remain the same. In the pages that follow, I will
describe the synergy and drive behind planning, developing, licensing, acquiring, and
managing collections that are both physical and virtual, used in-house and remotely, and
constantly changing.
Although collection development, the acquisitions process, and collection maintenance
issues are universal concerns for all types of libraries, differences in emphasis on the vari-
ous elements of collection development and maintenance become quickly apparent in dif-
ferent library settings such as public libraries, academic libraries, and school library media
centers. Issues of ethics, intellectual freedom, copyright, and licensing are impacting all
areas of collection development like never before. Therefore, while it is important to take
an overarching view of collection development and management processes, differences en-
gendered by the type of library will be brought out where appropriate.
The primary audience for this book will naturally be students in graduate programs
of library and information science. However, librarians changing professional assignments
into collection development and maintenance or those needing to catch up on, for example,
electronic materials should also find this book useful.
In many schools of library and information science, collection development is included
within a broader picture of collection management or maintenance and is often folded into
those courses. Many classes will actually emphasize, in such cases, not collection develop-
ment itself but collection management, sometimes with only a week or a single instruction-
al unit given over to acquisitions. Thus, it is important to make clear distinctions among
these three major elements:

• Collection management may be best defined as the process of information-

gathering, communication, coordination, policy formulation, evaluation,
and planning that results in decisions about the acquisition, retention, and
provision of access to information sources in support of the intellectual
needs of a given library community.

/ x iii /
xiv / PR E FACE TO TH E SEC ON D EDI TION

• Collection development is the subpart of collection management that

has primarily to do with decisions that will result in the acquisition of
materials.
• Acquisition is the process of actually securing materials for the library’s
collection, whether by purchase, as gifts, or through loan or exchange
programs.

THE ORGANIZATION OF THIS BOOK

Collection Development and Management for 21st Century Library Collections begins with a
comprehensive overview of the field, then moves into individual chapters covering each
step of the collection life cycle, and ends with a chapter looking at the future.
Chapter 1 takes a look at how new elements are influencing library collections today: it
has new sections on e-books and libraries, self-publishing, and additional materials on open
access, Web 2.0, the “long tail,” and globalization. Each of these elements affects how and
what the library owns, leases, or uses.
Chapter 2 looks at needs assessment from a collection development standpoint, and at
marketing the collection. A needs assessment is similar to market research, but in this case
with a library emphasis. Marketing plans are discussed and examples of marketing activi-
ties are drawn from different types of libraries.
Chapter 3 concerns the purpose and component parts of a good collection development
policy.
Chapter 4 covers the selection of library resources, and provides an overview of sources
for reviews, selection criteria, and variables in the process among different types of librar-
ies. New online sources for selection have been added, and older ones have been updated.
Chapter 5 concerns all aspects of the acquisition of print, electronic (digital databases
and e-books), and audiovisual resources, along with a discussion of gifts to libraries and the
exchange programs in which some libraries participate. Exchange programs can be local,
national, or international.
Chapter 6 discusses the budget and fiscal management of collection development and
acquisitions departments. A short introduction to bookkeeping is included, with most of the
terminology that a new acquisitions librarian will need to know.
Chapter 7 is about the evaluation and assessment plus the weeding of a collection. Dif-
ferences in procedures among different types of libraries are discussed.
Chapter 8 looks at cooperative collection development and how resource-sharing facil-
itates a good cooperative collection development program.
Chapter 9 examines the legal issues that concern collection development librarians,
such as copyright and the licensing of electronic resources. This chapter is not intended to
make lawyers out of librarians, but it will introduce you to a number of important concepts
in order to better inform you about how to recognize legal issues and how best to proceed
when you are confronted with them. In addition, legal obligations related to issues of di-
versity and the Americans with Disabilities Act are also discussed. Because chapter 4 covers
some diversity issues as well, this chapter focuses on the issues not discussed there, along
with issues of special needs users.
Chapter 10 concerns ethics and intellectual freedom as they affect acquisitions and
collection development librarians, particularly because these librarians may be wined
and dined by vendors. A section on self-censorship has been added, since this is an area of
 PR E FAC E TO TH E SE C ON D E DI TIO N / xv

concern of which all librarians must be aware. Intellectual freedom is one of the core values
of librarianship, and since it is often tied to censorship, it can also be viewed as a profes-
sional ethics area.
Chapter 11 addresses the preservation of both print and electronic materials. This is an
area of great concern because electronic materials can be quite ephemeral, unless libraries
or other organizations specifically target them for preservation.
Chapter 12 is a look into the future of collection development and collection develop-
ment librarians as viewed by several authors. One predicted difference from these librari-
ans’ current role concerns their more active involvement in the creation and maintenance
of locally produced digital materials. Another has to do with assuring the quality of materi-
als that users find on the Web, particularly when they are searching in the library or on its
website. Naive users may view these materials as being just as much a part of the collection
as the carefully selected materials on the library’s shelves.
The text of each chapter ends with references and selected readings, and many of the
chapters include activities and discussion questions. At the end of the book, there is a care-
fully selected bibliography for each part of the collection management life cycle, arranged
by subject, as well as an Appendix that lists library vendors.
As with all areas of library work, continuing education, involvement with professional
associations, and reading the newly published library literature will be important to main-
tain your professional skills if you intend to become a collections librarian. I hope you will
keep reading, keep learning, and keep building better collections that meet the needs of
your users.
 AC K NO W LEDG M EN T S

I wish to thank my graduate assistants Bridgette Woodley and Arlen Benson who assisted
with bibliographic searches and with the library vendor listings for the first edition, and
Zoe Leonarczyk, who updated the appendix “List of Library Vendors.” Thanks also to Rachel
Chance at ALA Neal-Schuman for all her assistance in the final editing and production of
this book. Others have helped along the way, and I thank them as well. You know who you
are!

/ x vii /
 CHAPTER 1

The Impact of New Technologies

on Collection Development and
Management
Welcome to one of the most interesting subjects in library and information science: col-
lection development and management. Selecting and managing library resources is at the
heart of the library and information science (LIS) profession, alongside cataloging and clas-
sification. We will leave cataloging and classification to another day, since this book will
concentrate on the collection itself—selecting, acquiring, assessing, weeding, and preserv-
ing the library’s collections are the main focus here.
This chapter looks at some of the new technologies and issues that are currently in-
fluencing and effecting changes in library services as well as collection development and
maintenance, such as open access, self-publishing, and e-books. This chapter is intended
just as an introduction to these issues, since they will be explored in greater depth in later
chapters dealing with specific aspects of collection development and maintenance. Instead
of bringing up these issues in this chapter as a nod to the future (they are too important for
that), they are being discussed at the beginning of this text and then sprinkled throughout
other chapters as appropriate.

OVERVIEW

The process of selecting the materials for and adequately maintaining the currency and
relevance of virtually any library’s collection of materials, in whatever format, has always
required a high level of tolerance for continuous change with regard to newly available
materials, as well as a clear-headed recognition of the need for constant evaluation and
reevaluation of those items already in hand. As libraries became more widespread and thus
more available to the general public in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries,
fairly standardized processes for collecting print materials came to be developed, and these
processes were refined and disseminated by library schools and handed down by librarians
to their successors.
But these standard processes for selecting and evaluating materials necessarily had to
evolve as conditions, user needs, and resources changed. Thus, today, the problem has al-
tered significantly. Libraries must now also include significant electronic resources in their
collections or otherwise make them available, and most importantly, they must purchase
and maintain the necessary hardware and software to enable the effective use of these re-
sources. With libraries today also being called upon to provide the means for users to access
library collections remotely from their home or office, and to make available and participate

/ 1 /
2 / CH AP T ER 1

in various online social networks in order to go where their users are, the focus of collection
development, and indeed the concept of what constitutes a collection, is changing. Even the
library’s organization and management of the selection of materials has evolved.
Although automated and electronic records were initially the exclusive domain of li-
brary technical services divisions, with cataloging and then circulation and then acquisi-
tions using the services of electronic vendors and electronic services such as OCLC, the use
of electronic records has become one of the standard services, and in many cases a central
focus, of the reference department. And user demand for all types of electronic resources
and records has brought collection development into the electronic age.
Open access (OA) is becoming an increasingly important topic in journal literature as
increasing numbers of books and monographs in library collections are being held in OA
form. OA refers to online materials that are free of all restrictions on access (e.g., access or
subscription fees) and are also free of many restrictions on use (e.g., certain copyright and
license restrictions). OA can be applied to all forms of published output, including academ-
ic journal articles, conference papers, theses and dissertations, book chapters, and mono-
graphs. Although open access journals save the library subscription fees, they still require
selection and examination for quality, since easy access to them on the Web has opened up
yet another avenue for fraudulent practices where these types of materials are concerned.
The open access movement was strengthened as government grants began requiring that
the findings resulting from federally funded research be published in OA publications.
(More information about open access can be found later in this chapter. See also chapter 4
for information on predatory journals and open access.)
The fast-growing user preference for electronic resources has severely affected the col-
lection development budgets of most libraries. Contrary to the promise of reductions in the
cost of the availability of information implicit in the electronic format, the new electronic
resources do not usually supplant and rarely completely replace existing materials. Viewed
from this angle, electronic materials therefore represent still another format that must be
collected if the library is to keep up with the times and meet the demands of its patrons.
Unfortunately, more than subject-matter expertise is needed to select these materials; the
selector must also possess sufficient technical expertise (or have access to those with tech-
nical expertise) in order to both evaluate what equipment may be needed to access any new
product and analyze how well the product performs. In the case of social networking, there
are also considerations of security for the library’s network and computer stations.

E-BOOKS AND LIBRARIES

Although e-books are now purchased in all types of library environments, many academic
libraries in particular are rapidly reducing their print collections and changing their empha-
sis to e-books and electronic services for users. Librarians are reclaiming shelf space by
weeding print books and replacing them with e-books in order to put in “makerspaces” and
labs where students can collaborate on projects (McAlister and Scherlen 2017).
Conventional library wisdom today asks the following question: since reading an e-jour-
nal, given the ease of document printing, is generally considered by students to be a superi-
or alternative to going to the library to read the original print copy, why won’t e-books be-
come more popular than print books? But e-book sales lately tell quite a different story. In
November 2016, the American Association of Publishers released a report showing that in
the first half of 2016, e-book sales were down 20 percent: “Ebook sales continued to decline
 TH E I M PAC T OF N E W TECH N OLO G I E S ON C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D MAN AG E M E N T / 3

in 2016. That’s good news (for those who advocate free reading)” (No Shelf Required 2016).
Along with this, a recent Pew study showed that e-book usage is down significantly in public
libraries where print book circulation far exceeds that of e-books (Horrigan 2016). Even in
academic libraries, the most recent statistics indicate that the usage of e-books is at best
flat (Ennis 2016). Based on survey research, a 2016 report on e-books in academic libraries
found that “print-books are still firmly ensconced in academic libraries, and are preferred
by library users—students and faculty—for most kinds of content, although ebooks are fa-
vored for reference titles” (Library Journal 2016, 3).
Many recent articles about e-books in libraries conclude that while at the outset, pa-
trons were fascinated with the new e-reading technologies, after their initial checkout
of e-books, many returned to reading hard-copy print materials, and e-book checkouts
dropped correspondingly and significantly. Research by multiple authors has pinpointed
many variables for this, but all have identified one specific rationale: transient fascination
with the new. Readers were intrigued by the idea of e-books, and so they bought e-readers
and checked out e-books right away. But as the fascination with the new wore off, readers
went back to checking out paper books, and so e-book circulation dropped significantly
(Rosenwald 2015). This is further evidence that the need to keep up with your users’ pref-
erences dynamically as those preferences change is a key aspect of collection development,
not only with regard to titles but also in respect of the selection of formats.
The fast-developing phenomena of open access, the information commons, self-pub-
lishing, Web 2.0 and social networking, the “long tail” (as described by Chris Anderson), and
globalization are all impacting the way librarians and information specialists must view the
collection development process and collection issues for their libraries. While libraries have
for many years been purchasing access to databases that are not housed at or in their local
facilities, it is only of late that they have begun purchasing access to streaming video, etc.
for the benefit of their users. The focus is turning, and probably will accelerate, on obtaining
access rather than ownership. Let’s look at several of these phenomena.

SELF-PUBLISHING AND LIBRARIES

Self-publishing, particularly in e-book formats but also in print on demand, has certainly
taken off recently. For those libraries that have tended to automatically dismiss self-pub-
lished books as ephemeral or vanity material and therefore have not added them to their
collections, think again! A number of factors are leading to more self-publishing: the Web,
open access, and changes in the commercial publishing industry, as well as authors’ desire
to be read even if this means that they don’t make money on the publishing of their books.
According to recent issues of the Bowker Annual, self-published titles are on the way to
becoming the majority of the titles published in the United States (Bowker 2014). Once
your awareness of the self-published book is raised, they seem to be all around you. Since
all library budgets are constrained these days, wouldn’t it be advantageous if you could get
to that content before it was necessary to spend larger sums to acquire it from a publisher?
What if you could help a local author make his or her name and work known to the reading
public? With so many academic libraries focused, if not obsessed, with open access, why not
make at least local material available without purchasing it from a publishing house?
As noted above, many librarians have considered self-published or “indie” titles to
be nothing more than the latest manifestations of vanity press publications—those titles
that authors paid to have printed, only to let them sit in their basements or garages, since
4 / CH AP T ER 1

bookstores would not carry them and libraries usually turned them down, even as gifts. All
of this has changed with e-books and print on demand, as well as the rise of Amazon and
other web-based sales outlets. In fact, an entire industry has grown up to support these
authors.
Self-published books can serve many purposes in a library. In some cases, they may
serve as primary source material, particularly for local history. They can help document
popular culture before it makes its way into mainstream publishing. Public libraries are
discovering that self-published novels and memoirs are an inexpensive way to supply the
materials desired by public library users. With the growing popularity of open access pub-
lishing, self-published works may include the work of independent scholars or the faculty
of colleges and universities. Self-published textbooks are being encouraged in many col-
leges and universities, and these provide a much less expensive option for textbooks and
other required reading. For universities, self-publishing may support scholars conducting
research in such a narrow field that traditional university presses or mainstream publishers
may not find it profitable to publish their work (Holley 2015).
The key is having the right software and processes in place to allow review and correc-
tions to be made to self-published items, which helps to make them, if not fully comparable
to those titles published by mainstream publishers, at least worthy of their placement in a
library’s collection.
Public libraries are themselves becoming involved in providing the platform to as-
sist local authors in the publication of their own materials. One such initiative is SELF-e,
which is a partnership between Library Journal and BiblioLabs, a Charleston, South Caro-
lina-based company. BiblioBoard, a BiblioLabs product, is a software platform designed to
bring self-published works into the library world. The Cuyahoga County Library in Parma,
Ohio, served as the pilot project for the platform after that library indicated it was looking
for a software platform to support local authors. The process works something like this:

• An author goes to the library’s website and uploads an EPUB or PDF file.
• BiblioBoard staff review the content of the file to ensure that it is not illegal
(such as child pornography) or plagiarized.
• Authors indicate whether they want Library Journal curation, which will
make their work available to a national audience, or whether they only want
their work to be available locally.
• The plan is for BiblioBoard to provide MARC records for the book in the
future.
• The author’s agreement with BiblioBoard distribution is not an exclusive
one, so if the book becomes popular and a commercial publisher becomes
interested, the author can withdraw his or her work from BiblioBoard.

The main advantage to authors of using this approach is to get their work out into the
library environment, and for libraries the advantage is bringing a new area of content to
their collections (LaRue 2015b, 53).
ONEBOOKAZ is another example of a library project (of the Arizona State Library,
Archives, and Public Records) that encourages the writing and sharing of self-published or
unpublished e-books, in this case by means of a contest. There are three categories: adult,
teens, and kids. For this contest, the books have to be by Arizona authors, but not necessar-
ily about Arizona. Downloads are available in any Arizona location through the BiblioBoard
SELF-e platform. The award-winning authors were scheduled to appear in public libraries
 TH E I M PAC T OF N E W TECH N OLO G I E S ON C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D MAN AG E M E N T / 5

around Arizona, thus giving them even greater visibility, and reading guides were created
for each of the winners (LaRue 2015a, 41).

THE “LONG TAIL”

Chris Anderson, who was then editor in chief of Wired magazine, in his book The Long Tail
(2006) assessed the future of consumer buying, suggesting that industries and businesses
will be serving consumers needing a greater number of things, but satisfying the needs of
readers, music lovers, and so on is going to be a thing of the past. A wide array of choices is
becoming increasingly important, as evidenced by cable television with 200–300 channels,
and movie multiplexes with 10 or more screens. Anderson concentrates on the increasing
importance of the “niche market” (p. 5). If he is correct, then the public library will increas-
ingly feel the pressure to provide more and different books, serials, and materials in elec-
tronic formats. Anderson further states that “many of our assumptions about popular taste
are actually artifacts of poor supply-and-demand matching—a market response to ineffi-
cient distribution” (p. 16). The distribution of materials over the Web gives the consumer an
almost unlimited array of goods that a business or organization which is limited by inven-
tory space can never satisfy. It is the difference between buying a book through Amazon
.com and searching local bookstores for an out-of-print book or an academic title. While in
the past readers or researchers may have been satisfied by what was locally available, now
that the Web has opened up so many other means of acquiring materials, such as streaming
media and online video, what is desired, and indeed expected, is expanding.

In 2005, Barnes & Noble sold 20 percent more unique titles than it sold in 2004, some-
thing its CEO, Steve Riggs, attributes to three forces: (1) the efficiencies of print-on-de-
mand, which keeps more books in print; (2) the increase in the number of smaller and
independent publishers; and (3) self-publishing. (Anderson 2006, 77)

The same trend that is affecting the market for booksellers must also naturally be reflected
in the changing demands that users make on their public library. If Amazon.com can sup-
ply the unusual book they want, why can’t the local public library? (In chapter 2, ways
to assess the needs of users will be discussed in more detail.) Of course, libraries do have
inventory and shelf space issues, unlike many of the web businesses with which the library
will be competing. Libraries, and certainly public libraries in particular, which concentrate
their collecting efforts on materials with broad appeal, may in the future need to focus on
developing bigger selections of unique titles to meet the narrower demand for more differ-
ent works. The Web and other electronic sources are creating new types of both adult and
child users of the public library who are deeply familiar with computers and using them
to acquire online information and products. Library users’ familiarity with a large array of
electronic resources will likely quickly change the need for public libraries to move away
from best sellers and hit novels to more niche resources out on the “long tail.” And can
libraries be more like online retailers that have virtually no limitations of space?
Figure 1.1 below is a simple graphic representation of the normal distribution of titles
for an average topic. In the past, libraries and booksellers have typically carried the titles
represented in the area covered by plus or minus one standard deviation on the graph,
which together account for 68 percent of all titles. However, with the use of the Web and
online bookstores, the true demand for titles now stretches way beyond the normal 68
6 / CH AP T ER 1

percent of the titles. To have a balanced collection, library selectors must now consider a
wider range of titles than they have in the past if they are to meet user demand.
Although Anderson’s depiction of the “long tail” is actually single-tailed, library select-
ing is probably best viewed as a “normal curve” which is two-tailed (see below). If viewed in
terms of subject areas and issues, as librarians generally do when they undertake selection,
there exists “long tail” material on both sides of an issue or subject.
The majority of the titles that libraries acquire and bookstores sell are in the plus or
minus one standard deviation range, or 68 percent of the titles published on an average
subject or issue. Research libraries may actually already buy in the plus or minus 2 standard
deviations area, or roughly 95 percent of the titles.
Are libraries already “long tail” organizations? Many librarians would like to think
so, but:

The Long Tail is more than simply a couple thousand niche-titles tucked away in the
stacks. The Long Tail includes 80 percent of the books printed every year. What per-
centage of these books does your library buy? According to Bowker, 172,000 new titles
and editions were published in the U.S. in 2005; 206,000 new titles were published in
the U.K. Still think you have a grip on the Long Tail? Not likely, unless of course your
library rivals the Library of Congress. (Casey and Savastinuk 2007, 64)

One of the ways that libraries can compete is through selection of the best materials from
an ever-widening array of print and electronic resources. Anderson uses the word “filters”
to describe the way users may use technological solutions to discover the best materials
on a particular subject (p. 108). However, librarians can use their evaluation skills to put
together a collection of the best materials either in print or electronic form. Instead of

34.1% 34.1%

13.6% 13.6%

FIGURE 1.1 Normal distribution of popular titles in a subject area

 TH E I M PAC T OF N E W TECH N OLO G I E S ON C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D MAN AG E M E N T / 7

relying totally on software, the user can have the benefits of a filter by consulting a librar-
ian. Basically, the two major features of the “long tail” future is that everything possible
must be available, and the user will need help to find the best resources. Sounds like work
for a librarian!

WEB 2.0 AND SOCIAL NETWORKING

Web 2.0 also plays a part here as wikis and blogs become more prevalent and many become
major sources of information on a variety of subjects.
Web 2.0 is all about participating and sharing in the production of resources. “While
the old Web was about Web sites, clicks, and ‘eyeballs,’ the new Web is about communities’
participation and peering. (Peering is a new form of horizontal organization that rivals hi-
erarchical forms in creating products and services and, in a few cases, physical things)”
(Tapscott and Williams 2006, 23). “As users and computing power multiply, and easy-to-
use tools proliferate, the Internet is evolving into a global, living, networked computer that
anyone can program” (Tapscott and Williams 2006, 19).
Social networking on the Web through sites such as Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr, You-
Tube, and Flickr has become ubiquitous among computer users these days, and the fore-
casts are for this type of collaboration to continue and grow. Libraries are themselves social
institutions, so librarians need to be involved with the social networking movement to re-
main relevant to their users.
This different mode of interacting will also change the resources needed for the librari-
an and user to be satisfied with the outcome of the transaction. All librarians will need to be
prepared to work with users and information from blogs, wikis, and other social networking
resources.
Wikis are another major new tool for collaboration among professional librarians, au-
thors, and others doing project work. Wikis allow authors in different areas to access, read,
and edit a work in progress. Wikis, in particular, are potentially a threat to the continued
publication of certain kinds of reference works. Younger users increasingly access Wikipe-
dia much more often than the standard print encyclopedias. Tapscott states:

It [Wikipedia] has become one of the most visited sites on the Web. It represents the
future of publishing, and every company that produces information—from publishers
to data providers—should be scared. (Tapscott 2009, 71)

Podcasts are another new means of communication and information-gathering. Scholars,

activists, teachers, and others now have the ability to put voice-based material on their
websites for others to hear and view, and this could encourage library users to have higher
expectations from the materials offered by their libraries. Of course, some libraries are
already into podcasting for training and orientation purposes. This technology could also be
useful as a way for a collection development librarian to discuss new materials received by
the library with specific interest groups in the community or an organization.
In all events, no matter what software or formats that a library’s users prefer, libraries
need to “be there” for their patrons: “Share on your social media page [or pages on social
media] programs when you find something interesting or timely or relevant. Make use of
trending hashtags or post on national holidays to increase your visibility to potential follow-
ers.” (EBSCOpost 2017)
8 / CH AP T ER 1

Another Web 2.0 technology that is gaining acceptance consists of “folksonomies,” a

form of user-based tagging. Tagging is itself relatively new and consists of the attachment
by the user of descriptive keywords or metadata to digital objects for the purpose of future
retrieval. In other words, tagging allows users to get involved in bibliographic access by as-
signing keywords that make sense to them. Since standardized subject heading lists are gen-
erally behind the newest technologies and trends, the user can immediately tag the resource
with an up-to-date terminology that can easily be changed if the subject name changes. This
tool is used by several of the Web 2.0 networks that deal with the organization of data such
as Flickr and del.icio.us.
As the number of tags increase in number, a kind of grassroots organization occurs
which is often referred to as a “folksonomy.” A folksonomy has come to mean a nonhierar-
chical ontology that is created as a natural result of tagging. The value of folksonomies has
been described thus:

Folksonomies are an illustration of the collective intelligence at work. A collective in-

telligence is achieved when a critical mass of participation is reached within a website
or networked system, allowing the participants to act as a filter for what is valuable.
A folksonomy is created from the aggregate of user-created tags within a website and
therefore provides an inclusive organization scheme reflective of the collective intelli-
gence of the community. (Courtney 2007, 94)

Social networking is not confined only to the Web. Text messaging or “texting” is a phe-
nomenon that has taken over the lives of teens and young adults. Howard Rheingold refers
to the outcome of this technology as “smart mobs.” As anyone who walks around a univer-
sity campus, a grocery store, an amusements park, a football stadium, or anywhere else
knows, people are demanding and using instant and ubiquitous communication devices.
Cell phones, smartphones, and PDAs are in almost constant use, which keeps users from
ever being alone, since they are always easily connected to friends and family. Mobile com-
munication has for some time been the name of the game (Rheingold 2002). This easy inter-
connection will increasingly affect the way that people want to access library information.
On most of these mobile devices they have access to the Web, so why not provide reference
help that goes beyond traditional telephone service and other interactive library services
and resources?
Social networking and Web 2.0 technologies naturally lead into a discussion of the in-
formation commons and open access.

THE INFORMATION COMMONS, OPEN ACCESS SERIALS,

AND OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE

The concept of an information commons arose in response to the stranglehold that copy-
right has traditionally placed on intellectual property. Particularly for scientists and aca-
demics who want their ideas to be widely disseminated, copyright regulations have tended
to place those works in a straitjacket seemingly devised by the publishers, not the authors,
of many articles, books, and other resources.
The philosophy behind the information commons and Creative Commons licensing
(Lessig 2001) is to advance innovation, stimulate creativity, and promote the sharing of
 TH E I M PAC T OF N E W TECH N OLO G I E S ON C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D MAN AG E M E N T / 9

information resources, allowing the author to make the determination as to what can and
cannot be done with his or her materials.
Open source software, although arguably not fully in the public domain in the sense of
a work whose copyright protection has expired, is available for little or no cost and is dis-
tributed essentially without restrictions as to subsequent use. Open source software such
as DSpace or Greenstone is often used to support digital repositories that may house open
access serials or other open access resources. Many examples of information commons
exist in the scholarly publication environment. The Scholarly Publishing and Academic
Resources Coalition (SPARC) is one of the most prominent ones. SPARC was formed as a
constructive response to perceived market dysfunctions in the scholarly communication
system. SPARC has been influential in helping to provide alternatives to high-priced jour-
nals and digital aggregated databases and is generally credited with raising the conscious-
ness of scholars about the alternatives to traditional publication formats by means of new
publishing initiatives.
SPARC is but one example of such initiatives. Many universities are developing insti-
tutional repositories where their scholars can upload their work and related materials into
the repository for widespread distribution across the Web.
Willinsky summarizes the benefits of open access:

When a scholarly journal is free for online reading, or when a researcher places a pub-
lished article in an open access e-print archive, it is first of all a boon for researchers and
students the world over. However, open access is also public access. Open access is slowly
making a greater portion of the research literature publicly available. (Willinsky, 111)

Open access is the current buzzword wherever serials publications are discussed. To users,
OA promises the nirvana of free availability of serial literature on the Web as described
above. But most publishers take a different and somewhat dimmer, if not darker, view of
open access. Usually, their definition of open access means that authors can put their own
version of a manuscript up on their website, but the PDF version or other edited version of
the manuscript belongs to the publishers, who may then charge for copies. For grants that
require publication in open access journals, publishers charge a fee to the author to make
their article open access, a fee that is usually covered by the granting agency. OA is today
still in its infancy, but it seems doubtful that charge-per-use will ultimately prevail; thus,
we can expect to find more and more open access journals of scholarly publications that are
free to the user, at least those users who can access the appropriate portal.

GLOBALIZATION

Globalization is more than a buzzword—it is becoming central to many aspects of modern

life. Is this something new for libraries? No, not at all; libraries have always cooperated,
nationally and internationally, even from the earliest days of the development of national
postal systems in the eighteenth century. Interlibrary loan has been a traditional hallmark
of the best inclinations of the library profession in doing the utmost to provide materials
to those who need them. Often this was even at the expense of local users of items; when
a library in a distant country borrowed material from a library in the United States as late
as the 1970s, the U.S. librarian would routinely make its return due in about six months
10 / CH AP T ER 1

because it would not be unusual for the item to move by cargo ship and might easily take a
month or more to reach the destination library, with the same problem involved in shipping
it back to the United States.
Such problems seem almost ancient today since the world has grown smaller (and flat-
ter, according to Thomas L. Friedman) in so many ways, and all types of transactions can
and do take place quickly now. While overnight package delivery systems and the availabili-
ty of the inexpensive facsimile transmission of documents were revolutionary in their own
ways, it is the World Wide Web that has become the premier means of communication that
brings us all so much closer together.
The Web has greatly contributed to the increasing globalization of today’s world. Glo-
balization was the word originally chosen to describe the changing relationships between
governments and big business, but its meaning has expanded to include individuals as well.
Friedman states:

I am convinced that the flattening of the world, if it continues, will be seen in time
as one of those fundamental shifts or inflection points, like Gutenberg’s invention of
the printing press, the rise of the nation-state, or the Industrial Revolution—each of
which, in its day, . . . produced changes in the role of individuals, the role and form of
governments, the ways business was done and wars were fought, the role of women, the
forms religion and art took, and the ways science and research were conducted, not to
mention the political labels that we as a civilization have assigned to ourselves and to
our enemies. (Friedman 2006, 49)

It cannot be overemphasized that the World Wide Web is just that—worldwide. A resource
put up on the Web from Tampa, Florida, is as likely to be used in India as it is in nearby
St. Petersburg, or for that matter, in not so nearby St. Petersburg, Russia. Ubiquity can
be confused with authoritativeness, however, leading to the expectation of too many that
everything on the Web is worth reading. Careful librarians are rightfully skeptical of all
that glitters on the Web, and they must, particularly through their selection, choice, and
collection of materials, ensure that their libraries’ users come to know that dependence
first, foremost, and exclusively on the Web can be a risky proposition. And it should not be
a source of serious discouragement that readers come to librarians only if they cannot find
what they are looking for on the Web. But it is the information on the Web that helps shape
opinions and knowledge about the world in general.
We are what we put up on the Web. Just as every book was not necessarily freely ac-
cessible to all segments of the public in a traditional library context, whether for reasons of
preservation, concerns over the age of the reader, and so on, so placing an entire collection
on the Web can be problematic.
For instance, global access presents problems with the intellectual property laws that
vary significantly from country to country, both in substance and degree of enforcement.
Differences in free speech principles can also be significant and create problems. Even
leaving aside exceptional cases such as North Korea, which tries to cut itself off from the
Web, or China, which conditions much internal commercial activity and its trade relations
on compliance with governmental restrictions on web content and site access, numerous
countries impose fairly draconian laws to prevent the publication of some kinds of mate-
rials—for example, Germany prohibits the use of the swastika and other Nazi symbols and
materials. A person in California can legally put up a swastika on his website in the United
States, but that same site would be illegal in Germany. In Poland, two people were arrested
 TH E I M PAC T OF N E W TECH N OLO G I E S ON C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D MAN AG E M E N T / 11

on June 26, 2006, for putting up a website, which actually resides on a server in the United
Kingdom, dealing with extremist views, especially Nazism. Even in the United Kingdom
itself, criticism of governmental figures can much more easily subject one to legal liability
than in the United States.
It must also be remembered that copyright in other countries may vary from that ac-
knowledged in the United States. It would, for instance, except in very limited situations,
be permissible in the United States to scan and put a work created in 1916 on the Web;
however, if the copyright is also registered in Great Britain, the work would probably not
be in the public domain yet, since the term of copyright protection in Britain is twenty-five
years longer than the maximum term under the U.S. Copyright Act. (This situation will be
discussed more fully in chapter 10.)

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. What factors have contributed to the emergence of self-publishing as a

major player in the publishing world? What makes it different now from
the vanity presses of the past?
2. Do you see evidence of the “long tail” phenomenon in your own choice of
books, music, and movies? Describe.
3. In your own words, what is an online social network?
4. How may the use of social networks, blogs, and similar software change
what a user needs from a library?

REFERENCES AND SELECTED READINGS

ABC News. 2004. “Internet Phenomenon Provides Unique Insights into Peoples’ Thoughts.” December 30.
Abram, Stephen. 2005. “Web 2.0—Huh?! Library 2.0, Librarian 2.0.” Information Outlook (December 1):
44–46.
Anderson, Chris. 2006. The “Long Tail:” Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More. New York:
Hyperion.
Bowker. 2014. Self-Publishing in the United States, 2007–2012: Print and Ebook. New Providence, NJ: Bowker.
www.bowker.com/assets/downloads/products/bowker_self-publishing_report2013.pdf.
Breeding, Marshall. 2006. “Web 2.0? Let’s Get to Web 1.0 First.” Computers in Libraries (May 1): 30–33.
Casey, Michael E., and Laura C. Savastinuk. 2007. Library 2.0: A Guide to Participatory Library Service.
Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Courtney, Nancy, ed. 2007. Library 2.0 and Beyond: Innovative Technologies and Tomorrow’s User. Westport,
CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Ennis, M. 2016. “Academic Ebook Sales Flat, Preference for E-Reference Up.” Library Journal 41, no. 15.
http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2016/09/technology/ebooks/academic-ebook-sales-flat-preference-for
-e-reference-up/#_.
Farkas, Meredith G. 2007. Social Software in Libraries: Building Collaboration, Communication, and
Community Online. Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Friedman, Thomas L. 2006. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century. Updated and
expanded edition. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Gillespie, Tarleton. 2007. Wired Shut: Copyright and the Shape of Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
12 / CH AP T ER 1

Holley, Robert P., ed. 2015. Self-Publishing and Collection Development: Opportunities and Challenges for
Libraries. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
Horrigan, J. 2016. “Libraries 2016.” Pew Research Center. September 9. www.pewinternet.org/2016/
09/09/2016/Libraries-2016/.
LaRue, James. 2015a. “ONEBOOKAZ.” Library Journal 140 (May 15): 41.
———. 2015b. “SELF-E Comes to Cuyahoga.” Library Journal 140 (January): 53.
Lessig, Lawrence. 2001. The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World. New York:
Random House.
Library Journal. 2016. “Ebook Usage in U.S. Academic Libraries, 2016.” http://lj.libraryjournal.com/
downloads/2016academicebooksurvey/.
McAlister, Alex D., and Allan Scherlen. 2017. “Weeding with Wisdom: Turning Deselection of Print
Monographs in Book-Reliant Disciplines.” Collection Management 42, no. 2: 76–91.
Miller, Paul. 2005. “Web 2.0: Building the New Library.” Ariadne 45 (October 30). www.ariadne.ac.uk/
issue45/miller/intro.html.
Mossberger, Karen, Caroline J. Tolbert, and Ramona S. McNeal. 2008. Digital Citizenship: The Internet,
Society, and Participation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
No Shelf Required. 2016. “Ebook Sales Continue to Decline in 2016. That May Be Good News (for Those
Who Advocate Free Reading).” No Shelf Required (November 16). www.noshelfrequired.com/
ebook-sales-continue-to-decline-in-2016-thats-very-good-news-for-those-who-advocate-free-reading/.
Rheingold, Howard. 2002. Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books.
Rosenwald, M. 2015. “Why Digital Natives Prefer Reading in Print. Yes, You Read That Right.” The
Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/why-digital-natives-prefer-reading-in-print
-yes-you-read-that-right/2015/02/22/8596ca86-b871–11e4–9423-f3d0a1ec335c_story.html?utm
_term=.277dce23922f.
Scoble, Robert, and Shel Israel. 2006. Naked Conversations: How Blogs Are Changing the Way Businesses Talk
with Customers. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Tapscott, Don. 2009. Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation Is Changing Your World. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Tapscott, Don, and Anthony D. Williams. 2006. Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything.
New York: Penguin Group.
Way, Doug. 2010. “The Impact of Web-Scale Discovery on the Use of a Library Collection.” Serials Review 36
(December): 214–20.
Willinsky, John. 2017. The Intellectual Properties of Learning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ten Tips to Master Social Media at Your Library. 2017. EBSCOpost (December 18). https://www.ebsco.com/
sites/g/files/nabnos191/files/acquiadam-assets/66749598.pdf.
 CHAPTER 2

Assessing User Needs and

Marketing the Collection
to Those Users

OVERVIEW

The mission and goals of any library revolve around meeting the informational, educa-
tional, and recreational needs of its clientele. The analysis of the information needs of the
community it serves is thus an important part of the strategic planning for a public library.
How do librarians know the needs of their users or potential users? The answer to this ques-
tion is one of the major keys to successful collection development.
In this chapter you will be introduced to needs assessment and how to do one for your
library. The focus is on using a needs assessment for collection development purposes, but
you will also find that libraries do needs assessments for services, building arrangements,
and other administrative and service-oriented purposes. The other side of the coin is that
once you have what people need, how do you let them know what the library has to offer?
Biblarz, Bosch, and Sugnet (2001, vii) define a needs assessment as a “process of using
one or more techniques to collect and analyze data regarding library users or potential us-
ers. Specifically, the data collected will be directly or indirectly related to the needs, in the
broadest sense, of users, or customers, for information in all formats. Interpretation of the
data will influence the management of collections.”
Knowledge of the community that the library serves, whether it is a geographical area
or an organization, is the keystone of effective collection development. The more the col-
lection development staff knows about the work roles, general interests, education, infor-
mation-seeking behavior, values, and related characteristics of potential library users, the
more likely it is that the collection will be able to provide the necessary materials to those
users when it is needed.
A library generally has a sizable base of patrons who use it on a regular basis, and many
others who come to it only sporadically. However, there is generally an even larger number
of complete nonusers in any community or organization that the library serves. A needs
assessment study can be aimed at any or all of these constituencies.
Community analysis as a part of needs assessment has to be done on a regular basis:

There are many similarities between “needs assessment projects” and marketing stud-
ies, and they frequently employ the same data-collecting methods. Both focus on gain-
ing insights about the people (“target populations”) being studied. Often their goals

/ 13 /
14 / CH AP T ER 2

are similar in that they want to improve the usefulness/value of a service or “product.”
Additionally, both can produce data valuable for other projects. . . . Libraries of all types
need to market themselves, especially in today’s environment, and one builds useful/
effective collections, in part, through a solid understanding of the service population.
(Evans and Saponaro 2005, 20–21)

Librarians may think they know their users, but the demographics of any community will
change over time. Those changing demographics will increase the number of nonusers if
librarians don’t recognize the need to change or expand their services and collections. For
example, materials and services in different languages may be needed. Spanish-language
materials are commonly requested, but other immigrant groups may need or desire materi-
als in Slavic or Asian languages. Remember to examine your potential users’ other activities,
since this information can provide valuable insight on their hobbies and other interests to
which the library can cater. Advertising your library’s relevant materials to civic groups or
others that meet within your service area can bring in additional users.
The essential nature of information needs assessment is obvious when you consider the
library’s service role—libraries will continue to be supported by their parent organizations
only to the extent that they provide information services that users perceive as useful. Al-
though there are certainly other reasons, collection development is generally the main rea-
son for conducting a needs assessment. One should be careful to focus a user needs analysis
survey on a few major areas of concern, or even just one concern. The research literature
and common sense tell us that items on a survey that may seem peripheral or unrelated to
the survey’s purpose can make respondents suspicious of the survey or the motives of the
investigator, which often leads to nonparticipation or, worse yet, deliberately misleading
responses.
Conducting a community analysis or needs assessment need not be a daunting task.
The traditional journalist’s approach to writing a news story by asking who, what, when,
where, and how constitutes an appropriate and easy-to-apply methodology for building
an effective collection needs assessment. With this approach, you, as the librarian, need
to consider collecting the following types of information in your needs assessment study
(Gregory 2006, 15–17).

WHO AND WHAT WILL BE STUDIED?

Historical Data
Historical data can provide clues as to which areas of the collection might need weeding or
might no longer need new materials. Circulation records, for example, can be data-mined
for a wealth of information about the current collection. Interlibrary loan records may pro-
vide information about the kinds of materials that may be required to meet new needs.

Geographic Data
Geographic data can help in the determination of service points, which in turn influences
the number of copies of various titles that the library needs to acquire. How far away
do your users live from the library? How do they get to the library—walk, drive, public
 A S SE S SI NG USE R N E E DS AN D MAR K E TI N G TH E C OLLE C TI O N TO TH OSE USE R S / 15

transportation? Knowledge of all these factors can guide the collection development librar-
ian in terms of numbers of copies and document delivery questions.

Legal Basis and Authority

The librarian must know if there are any legal restrictions on what the library may buy with
monies allocated for collection development.

Political Information
Political information about the community or organization is also vital. Who is really
influencing fiscal decisions? What are the policies concerning the allocation of collection
development funds? The answers may not influence which titles are acquired, but they
will influence the way in which funds are secured and allocated. You may think that this is
something that you learn the first day on the job, so why study it? In my experience, many
of the so-called rules and regulations that may be passed along to you are really customs, not
rules. Occasionally, it is good to question such assumptions and determine what you really
can and cannot do.

Demographic Data
Demographic data are fundamental in formulating a collection development program. Basic
changes in the composition of the community or user population are inevitable, but only
by monitoring the user community can such changes be anticipated and discovered. Over
time, there are population shifts and changes in the age and the racial and ethnic composi-
tion of the potential user base. It will be useful to remain aware of users’ educational back-
grounds and economic status as well.

Economic Information
Economic information about your community of users may also play a part in determining
which materials may be useful to the business community. If industries and businesses are
shutting down, a significant number of users may be looking for information about jobs and
retraining.

Social and Educational Organizations

Social and economic organizations reflect the user community’s values. Educational and
other organizations may bring special needs to the library.

Cultural and Recreational Organizations

Cultural and recreational organizations may provide useful clues to specialized interest
areas in the community. Are reading groups prominent in your area? Can the library facili-
tate the operation of such groups by providing multiple copies of likely selections and read-
ing club guides to these works? Are there hobby groups in your community for which you
could provide meeting space and materials of interest?
16 / CH AP T ER 2

Other Community Organizations

Other community organizations such as other libraries, bookstores, newspapers, and so on
may also affect the demands made upon the library collection.

WHERE ARE DATA COLLECTED?

Published Sources
First, you should see what information about your users is already available in print or
online, and then design an assessment (interview, community forum, survey, etc.) instru-
ment to collect information that is not readily available.

Key Informants
After reviewing the existing printed sources, a good next step is to interview people who
ought to know about the information needs and interests of the user base. In public librar-
ies, these key informants might be public officials, business leaders, clergy, and so on. In
academic libraries, you might interview deans, the chair of the faculty senate, faculty who
are known to be heavy library users, and so on. In school media centers, the principal, key
faculty leaders, and the head of the PTA would be likely key informants. This method is used
as an initial or screening stage for a more extensive study.

Community Forum
A community forum is like a town meeting. This approach avoids selection bias by the
researcher, since all members of the potential user community are invited to participate.
The key to success for this approach is extensively publicizing the forum in all available
media. The researcher needs to prepare starter questions, but should also make room for
spontaneous questions (some of which may be planted to avoid dead air). It often helps
to have a moderator who is not on the library staff and thus is not subject to emotional
involvement. Public libraries often use consultants to moderate such meetings.

Focus Groups
Instead of or in addition to a community forum, the library or its consultant may want to
organize small focus groups of library users or nonusers to explore particular concerns in
more depth than can be obtained in a community forum. With a smaller group of partici-
pants, issues can be explored in greater depth. Successful focus groups need an experienced
facilitator and a recorder to capture the information for later study.

Social Indicators
Social indicators include data about age, education, income, and so on. Much of this infor-
mation can be found in existing sources such as census reports, reports from regional plan-
ning agencies, and so on. Social scientists have developed a method that makes use of social
indicators to determine the needs of various segments of the community. By selecting
 A S SE S SI NG USE R N E E DS AN D MAR K E TI N G TH E C OLLE C TI O N TO TH OSE USE R S / 17

factors that researchers think are highly correlated with special groups or segments of the
population, surveyors may be able to extrapolate the information needs of the community.

Survey
Surveys can consist of personal interviews or mailed questionnaires (these are particularly
important if the library wants to hear from nonusers) or a site-based survey (or a combina-
tion of all three).
Surveys should always be kept as simple and easy as possible while still obtaining the
needed information:

• A survey should be as simple as possible, both for those taking it and for
those analyzing it.
• Limit the response possibilities to a range from five to ten.
• Offer an even number of choices in order to avoid the middle-of-the-road
choice whenever possible.
• Use simple sentences: do not include two concepts or situations in the same
question.
• Use language that your users or potential users will understand; avoid
jargon whenever possible.
• Avoid complexity and ambiguity: users should feel comfortable answering
the questions.
• The survey should be easy to return: provide preaddressed, stamped
envelopes where necessary; self-mailers have been known to increase
return rates. If the survey is given in the library, provide a large, very
visible box for returns. (Arizona State Library n.d.)

Always be sure to make the survey meaningful for respondents. If they understand the rea-
soning behind the survey, they are more likely to spend the time to fill it out thoughtfully.

• The purpose of the survey should be clear before starting to write.

• How the data will be used should be understood before beginning.
• How many responses are expected?
• Will Excel or a statistical program such as SPSS be required to analyze the results?
• Does someone on the team have the skills to analyze the data? (Arizona
State Library, n.d.)

WHEN SHOULD THE DATA BE COLLECTED?

Research shows that there are several ways to design the timing of a good study:

• Pick a typical or normal time.

• Pick a time of heavy usage based on past performance.
• Pick some combination of the two.

The intention is to collect information from users that will help in your collection develop-
ment decisions. In an academic library, November and December may be the peak time for
18 / CH AP T ER 2

term papers for undergraduates and thus a high-traffic time for the library. Students will
need numerous types of materials, and determining their met and unmet needs can be of
great use to collection development staff.

HOW ARE THE DATA INTERPRETED?

In general, data interpretation should follow the steps below:

• Summarize the data and describe your findings in a draft or preliminary

report.
• Graph or chart your data to make it easier to sell your recommendations.
• Get reactions and comments on the draft report, and prepare a set of
conclusions and recommendations.
• Prepare the final report with priorities assigned to your recommendations.
• Library units should examine the report for its implications regarding their
work.

After this is done, don’t do what so many libraries do—that is, simply file the report away.
Give careful consideration to the data and its implications for the library’s collection and
services. The most important point to consider is: do the present objectives of the library
coincide with your new knowledge of its community of users?

TIPS FOR A GOOD STUDY

Generally, using more than one method of assessment greatly enhances the findings. The
researcher may, for example, consult with key informants about a draft questionnaire and
revise it as a result. Key informants are a good source for determining what needs to be
asked in interviews or questionnaires. Also, consulting all existing sources will allow you to
construct a shorter survey or interview instrument because you are merely supplementing
your knowledge of the community, and not trying to capture everything in the instrument.
A good rule of thumb is to ask people only what you cannot find out from existing sources.
(Note: You may want to ask for some demographic or personal information for cross-tabula-
tion purposes, but you should already have a demographic picture of your community from
existing information sources.)
Remember that there are examples of excellent needs assessment reports and proj-
ects on the Web. The Logan Heights Branch (2009) of the San Diego Public Library posted
its needs assessment on the Web (www.sandiego.gov/public-library/pdf/logan_needs.pdf ).
Although this assessment includes much more than the collection, an analysis of the collec-
tion is embedded in the report. This is just one example of a well-planned needs assessment.
The Arizona State Library, Archives & Public Records division (n.d.) has posted online
a needs assessment overview that may prove helpful to you in getting started. The needs
assessment report from the Via Christi medical library is another good example of a needs
assessment, but in a special library situation (Perley et al. 2007). Undertake a web search,
and you will very likely find more examples to help you visualize the product of a needs
assessment. As with so many things, you can always add improvements, but reinventing the
wheel is unnecessary.
 A S SE S SI NG USE R N E E DS AN D MAR K E TI N G TH E C OLLE C TI O N TO TH OSE USE R S / 19

MARKETING YOUR COLLECTION

Now that you have completed a needs assessment for your library, the next step is to get the
word out about what you have added or what you already have in your collection that fits
the needs which you have identified. For public libraries, marketing and community out-
reach are among the most important activities in which librarians need to participate. Mar-
keting is essential because users need to be convinced that libraries have the materials that
they need—not everything is on the Internet, as sometimes simplistically implied by the
mass media. Likewise, school media centers must necessarily market themselves to faculty,
parents, and students. Special libraries have always been forced to market themselves to
their users or organizations in order to demonstrate their worth. In contrast, only academic
libraries have tended to shrink from marketing activities, which are all too often viewed as
insufficiently academically oriented.
The Encyclopedia of Business and Finance defines the term marketing:

The term market is the root word for the word marketing. Market refers to the location
where exchanges between buyers and sellers occur. Marketing pertains to the interac-
tive process that requires developing, pricing, placing, and promoting goods, ideas, or
services in order to facilitate exchanges between customers and sellers to satisfy the
needs and wants of consumers. Thus, at the very center of the marketing process is
satisfying the needs and wants of customers. (Marion 2001)

Potter goes further and explains what marketing isn’t, which is helpful to keep in mind in
separating advertising and promotion from marketing:

What marketing is not, is simply a poster featuring details of a new database. That’s
advertising. It’s not simply an online campaign about a new service, that’s publicity.
It’s not an article in the newspaper about the head librarian: that’s publicity (and if the
article is about the librarian welcoming a famous celebrity to the library, that’s PR).
(Potter 2012, xiii)

Marketing requires interactions with your users on an ongoing basis that may include pro-
motion, publicity, public relations, and advertising in an organized, strategic way.
Marketing of the library, its collections, and its services has not always been a focal
point for librarians, but today it can be accomplished much more easily than in the past
through the library’s website and online catalog, newsletters, inexpensive giveaways, ex-
hibits, educational outreach, press releases, and public service announcements, as well as
displays and library publications.
Librarians don’t often think of marketing as a part of their job. They don’t see them-
selves as selling anything, naturally enough. But note the last sentence in the definition
above: “satisfying the needs and wants” of library users is very much a part of library work.
Librarians have materials that they want users to see and use, so how is that different from
selling?
Many business selling techniques can be adapted for use in libraries. Take the “up-sell,”
which involves bringing to users’ attention something similar to what they have already
found that may also be of interest to them.
Bookstores often make a point of actually putting a book in the hands of a customer
who has inquired about a title—not just pointing or telling the customer where something
20 / CH AP T ER 2

is located. Librarians have known for a long time that going with users to the location of the
materials that they need is appreciated, but the stress of time and the numbers of users may
tempt the librarian to remain a pointer. This tendency needs to be resisted.
There is also the “hand-sell,” where particular items are targeted by bookstore employ-
ees to push. Special displays can bring these items to the customer’s attention. Placing items
near the cash register is also an example of this kind of marketing activity. These techniques
are easily transferred to a library setting.
Successful marketing requires a plan that is often spoken of as a marketing cycle, since
it should include a method for gathering feedback and adjusting the plan as needed to get
the desired results. A marketing plan for a library should not be thought of as a one-shot
event, but as a continuing program that changes over time as needed (Potter 2012, 11–12).
Even when looking only at the collection, marketing the collection should be an ongoing
process. Also remember that it may help to do some internal marketing of the collection as
well. Those librarians who are not involved in developing the collection will need to be kept
abreast of new resources that have been added. Internal marketing focuses on the tool or
resource itself, while external marketing should focus on what the tool or resource can do
for users and how it benefits them.
A marketing plan needs to contain the specifics for the marketing mix, the resources
you will need (including costs), the expected results of the plan, and controls that will allow
you to monitor the costs and results as the plan unfolds. Also, it is a good idea to include
how you will evaluate the marketing effort to measure how well it did. A good evaluation
includes more than anecdotal evidence. Your marketing plan should include measurable
outcomes.

Public Libraries

Since their beginnings in the mid-nineteenth century, public libraries have (without say-
ing so, of course) practiced marketing techniques to bring their collections and services
to the attention of their clientele. Marketing strategies can also be seen in their planning
processes. Public libraries tend to do more in the way of needs assessment in order to more
closely match their users’ needs with the materials that they purchase. As publicly funded
and mostly government-affiliated institutions, these libraries’ budgets are more closely tied
to satisfying the public than may be the case for many other types of libraries. An important
element in user satisfaction is getting the word out about what is happening at the library
and its new resources.
Public library collections can be seen as somewhat similar to the offerings available in
large bookstores. Owing to space and mission considerations, most public libraries stress
new materials and are constantly weeding out materials that are not circulating at some
predetermined level. Bringing new materials to the attention of users is a crucial part of a
public librarian’s job. Marketing in a public library thus involves or could involve many of
the techniques discussed above.
As an example of an innovative marketing technique, Florida’s Orange County Public
Library System came up with the idea of using their online catalog to market their collec-
tions and events to the million or so residents in the Orange County area. For example, a
library event with the author Carl Hiaasen as the featured speaker was advertised through
the catalog, with a MARC record being specially made for the event. The catalog record
contained all of Hiaasen’s works in a 505 field. Thus, a search on his name or on any of his
 A S SE S SI NG USE R N E E DS AN D MAR K E TI N G TH E C OLLE C TI O N TO TH OSE USE R S / 21

books brought up the event record. The event record not only helped get the word out about
the event, but also served to bring all of his titles to the attention of users (Bost and Conklin
2006).
Getting an audience for an event or steering users to materials depends heavily on in-
forming people about what is happening in the library.

Academic Libraries

Amy Fry (2009, 33) states, “I realize now that, in a way, everybody’s got to sell something;
indeed, marketing is an important element in my work in the academic library field.” Also,
in reference to academic libraries, Rajesh Singh writes:

The library in an academic institution is considered as an invaluable resource for gain-

ing knowledge for students, faculty and staff. However, it is not difficult for an academ-
ic library to become complacent because it has no natural information competitors on
campus to stimulate marketing initiatives. One of the possible reasons for the compla-
cency on the part of libraries could be the uncomfortable attitudes of librarians toward
“marketing” terminologies. (Singh 2009, 25)

Furthermore, academic librarians and staff often view negatively any of the library’s pre-
cious funds being spent on marketing activities. Gossip can quickly make the rounds about
how much money is being “wasted” on marketing that could be spent more appropriately
for items in the library collection, when, in fact, marketing activities are necessary to make
sure that users and potential users know about the resources and services available at the
library or through its website.
With specific reference to academic libraries (although his advice is applicable to any
type of library), Burkhardt (2010, 11) recommends using one or more types of new social
media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) to provide information about new additions to the library’s
collection, possibly with links to text or video. Librarians who do bibliographic instruction
and those training students and faculty also need to market what is available through the
social media used by the library. Different venues may be appropriate, depending on the
materials in the collection that are being discussed. Marketing the collection is all about
communicating with potential users.
Academic libraries may also do outreach to local schools. St. Cloud State University
(SCSU) in Minnesota participated in History Day, a nationwide program that brings stu-
dents in the sixth through twelfth grades into libraries, historical societies, and archives to
give students a fun way to learn about history.

This event was “outreach in action” to the community. People who attended had no
connection to SCSU, yet discovered resources available to them as community mem-
bers. The community participants were shown that the academic library has other uses
that go beyond the university. (Steman and Motin 2010, 29)

Similarly, a library marketing project at the University of British Columbia attempted to

educate academics about the potential of the library as the heart and soul of the university
rather than just a place to come when a research paper is assigned (Empey and Black 2006).
The librarians’ efforts included tabletop displays at university events about the library
22 / CH AP T ER 2

and its services, as well as posters, giveaways, and exhibits in a display case at the library
entrance. They also took advantage of university publications, including the student news-
paper, as another way to spread the message about the library.
When considering the question of whether “to market or not to market,” complacency
is not an option.

The risks of being reticent about marketing are too great: a poor image, false percep-
tions, lack of support and advocacy, and missed opportunities in the big institutional
picture. Marketing can and does serve many purposes. Not only can it be instrumental
in raising the profile of the academic library, but marketing also serves to educate and
inform users about the important research function the library provides. Librarians
are only too aware that most individuals do not understand the complexities of library
resources and services and that too many students do not recognize the link between
using the library and academic success. (Empey and Black 2006, 31)

It is not such a stretch from needs assessment to marketing the collection. The result of
performing a needs assessment is a better understanding of what users want. Simply buying
materials in response to that assessment’s findings may not be enough, however. The library
needs to market its new resources. Matthews (2009) urges librarians to move beyond sur-
veys, forms, and other data-gathering methods to actually market the library’s collection
and services as a product.
Fagan (2009) found that virtual libraries, defined generally as electronic resources
available on multiple computer systems, utilizing a single interface or entry point, are
not used or “visited” as often as physical libraries. Her article in Computers in Libraries
addresses how libraries need to market their virtual libraries, and provides tips on how
to go about it.

Special Libraries

Most special libraries exist to serve the needs of a particular organization or discipline, such
as business, law, or medicine. The continued existence of these libraries depends on their
ability to publicize their collections and services because they need to be able to demon-
strate a good return on investment. Companies that have libraries want to know that the
library is valuable to their business and profits, more so than getting information elsewhere
or doing without. Since many special librarians are solo librarians, it is easy for them to for-
get about marketing when there are reference questions, acquisitions, and other activities
to perform daily. Many special librarians may complain that they have no time to mar-
ket their library. However, taking the time to market your library effectively is extremely
important to its viability, and not just its visibility.
Special libraries are part of the culture of their parent organization and thus need to
demonstrate the shared values and goals of that organization. This culture should carry over
to the library’s marketing efforts.
A favorite technique with many special librarians is to hold an open house to bring
users and potential users into the library. Offer attendees refreshments such as wine and
cheese, fruit, cookies, or just coffee and tea. Use this opportunity to show off new databases
or other materials or services. If you have nothing new to show off, have an open house
during National Library Week or when new staff members are hired. You may want to hold
 A S SE S SI NG USE R N E E DS AN D MAR K E TI N G TH E C OLLE C TI O N TO TH OSE USE R S / 23

an open house semiannually to get new employees acquainted with the library and the ser-
vices you provide. Getting people into the library is the first step toward making them users
of your services.
Special librarians seem to be the ones who are most involved in marketing activities of
some kind or another. Even small things such as taking requested materials to individuals
and taking the time to encourage them to become more acquainted with library services can
pay off down the line. Successful marketing in special libraries is the main key to survival.

School Library Media Centers

Media specialists have many constituencies with whom to communicate what they have
to offer—students, teachers and staff, administrators, parents, community members, and
even legislators. Establishing good relations with each constituency can help the library
flourish. Without knowledge of the library and its collection and services, these groups will
not support the school library media center as they should. Different tactics are called for,
but all are important if the library is to continue to flourish.
Because the American Association of School Librarians (AASL) recognizes the impor-
tance of marketing the school library, they held a contest for the best marketing video in
2010 and featured that video on the AASL website. The contest rules called for the videos to
show how school libraries make the community thrive.
There are many ways to get your message across, which can be found in the references
and suggested readings for this chapter. Start with the more local of your constituent groups
and use them to help you reach beyond the school.

SUMMARY

Knowing what your community wants and needs and then telling them about your collec-
tion and services is important for all types of libraries. Libraries cannot play the central role
that they should be playing unless potential users know about the library and feel welcome
there. After determining what the community wants through a needs assessment, the next
important step is getting people into the library to make them loyal users.

ACTIVITIES

Scenarios

Choose one of the scenarios below for your needs assessment. This activity is best done in
small groups.
Prepare a plan for a needs assessment project that includes gathering appropriate de-
mographic data from published sources, interviews with key informants, and either a field
survey or an activities survey. Make up plausible data (known as dummy data) and analyze
your results. Be sure to include the information required to answer the following questions:

• What sources will you use to find the demographic and social data needed?
How will it be used in the final report?
24 / CH AP T ER 2

• How will you identify key informants? How will you structure the interviews?
• How will you identify the respondent sample for the field survey or
activities survey?
• What questions will be asked? Format the questions in the same manner as
you would distribute them.
• Provide dummy data to analyze. You are not expected to actually
administer the survey. Simply make up plausible data.
• How will you compile information from responses? Use the dummy data
to illustrate your compilation methods. It is also appropriate to include
dummy data for the interviews of key informants.
• How and to whom will you communicate the results of the survey?
• What actions should be taken based on the results of the needs assessment?
Again, base your response on the dummy data you provided.

Scenario A
The staff of a public library in a small town realizes that the town’s population base is
changing. Previously, Spanish-language materials were the only type other than English
that the library felt the need to collect. Due to some new industry in the town, a new group
of immigrants has moved in. Their native languages appear to be Slavic ones, but the librar-
ians are not sure which Slavic languages they speak. These immigrants also seem to speak
English very well, so the librarians are not sure if they need materials in their native lan-
guages or not. How do you proceed to assess their needs?

Scenario B
You have just been hired as a school media specialist for a private middle school (or elemen-
tary or high school). It has been three years since the school has hired a professional librar-
ian. The collection has suffered from neglect. Your initial examination finds that many of
the materials need to be discarded, and some areas of the school’s curriculum don’t seem to
be addressed at all. How do you proceed to assess the needs of the teachers and students?

Scenario C
A large cancer hospital has decided to introduce a library for patient information that will
be open to anyone in the community. The budget is somewhat limited for the first two
years, with a promise for more generous funding in the future. How do you proceed to
determine the initial, most desperate needs of the community and devise a plan for the
collection as more funding becomes available?

Marketing Campaign

In groups of four to five students, based on the type of library, design a brochure or write
a press release to market a new or updated area in the collection (e.g., art books on local
artists) or a new format of materials (e.g., e-books or a new digital library). Identify the con-
stituency for the marketing campaign, and also how the product (brochure or press release)
will be distributed.
 A S SE S SI NG USE R N E E DS AN D MAR K E TI N G TH E C OLLE C TI O N TO TH OSE USE R S / 25

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Because of rough economic times, there have been rumors that most school
media positions will be eliminated. (Or put yourself in a special library
within a company where there are rumors about the library being closed.)
Describe how you would try to stop such a decision. Your answer can
include what you would do, as well as how your state library association
could help you get your message across.
2. Although your library seems to have a good reputation with the city and
county governments, other public libraries in your state are experiencing
deep cuts to their book budgets. What can you do to help ensure that your
library does not experience similar budget cuts?
3. After completing a needs assessment and discovering that students want
more electronic databases with full-text articles, your academic library has
recently licensed a number of expensive article databases that are not being
used as much as you expected based on the needs assessment. How can you
generate more interest in these new materials?

REFERENCES

Arizona State Library, Archives & Public Libraries. N.d. “Community Needs Assessment.”
https://www.azlibrary.gov/libdev/continuing-education/cdt/community-needs.
Biblarz, Dora, Stephen Bosch, and Chris Sugnet, eds. 2001. Guide to Library User Needs Assessment for
Integrated Information Resource Management and Collection Development. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
Bost, Wendi, and Jamie Conklin. 2006. “Creating a One-Stop Shop: Using the Catalog to Market Collections
and Services.” Florida Libraries 49 (fall): 5–7.
Burkhardt, Andy. 2010. “Social Media: A Guide for College and University Libraries.” College and Research
Library News 71 (January): 10–12.
Empey, Heather, and Nancy E. Black. 2006. “Marketing the Academic Library: Building on the ‘@Your
Library’ Framework.” College and Undergraduate Libraries 12, no. 1: 19–33.
Evans, G. Edward, and Margaret Zarnosky Saponaro. 2005. Developing Library and Information Center
Collections. 5th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Fagan, Jody Condit. 2009. “Marketing the Virtual Library.” Computers in Libraries 29 (July/August): 25–30.
Fry, Amy. 2009. “Lessons of Good Customer Service.” Library Journal 134 (September 1): 33–34.
Gregory, Vicki L. 2006. Selecting and Managing Electronic Resources. Rev. ed. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Kropp, Lisa G. 2014. “Know Your Neighborhood: A Community Needs Assessment Primer.” School Library
Journal, June 20. www.slj.com/2014/06/public-libraries/know-your-neighborhood-a-community
-needs-assessment-primer/.
Logan Heights Branch Library [San Diego, CA]. 2009. “Community Library Needs Assessment
Components.” City of San Diego. www.sandiego.gov/public-library/pdf/logan_needs.pdf.
Marion, Allison McClintic, ed. 2001. “Marketing.” In Encyclopedia of Business and Finance. Gale Cengage.
eNotes.com, 2006. www.enotes.com/ business-finance-encyclopedia/marketing.
Matthews, Brian. 2009. Marketing Today’s Academic Library: A Bold New Approach to Communicating with
Students. Chicago: American Library Association.
Perley, Cathy M., Camilla A. Gentry, A. Sue Fleming, and Kristin M. Sen. 2007. “Conducting a User-
Centered Information Needs Assessment: The Via Christi Libraries’ Experience.” JMLA 95, no. 2
(April): 172–81. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852625/.
26 / CH AP T ER 2

Potter, Ned. 2012. The Library Marketing Toolkit. London: Facet.

Singh, Rajesh. 2009. “Does Your Library Have an Attitude Problem Towards ‘Marketing’? Revealing
Inter-Relationships between Marketing Attitudes and Behavior.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 35
(January): 25–32.
Steman, Thomas, and Susan Motin. 2010. “History Day: Another Outreach Opportunity for Academic
Libraries.” College & Research Libraries News 71 (January): 26–29.

SELECTED READINGS

Bishop, Kay. 2007. The Collection Program in Schools: Concepts, Practices, and Information Sources. 4th ed.
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Bizzle, Ben and Maria Flora. 2015. Stop Acting Like a Library and Start a Revolution. Chicago: ALA Editions.
Blake, Julie C., and Susan P. Schleper. 2004. “From Data to Decisions: Using Surveys and Statistics to Make
Collection Management Decisions.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services 28: 460–64.
Doucett, Elizabeth. 2008. Creating Your Library Brand: Communicating Your Relevance and Value to Your
Patrons. Chicago: American Library Association.
Duff, Wendy M., and Catherine A. Johnson. 2001. “A Virtual Expression of Need: An Analysis of E-Mail
Reference Questions.” American Archivist 64 (spring/summer): 43–60.
Empey, Heather, and Nancy E. Black. 2006. “Marketing the Academic Library: Building on the ‘@Your
Library’ Framework.” College and Undergraduate Libraries 12, no. 1: 19–33.
Farmer, Lesley S. J. 2001. “Collection Development in Partnership with Youth: Uncovering Best Practices.”
Collection Management 26, no. 2: 67–78.
Flowers, Helen F. 1998. Public Relations for School Library Media Programs: 500 Ways to Influence People and
Win Friends for Your School Library Media Center. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Fry, Amy. 2009. “Lessons of Good Customer Service.” Library Journal 134 (September 1): 33–34.
Hahn, K. L., and L. A. Faulkner. 2002. “Evaluative Usage-Based Metrics for the Selection of E-Journals.”
College & Research Libraries 63 (September): 215–27.
Ismail, Lizah. 2009. “What They Are Telling Us: Library Use and Needs of Traditional and Non-Traditional
Students in a Graduate Social Work Program.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 35 (November):
555–64.
Karp, Rashelle S., ed. 2002. Powerful Public Relations: A How-to Guide for Libraries. Chicago: American
Library Association.
Kohl, Susan. 2000. Getting Attention: Leading-Edge Lessons for Publicity and Marketing. Boston:
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Koontz, Christie, and Dean Jue. 2004. “Unlock Your Demographics.” Library Journal 129 (March 1): 32–33.
The “M” Word—Marketing Libraries: Marketing News, Tips, and Trends for Libraries (blog). thewordblog
.blogspot.com.
Lucas-Alfieri, Debra. 2015. Marketing the 21st Century Library. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Malenfant, Kara J. 2010. “Leading Change in the System of Scholarly Communication: A Case Study of
Engaging Liaison Librarians for Outreach to Faculty.” College & Research Libraries 71 (January): 63–76.
Matthews, Brian, and Jon Bodnar. 2008. SPEC KIT 306. Association of Research Libraries, September.
McCarthy, Madsen C. 2009. “The Importance of Marketing Digital Collections.” ALISS Quarterly 5, no. 1
(October): 2–9.
Russo, Laurie. 2017. “Mastering Marketing.” Library Journal 142 (March 1): 46–48.
Solomon, Laura. 2016. The Librarian’s Nitty-Gritty Guide to Content Marketing. Chicago: ALA Editions.
Steinmacher, Michael. 2000. “Underlying Principles of Library Public Relations.” Kentucky Libraries 64
(winter): 12–15.
 A S SE S SI NG USE R N E E DS AN D MAR K E TI N G TH E C OLLE C TI O N TO TH OSE USE R S / 27

Thomset, Beth C. 2018. Marketing with Social Media: A LITA Guide, 2nd ed. Chicago: ALA.
Thorsen, Jeanne. 1998. “Community Studies: Raising the Roof and Other Recommendations.” Acquisitions
Librarian 10, no. 20: 5–13.
Westbrook, Lynn, and Steven A. Tucker. 2002. “Understanding Faculty Information Needs.” Reference and
User Studies Quarterly 42 (winter): 144–48.
 CHAPTER 3

Collection Development
Policies

OVERVIEW

In this chapter, we will look at the rationale and the procedures for developing and main-
taining a collection development policy that is current and up-to-date. Each part of the
policy will be examined from the perspective of both writing it and using it in the library
for collection development and management purposes. Not all libraries will have a written
collection development policy, so some of you may find yourselves needing to develop and
write a collection development policy for the first time in your library.
Collection development policies serve as blueprints for the operations of a library as
a whole, for it is through these policies that the library carries out its central tasks of ac-
quiring, organizing, and managing library materials. These policies also typically set up the
general framework for establishing the library’s collection goals, in terms of both new ac-
quisitions and the maintenance of existing items. Policies are usually developed by libraries
with two audiences in mind—the library’s staff members, and the broader community of
patrons and other users. Collection development policies can certainly vary greatly as a
result. In most libraries, what we find today consists of a combination of descriptions of
practices, guidelines for decision-making, and provisions intended to protect against un-
warranted pressures to acquire, not to acquire, or to discard certain types of materials or
particular items.
Collection development policies help to ensure consistency in procedures and are also
important in achieving appropriate balance in a library’s collection. Consistency is needed
because selectors, in using and revising the policies, are necessarily forced to confront the
overall goals and objectives of the library and to reflect these goals and objectives in the col-
lection they are building, whether that collection is owned and housed locally in hard-copy
form or in an electronic format, or is simply accessed through the Web. Of course, proper
collection balance does not mean that all areas must receive equal coverage, but rather that
the collection reflects the proper balance necessary to meet the needs of the particular li-
brary’s users.
Although we talk of collection development policy as a blueprint, it is not as exact as
a hard science (see figure 3.1), which is why we need broadly knowledgeable professional
librarians to design and implement collection development decisions.
Since writing a collection development policy is a time-consuming task, Gardner (1981,
222–24) provides a number of reasons why it is worth the time of librarians to write such a
policy, including the following ones:

/ 29 /
30 / CH AP T ER 3

Physics Chemistry Biology Psychology Social Sciences (LIS)

Hard or Exact Science Soft or Messy Science

FIGURE 3.1 Hard versus soft science

• It forces the staff to think through library goals and commit themselves
to these goals, helping them to identify the long- and short-range needs of
users and to establish priorities for allocating funds.
• It helps ensure that the library will commit itself to all parts of the
community, both present and future.
• It helps set standards for the selection and weeding of materials.
• It informs users, administrators, and other libraries of the collection’s
scope, facilitating the coordination of collection development within and
among institutions.
• It helps to minimize the selectors’ personal bias and to highlight imbalances
in selection criteria.
• It serves as an in-service training tool for new staff.
• It helps ensure continuity, especially in larger collections, providing a
pattern and framework to ease transitions from one librarian to the next.
• It provides a means of staff self-evaluation, and evaluation by outsiders.
• It helps demonstrate that the library is running a businesslike operation.
• It provides information to assist in budget allocations.
• It contributes to operational efficiency in terms of routine decisions, which
helps junior staff.
• It serves as a tool to handle complaints with regard to inclusions or
exclusions of particular materials.

In the last two decades, there has been a rapid infusion of all types of electronic resources
into libraries’ collections. Among these materials are e-books and e-journals, electronic
databases, movies on DVDs, image collections, maps, encyclopedias, stock market reports,
other business and financial information, and health and medical information. These elec-
tronic resources, as might be expected, have often strained the rules and guidelines typ-
ically found in current collection development policies. For instance, in regard to these
electronic resources, what constitutes the library’s collection? Is it simply the items that
are purchased and housed locally, or does it include licensed materials housed on a server
at the vendor’s site and not at the library? Is (or should) the library’s collection considered
to include materials that are freely available on the Internet? These and other basic phil-
osophical issues must be resolved before a collection development policy can successfully
incorporate electronic resources.
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 31

PURPOSE OF COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

A written collection development policy is important for a number of reasons, and the
absence of such a policy suggests that the collection is being developed on an ad hoc basis.

Libraries without collection development policies are like businesses without business
plans. Without a plan, an owner and his employees lack a clear understanding of what
the business is doing now and what it will do in the future, and potential investors
have little information about the business’s prospects. The owner has no benchmarks
against which to measure progress. Daily decisions are made without context. Even a
library with written policy statements suffers if those statements are not reviewed,
revised, and updated regularly. Selections, deselections, and priority setting throughout
the library occur in isolation and without coordination if the library has no recorded
rationale for decisions. (Johnson 2009, 72–73)

Collection development policies typically serve a number of purposes: they inform and
direct library processes in acquiring and making resources available to users, and they serve
as a protection for the library against challenges to its procedures and resources. These pur-
poses—informing, directing, and protecting—can be accomplished in many ways through a
traditional collection development policy.
A good collection development policy will provide the staff and users with information
as follows. It will:

• Describe the library’s user community, define the institutional mission of

the library, and identify its users’ likely needs.
• Provide selection criteria and guidelines for the use of those charged with
selecting library materials.
• Identify those selection tools and processes that are most appropriate for
the particular library.
• Define the process for identifying materials for weeding, cancellation,
storage, and replacement.
• Facilitate consistency and communication among the collection
development librarians.
• Establish who is responsible for various aspects of the collection
development process and its management.
• Create a plan for the future of the collection and the budgeting of resultant
library expenditures.
• Serve as a training document for new collection development librarians and
those charged with management of the library as a whole.
• Provide guidelines for dealing with gift materials.
• Provide guidelines for dealing with complaints about materials or services
which are thought by patrons or administrators to be inappropriate.
• Provide a framework and context for decisions concerning library access,
space allocations, budgeting, and fund-raising priorities.
• Support cooperative collection development activities by documenting
what the library has done in the past and what the library is currently doing
with collecting levels by discipline.
32 / CH AP T ER 3

• Identify both the strengths and the relative weaknesses of the library’s
current collections.
• Aid in preparing grant proposals and planning development initiatives
through its supporting documentation.
• Serve as a communication vehicle with the library’s staff, administration,
and various constituencies.

A good collection development policy will carry out its protecting purposes by containing
provisions in such areas as the following:

• Protecting intellectual freedom

• Informing the library’s governing or funding body about the library’s
current direction
• Providing a clear and carefully described rationale for the library’s
collection goals and practices
• Making clear the principles by which decisions are made in order to protect
the library against charges of bias or irresponsible behavior
• Protecting the library from pressures to acquire or provide access to
inappropriate or irrelevant resources
• Acting as an informational tool for use within the library’s user and patron
community and for the community at large
• Providing some protection to the library, when budgets decrease or
materials costs increase, against complaints by the user community

A collection development policy that encompasses electronic resources must also include
policies for handling the following issues that arise with such resources:

• Cancellation or retention of print resources when the electronic version of

the resource becomes available
• Provision of or limitations on remote access to electronic resources that are
owned or licensed by the library
• Justification of new costs, which could include the costs of hardware and
software in addition to the cost of the electronic materials
• Location of resources and the cost of maintaining appropriate Internet or
other network links
• Possible duplication of certain e-journals or databases, based on purchasing
bundles that are available from different electronic information aggregators
• Negotiation of the terms of licenses for use of the material, including
provisions addressing these new types of legal considerations in the
collection development policy itself
• Consideration of the special preservation and long-term access issues that
electronic resources present
• Satisfaction by the library of the technical requirements for access to the
resource, including such matters as determining the formats and computer
platforms needed to support the materials
• Cancellation problems, which include whether the library loses all rights to
materials previously licensed once cancellation occurs
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 33

• Performance questions, such as whether the electronic product really

performs its intended job better (i.e., does it make information more easily
or more accurately available than its print counterpart?)
• Training of staff and users in the use of new electronic resources
• Access and organizational issues concerning whether to catalog Internet-
available items or electronic bundles of resources
• Cooperative collection development issues, such as the ability to provide
copies on interlibrary loan

The flood of electronic materials coming into libraries has caused many of them to reexam-
ine their collection development policies and update them in order to add the concerns and
issues that are specific to electronic formats.

BASIC ELEMENTS OF A COLLECTION

DEVELOPMENT POLICY

This section presents the major components of any collection development policy, along
with a brief explanation of the kinds of information that belong in each section. For addi-
tional information and examples, you may wish to consult Frank W. Hoffmann and Rich-
ard J. Wood’s book Library Collection Development Policies: Academic, Public, and Special
Libraries (2005). Hoffmann and Wood have pulled together examples from a number of
different library policies for every element of a collection development policy. Also, you
should know that many libraries now put their entire policy on their website. An Inter-
net search will allow you to find examples of numerous policies from a wide variety of
libraries.

Title Page/Cover

This page identifies the type of document and the library to which it belongs. Be sure that
the title page is adequately descriptive and contains the date when it was written and
approved.

Signature Page

The signature page, which may be included in the title page, contains the signatures of the
librarian and supervisors, plus at least the chair of the library board in a public library
setting. The college or university academic vice president or provost are the likely signers
for an academic library. This page confers a needed legitimacy on the overall document.
Although many of the uses of a collection development policy are internal, external chal-
lenges may be mounted against any type of library, thus making it extremely important
that everyone in the hierarchy acknowledge the policy by signing off on the document. Any
individuals in the chain of command who may receive complaints directly about the library
should be cognizant of the policy and its contents.
34 / CH AP T ER 3

Table of Contents

As with any document, a table of contents allows users to more quickly find what they need.
Wood and Hoffman (1996, 34) list a number of features that all good tables of contents
should include:

• Headings should correspond, word for word, with those contained in the text.
• Subheadings should be included, if possible, with a uniform cutoff point
(regarding what is to be included) established throughout the table.
• Page numbers should be included in the table and cited for each content
heading.
• Appendixes, tables, and other sidebar-type information should be noted at
their proper sequence within the text.

Often when staff members need to consult a collection development policy, the matter is
urgent. It is important that all staff members be able to quickly find whichever part of the
policy is needed.

Statement of Purpose

This states the purpose of the library’s collection development policy. “The library’s pur-
pose statement often focuses on the communication function: internally, with users, staff,
and administrators, and externally, with other libraries and institutions. Communication
embraces a wide variety of vital operations, including training, budgeting, cooperative
acquisitions, and shared services” (Hoffman and Wood 2005, 5).
If this is a policy for a college or university library, it may state that the library’s pur-
pose is to support the curriculum and faculty research, or it may take a broader view that in
addition to the materials designed to support the academic program, the library also strives
to provide light or recreational reading for students and faculty.
A public library’s policy may state its purpose as serving the needs of local citizens and
providing information to the public and to city, town, or county government officials about
the principles on which materials are added to the collection.

Background Statement

A background statement should describe the library’s user community as defined by demo-
graphic materials and any insights gained through a needs assessment. It should also define
the institutional mission of the library and identify its users’ likely needs.
Usually background statements include some or all of the following:

• Geographical data as well as a demographic description of the community

as a whole, which may include information about social services required by
segments of the potential user population
• Special features of the area and organization that play a role in the services
and collections that may be particularly needed by this library or library
system
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 35

• The location of the library facilities, and any special services offered in
different locations
• A description of any cooperative agreements with other libraries that are
available to users (such as borrowing privileges)

Responsibility for Collection Development and Management

All policies need to clearly address the issue of responsibility for the collection. This section
should state the responsibilities of the collection development librarians and the director.
Usually the major day-to-day work is delegated to the collection development librarians,
but oversight is generally the responsibility of the director.
Academic libraries will usually cover the responsibility of the library to work with fac-
ulty members in each discipline to develop those areas of the collection. In smaller academ-
ic libraries, the faculty may play an active role in collection development. Generally, the
larger the library, the more likely that faculty will work with a member of the collection
development team only for special purchases or new specialty areas, such as the support of
a new academic program or degree. If the size of the library dictates that a large number of
people participate in the selection process, a chart or diagram may be included to help the
reader visualize the structure.
In the case of school media centers, a district supervisor or the school principal may
have ultimate responsibility for the collection, with the media specialist delegated to do
day-to-day selection. If this is the case, that fact should be clearly articulated in the appro-
priate documentation.

Mission, Goals, and Objectives Statements

Although some libraries use the library’s general mission, goals, and objectives statements
in their collection development policies, it is more effective to develop a mission, goals, and
objectives specifically for the policy. In the latter case, the mission, goals, and objectives of
the collection should be clearly tied to those of the library. Some libraries now put a vision
statement first, thus having a vision, a mission, goals, and objectives.
This portion of the policy can be problematic. “In many instances, libraries don’t uti-
lize mission, goal, and objectives statements in tandem; this despite the fact that these
three concepts are interrelated and vital to the overall way some libraries interpret these
concepts” (Hoffman and Wood 2005, 20). A close reading of this section in many collection
development policies that can be found on the Web shows that libraries often confuse these
concepts in their policies. This is obviously a long-standing problem.
To develop effective policy-making strategies, the proper use of mission, goals and
objectives must be understood. Often in a collection development policy, objectives read
more like goals, goals read more like a mission, and there are no real objectives at all.
Goals are broad statements of intentions, and objectives are narrower statements that
show how these intentions are to be carried out. Objectives are measurable and tell you
what actions must be completed or moved forward in a particular goal. (Futas 1995, 9;
emphasis in original).
Although the mission statement may at times seem a bit vacuous and can read a little
like an endorsement of the national flag, motherhood, and apple pie, the goals and objectives
36 / CH AP T ER 3

are important and should be written in such a way as to provide a framework for judging the
success of the library’s collection development work.

Identification of Target Audiences

This section identifies the library’s user constituencies or target audiences. A public library
typically has a number of these constituencies: children, young adults, adults seeking lei-
sure reading, adults researching local history, genealogy, or other subjects, businesspeople,
and so on. The library may also have a large senior citizen user group that, in addition to the
materials listed above, may require large-print resources and special equipment to enlarge
materials not available in that format. The library may likewise have a large disabled popu-
lation with a number of different special needs. The language and background diversity of
users will thus also need to be reflected in the collection.
Academic libraries have as their primary clientele their institution’s faculty, staff, and
students. However, many academic libraries also play an important role in the community;
for example, advanced high school students may be permitted to use the library. In some
cases, colleges and universities cultivate such high school students in the hope of drawing
them to attend that university. School media centers serve teachers and students primarily,
but they too may have other constituents. Special libraries usually have a more narrowly
defined user base, since they are often not open to the public or only in a limited manner.
Their clientele is generally the organization to which they belong.

Budgeting and Funding

This section addresses how the library is funded, and the effect that this funding meth-
odology has on the spending of often-scarce collection development dollars. In academic
libraries, in addition to general funds for reference and undergraduate materials, funds may
be allocated to each college and even down to the department level. Usually, there is a cutoff
time when the funds revert to the collection development librarians in order to provide
them with time to expend or commit the funds before the end of the current fiscal year.
In a large public library, the different departments may be allocated a specific sum of
money for collection development, or collection development may be centralized so that a
group of selectors purchases materials for the library or library system. Some libraries have
a committee of selectors who review suggestions for purchases. These selection committees
will often review or preview serials and audiovisual and electronic resources as a group be-
fore ordering them for the collection.
School media specialists will receive a budget for collection development and usually
will confer with teachers about the kinds of resources needed to match the curriculum and
their lesson plans. In the higher grades, the teachers may be organized by department, with
department chairs working with the media specialist in the selection of materials for that
area.
Special librarians will often be solo librarians or one of only a small staff. Collection de-
velopment decisions are usually somewhat easier in a special library because of the focus of
the collection in one area. Librarians may often work with researchers using the library and
therefore will be very cognizant of users’ needs. In larger medical or law libraries, the pro-
cesses for collection development may more closely resemble those of academic libraries.
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 37

Selection or Evaluation Criteria

The selection criteria are often seen as the core of the policy. They can explain why one item
is chosen over another—an accountability factor, so to speak. Since virtually all libraries
feel that they don’t receive enough funds to fully meet all user needs, a number of different
criteria need to be considered when purchasing library materials.

General Criteria

1. User needs and wants: Data gathered from a needs assessment, interlibrary
loan requests, reference questions, and the hits on a website can be used to
determine the needs of users.
2. Holdings of other libraries: For sources that are not needed often, it may be
possible to rely on nearby libraries.
3. Gaps in the collection: Missing volumes of serials or missing titles by famous
authors can be revealed and worked into an acquisition plan.

Specific Criteria

1. Currency: How old are your titles on average? For example, are particular
genre (e.g., westerns) titles not circulating because they aren’t wanted or
because they have already been read by most of the interested patrons?
2. Reputation of author or publisher: Standard best-selling and highly popular
items must be bought to keep the users happy. For example, a new Danielle
Steele novel cannot be ignored by public libraries.

Analysis of Subject Fields

This section discusses the evaluation of the collection by classification number, or provides
a breakdown by general subject area. This analysis should focus on the current strengths
and the desired strengths of the collection. There are a number of ways to format and ana-
lyze the collection by subject area. The RLG Conspectus and the Western Library Network
(now OCLC Western) Conspectus Model are the most prominent collection assessment
tools in the library literature. If your library is small, you can use a smaller scale than the
full Conspectus, or you can simply rank items using stars (*, **, ***, ****) or some similar
way to indicate differences in collecting importance and desired collecting strength (for
examples, see figures 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4).
The RLG Conspectus model allows libraries to compare the current and desired
strengths of a collection by subject area, using codes as follows:

CL: current collection strength AC: acquisition commitment

GL: collection goal or desired strength of collection PC: preservation
commitment

The RLG Conspectus uses indicators to describe the level at which the library attempts
to build a particular subject area’s collection:
38 / CH AP T ER 3

0 Out of Scope: The library does not collect in this area

1 Minimal Level: Includes few selections beyond very basic works
2 Information Level: Includes works that introduce and define a basic subject;
supports general library users through the first two years of college
3 Study Level: Includes a wide range of basic works on a subject; supports
independent research for general library users as well as graduate and
undergraduate students
4 Research Level: Includes major source material on a subject; supports the
research needs of doctoral students
5 Comprehensive Level: Attempts to collect all significant works in a subject
area; serves as a national or international resource

The Western Library Network/OCLC Western Conspectus scale uses more levels (ten as
opposed to six for the RLG Conspectus):

0 Out of Scope
1a Minimal Information Level: uneven coverage
1b Minimal Information Level: focused coverage
2a Basic Information Level: introductory

CALL # SUBJECT CL AC GL PC COMMENTS

359 Sea (naval) forces and warfare 1 0 4 0 New Naval ROTC program
requires more resources in
all areas below. Also new
professor in history with
research emphasis in naval
warfare. Also check for age
of titles. May need to weed
as well as buy new materials.
359.1–.2 Naval life and resources 1 0 3 0

359.3 Organization and personnel of 2 0 3 0

naval forces
359.4–.7 Naval operations, training, 2 0 4 0 Needs weeding and
administration, installations updating.
359.8 Naval equipment and supplies 1 0 4 0

359.9 Specialized combat forces; 1 0 3 0

engineering and related services

FIGURE 3.2 Conspectus-like example using Dewey Decimal Classification

(large academic library): Sea (naval) forces and warfare
NOTE: CL = Current Collection Strength; AC = Acquisition Commitment; GL = Collection Goal; PC = Preservation Commitment.
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 39

2b Basic Information Level: advanced

3a Basic Study or Instructional Support Level
3b Intermediate Study or Instructional Support Level
3c Advanced Study or Instructional Support Level
4 Research Level
5 Comprehensive

School media centers have a mission revolving around the curriculum and therefore have a
much more limited focus (figure 3.5). The following are a couple of examples of how a school
library media specialist might do a subject analysis of the collection.

Collection Mapping

K–12 schools sometimes prefer to map the library’s collection to the curriculum. The table
in figure 3.5 serves to summarize the curriculum at the high school level in terms of library
and information support. Information support is defined as the provision of information
and library resources to students and staff from both the physical in-house collections and
external sources made available through library services. Support also includes student
instruction by school library media specialists and staff assistance in reference services.

CALL # SUBJECT CL AC GL PC COMMENTS

351 Administration of central 1 0 1 0 Major interests are 353.
governments
352 Administration of local 2 0 2 0 Needs weeding and updating
governments
353 Administration of United States 3 0 3 0 U.S. and Florida are used
federal and state governments most heavily.
354 Administration of specific central 1 0 2 0 High school students have a
governments; international new assignment dealing with
administration the United Nations.
355 Military science 3 0 3 0 See note on 358.
356 Foot forces and warfare 1 0 1 0 Needs weeding.
357 Mounted forces and warfare 1 0 1 0 Needs weeding.
358 Air and other specialized forces 2 0 3 0 Presence of a large Air
and warfare; engineering and Force base causes a large
related services circulation of this area.
359 Sea (naval) force and warfare 2 0 2 O Needs weeding as materials
are more than 10 years old.

FIGURE 3.3 Conspectus-like example using Dewey Decimal System

(small- to medium-size public library): Public administration and military science
NOTE: CL = Current Collection Strength; AC = Acquisition Commitment; GL = Collection Goal; PC = Preservation Commitment.
40 / CH AP T ER 3

Support Levels

Note the similarity to the RLG Conspectus approach, tailored to the level of the school:

1. Minimal library resources needed for students and teachers; basic resources
are textbooks and specially purchased classroom resources
2. Library resources needed to support one or two student projects per
year plus some teacher resources; textbooks used as guides with some
supplemental, teacher-developed units
3. Library resources needed to support several student projects per year
and classroom instruction; minimal textbook use; most units are teacher-
designed with local resources; some units include the instruction of core
information skills by the school library media specialist

CALL # SUBJECT CL AC GL PC COMMENTS

Z4–8 History of books and 3 3 4 0 Growing need in the
bookmaking fine arts bookmaking
program.
Z40–104.5 Writing 2 0 3 0 Growing need in the
fine arts bookmaking
program.
Z105–115.4 Paleography, manuscripts 2 2 3 0 Medieval studies needs
more materials to sup-
port a new graduate
degree.
Z116 Book industries and trade 2 0 2 0 Needs weeding.
Z116.A5–265 Printing 3 0 3 0 Need more materials on
early printing.
Z266–276 Bookbinding, book decoration 2 2 3 0 Growing need in the
fine arts bookmaking
program.
Z278–549 Book selling and publishing 2 0 3 0 Need more materials on
electronic publishing.
Z551–656 Copyright 2 0 4 0 Materials needed on
copyright and electronic
materials.
Z657–659 Freedom of the press, 3 0 4 0 Journalism is coming up
censorship for reaccreditation and
needs more resources to
be successful.

FIGURE 3.4 Conspectus-like example for a library using

Library of Congress classification: Books (general. writing. paleography)
NOTE: CL = Current Collection Strength; AC = Acquisition Commitment; GL = Collection Goal; PC = Preservation Commitment.
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 41

CLASSIFICATION

PERCENTAGE OF

PERCENTAGE OF
CIRCULATION
DESCRIPTION

COLLECTION

COMMENTS
GOAL
000s Generalities .8 .9 + Computer science area growing.

100s Philosophy and 1.5 2.8 + Paranormal phenomena, psychology, and

psychology ethics circulate heavily.

200s Religion .7 .6 − World religions utilized in world culture

classes.

300s Social sciences 12.0 12.1 + Criminology materials receive heaviest

circulation.

400s Language .3 .1 − Needs weeding.

500s Natural sciences 2.9 2.4 + Astronomy collection underutilized.

600s Technology and 5.8 6.6 + Medicine selection used heavily by health
applied sciences classes.

700s Fine arts and 4.4 3.4 = Art and sports books not circulating well.
recreation

800s Literature 7.3 4.7 + Literature classes are textbook driven;

only advanced classes do literary
criticism.

900s Geography and 10.9 10.4 + Used heavily by world cultures classes.
history

AV Audiovisual 8.0 9.2 + Obsolete formats need replacements—

records, filmstrips.

B Biography 4.4 2.8 − Students not reading biography unless

related to class assignments.

F Fiction 9.4 4.3 − Students prefer paperbacks; hardbound

fiction not circulating.

FAC Faculty and 1.1 .5 = Needs promotion.

professional

PA Paperbacks 15.2 13.3 = Could use weeding and removal of some

duplicates and badly worn titles.

PER Periodicals .4 3.2 = Circulation is staff use only; student in-

(recent use only) library use not represented.

REF Reference 10.5 9.7 = Overnight only.

FIGURE 3.5 Subject descriptions of a senior high school collection

42 / CH AP T ER 3

Phase Levels

The language arts courses are designated with a “phase level” to aid in course selection. The
levels identify courses for students who have various needs and abilities (for an example,
see figure 3.6):

Phase 2 Need to learn how to improve sentence-writing skills,

understand what they read, and talk about what they have read
Phase 2–3 Can write a complete sentence and speak in front of a
class; will learn to write a paragraph and improve
speaking and writing skills
Phase 3 Have average abilities in language arts
Phase 3–4 Can think, write, and read analytically; college preparatory
Phase 4 Will be challenged to think creatively and to produce
superior work

As you can see from these examples, a thorough subject analysis is time well spent, since it
leads to a virtual road map of where the collection needs to expand, where materials need
to be better focused on user needs, where fewer materials are needed, what sections of the
collection need weeding, and where the library is on target.

Analysis of Collection by Format

This portion of the collection development policy is usually a narrative that deals with the
formats collected and any special considerations for particular formats. Common formats
include books, periodicals, newspapers, videos, CDs, DVDs, curriculum materials, MP3
files, and others. For example, an academic library might purchase local newspapers for
those areas from which students come, including international newspapers. These may not
be added to the permanent collection, but may be kept for a specific period of time such as
six months.
It is also good practice to include here the types of formats that are normally collected,
such as textbooks, laboratory manuals, games, theses and dissertations from other insti-
tutions, and audio and video recordings. Sometimes items may be purchased under spe-
cial circumstances, which can be indicated if deemed appropriate. For example, the library
might purchase textbooks authored by the institution’s faculty; if so, this would be an ap-
propriate addition to the policy.
It is becoming more common for libraries to deal with web links in their policies. Gen-
erally, there is a statement indicating that web links are selected for the library’s website on
the same basis as printed materials, meaning that the links are evaluated and selected for
inclusion as part of the library’s resources.
This is also the proper section to deal with the selection of materials in different lan-
guages. An academic library may state, for example, that only materials in languages taught
by the university are acquired. A statement could also be made that the library supports
faculty research in whatever language is required, although this is common only in large
research libraries. A public library may make substantial purchases in Spanish or any other
foreign language that is prevalent in the community.
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 43

LANGUAGE ARTS

SUPPORT LEVEL
GRADE LEVELS

ENROLLMENT

COMMENTS
COURSES

TYPE
English 9 9 48 1 Yr Phase 2
Basic Grammar 9 145 2 Sem Phase 2–3
Introduction to Literature 9 147 1 Sem Phase 2–3
Grammar and Usage 10–12 46 1 Sem Phase 2
Legends and Folklore 11–12 18 2 Sem Phase 2
Basic Speaking Skills 10–12 28 1 Sem Phase 2
Adventure Stories 10 49 1 Sem Phase 2
Paragraph Writing 10–12 147 1 Sem Phase 2–3
American Character 10–12 88 2 Sem Phase 2–3
Short Stories 10–12 49 1 Sem Phase 2
Techniques of Reading 11–12 45 1 Sem Phase 3
Introduction to Composition 10–12 167 1 Sem Phase 2–3
Public Speaking 10–12 82 2 Sem Phase 3
Introduction to Research 11–12 83 3 Sem Phase 3
Business English I 11 0 1 Sem Phase 3
Applied Communications 11–12 56 2 Yr Phase 3–4
American Literature 10–11 138 2 Sem Phase 3
Mystery and Detective Literature 10–12 43 2 Sem Phase 3
Contemporary Man 11–12 40 2 Sem Phase 3
Business English II 11 10 1 Yr Phase 3
College Vocabulary 11–12 48 1 Sem Phase 3–4
Techniques of Research 11–12 15 3 Sem Phase 3–4
Advanced Reading 12 35 1 Sem Phase 3–4
English Literature 11–12 48 1 Sem Phase 3–4
20th-Century American Writers 11–12 49 2 Sem Phase 3–4
Humanities: Greek to Renaissance 11–12 38 2 Sem Phase 4
Humanities: Renaissance to 20th Century 11–12 32 2 Sem Phase 4
Advanced Composition 11–12 15 1 Sem Phase 4

FIGURE 3.6 Example from a senior high school collection mapping

44 / CH AP T ER 3

The library may wish to include government documents in this section, although they
are not strictly a format, since they come in various printed and electronic forms. If there
is a substantial government documents collection, the library may want to include it as a
section to itself, or do whatever makes the most sense in the particular situation.
Policies that recognize the quickly changing world of new technologies may indicate
that the library will collect in new formats when feasible. A statement such as this will suf-
fice when a new technology first comes along, but the new format should be incorporated
into the policy as soon as possible, while still including the paragraph about new technology
to cover the next new format.

Selection Aids

This section lists the published sources that are consulted when selecting materials for the
collection. Selection aids vary with the type of library and the collection. Never box yourself
into having to use only the sources listed in this section, but rather use it to list the more
common sources for selection in your type and size of library. (A thorough discussion of
selection aids is provided in chapter 4.)

Intellectual Freedom

This section of the policy contains a philosophy statement concerning intellectual freedom
and the procedures for handling complaints. Generally, it is a good idea to include a copy
of any complaint or reconsideration forms and letters in an appendix to the policy. Many
libraries include the Library Bill of Rights (American Library Association 2009).
Figure 3.7 is a sample form that library staff would give to a person who wants to chal-
lenge a particular work. One item that the library challenge form should always have is a
question asking whether the person has read the work. Most libraries will not consider a
challenge valid if the person complaining has not read the work.

Collection Maintenance and Weeding

Weeding or deselection needs to be performed in most libraries, with school and public
libraries having to pay the most constant attention to this important process. The collection
development policy lays down the general guidelines for weeding based on the needs and
collection purpose of the particular library. Evaluation criteria that are used in the weeding
process should be listed here as well. (More specific information about weeding criteria is
presented in chapter 7.)

Gift Policy and Procedures

Although most libraries welcome gifts and donations in the form of materials or monetary
funds, gifts should be accepted only with the understanding that they will be evaluated by
the same criteria used for purchased materials.
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 45

Request for Reconsideration of Library Material

Author: ______________________________________________________________

Type of Material: ______________________________________________________

Title: ________________________________________________________________

Publisher (if known): ___________________________________________________

Request initiated by: ___________________________________________________

Telephone: ___________________________________________________________

Street Address: _______________________________________________________

City: ________________________________________________________________

Zip Code: ____________________________________________________________

1. Did you read and examine the entire item? If not the whole item, what parts?

2. What do you feel might be the result of using this item?

3. For what age group would you recommend this item?

4. Do you feel there is any value in this item?

5. To what in the item do you object? (Please be specific.)

6. Have you had an opportunity to discuss the proposed use of this item with a
staff member?

Date: _______________________________________________________________

Signature of Complainant: ______________________________________________

Please return this request to: <insert name and contact information>

You will be contacted about the decision by the <insert proper person or group for
your library> within <insert time frame> weeks of the receipt of your completed form.

FIGURE 3.7 Sample challenge form

46 / CH AP T ER 3

Typical policies will state that the use and disposal of gifts will be at the discretion of
the librarian in the interest of maintaining an appropriate and balanced collection. The li-
brary cannot assign a monetary value to any gifts, but for tax purposes, it may give receipts
showing the date and number of books donated. A gift to the library becomes library prop-
erty and must be treated as such. Gifts can be one of the trickiest aspects of collection de-
velopment. Some donors have collected unusual materials that may fit into the library’s col-
lection and be a real asset. Other donors may have, for example, a personally highly prized
complete set of Reader’s Digest Condensed Books or a set of magazines that the library simply
does not need. Being able to sell or otherwise dispose of such unneeded materials has to be
established up-front with the donor.

Replacements

This section of the policy deals with conditions under which the library will or will not
replace stolen, lost, or damaged materials. A replacement is an item purchased to take the
place of an identical title that was previously in the collection. It is usually the library’s
policy not to automatically replace all materials that have been removed because of loss,
damage, or wear. The need for replacement in each case is to be judged by such factors as:

1. The existence of adequate coverage of the subject area, especially if more

current materials are available;
2. The demand for the specific title; and
3. The appearance of the title in standard selection tools and bibliographies.

Special Collections

Almost all libraries have some type of special collection materials. For instance, in a school
library these are often professional materials, which are necessary to promote the profes-
sional development of the faculty and aid in the process of educational development and
progress within the school. A school media center may have a policy such as: “Professional
materials will be acquired and housed in a special area of the library. These materials will
be available for checkout by the faculty and staff of the school. Requests for materials by
teachers, other staff, and the administration will be given high priority.”
Public libraries are likely to have special collections of local materials such as books by
local authors, pamphlets and newspaper articles about local events, locally produced maga-
zines, personal papers and diaries from prominent citizens of the area, and so on.
An academic or special library may be the repository of special subject materials from a
donor that may include personal papers, scrapbooks, diaries, and so forth. The library then
may want to fill out this collection. For example, if a prominent author gave the library his
or her personal papers, the library may try to obtain a complete set of the first editions of
the author’s novels in order to make the collection more valuable. These libraries will most
likely have special collections librarians or archivists who will work with the collection de-
velopment staff on such issues.
It is becoming more and more common for academic and some special libraries to cre-
ate digital repositories of faculty and staff publications, which are often included in special
collections for their creation, use, and maintenance.
 C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T P O LI C I E S / 47

Revisions

At the conclusion of the policy, there should be an indication of the process for revision of
that policy. Ideally, this process should be continual, since the policy cannot be useful if it
is not revised often enough to keep it up-to-date with the current needs of users, changes
in the curriculum of a school, or the needs of researchers and faculty in academic and
special libraries. Depending on the amount of change in what users need, a committee or
task force should be assigned the responsibility of looking at the policy for small additions
and deletions every year and should consider a full, comprehensive revision at least every
ten years.
As should be apparent by now, writing and revising a policy is a time-consuming pro-
cess, which is the reason why some libraries fail to have one. However, if done correctly,
the collection development policy will be a blueprint for the continuing development and
improvement of the collection, and it can be a tremendously worthwhile aid in explaining
the kinds of materials purchased to users, boards, and administrators.

ACTIVITIES

In the class, form groups of four to five students based on the type of library: these types
can include an academic library, community college, medical, law, corporate, large research
public library, medium-sized public library, branch public library, elementary school
library, middle school library, high school library, and so on. Each group should select a
reporter (to report to the class as a whole about their discussion) and a recorder (to take
notes about the discussion). Discuss each part of the elements of a collection development
policy, with particular attention paid to what collection needs should be included in the
policy for the type of library they are representing. The students should be sure to include
their decisions on how to best approach the analysis by subject for their type of library.
They should report in the time frame chosen by your instructor.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Why go to the trouble of writing a collection development policy? What

advantages can you see to having such a policy? Disadvantages?
2. If you were hired to do collection development for a library that did not
have a written collection development policy, how would you proceed?

REFERENCES

American Library Association. 2009. “Library Bill of Rights.” www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/

statementspols/statementsif/librarybillrights.cfm.
Futas, Elizabeth, ed. 1995. Collection Development Policies and Procedures. 3rd ed. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx.
Gardner, Richard K. 1981. Library Collections: Their Origins, Selection, and Development. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Hoffman, Frank W., and Richard J. Wood. 2005. Library Collection Development Policies: Academic, Public,
and Special Libraries. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
48 / CH AP T ER 3

Johnson, Peggy. 2009. Fundamentals of Collection Development and Management. 2nd ed. Chicago: American
Library Association.
Wood, Richard J., and Frank Hoffman. 1996. Library Collection Development Policies: A Reference and Writers’
Handbook. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

SELECTED READINGS

Coleman, Jim. 1992. “The RLG Conspectus: A History of Its Development and Influence and a Prognosis
for Its Future.” Acquisitions Librarian 4, no. 7: 25–43.
IFLA Section on Acquisitions and Collection Development. 2009. “Guidelines for a Collection Development
Policy Using the Conspectus Model.” International Federation of Library Associations and
Institutions. www.ifla.org.sg/VII/s14/nd1/gcdp-e.pdf.
Lee, Hur-Li. 2000. “What Is a Collection?” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51
(October): 1106–13.
Mangrum, Suzanne, and Mary Ellen Sloane. 2012. “Using Collection Development Policies in Electronic
Resource Management.” Collection Building 31, no. 3 (June): 108–14.
Tucker, James Cory, and Matt Torrence. 2004. “Collection Development for New Librarians: Advice from
the Trenches.” Library Collections, Acquisitions and Technical Services 28, no. 4: 397–409.
 CHAPTER 4

Selection Sources
and Processes

OVERVIEW

In this chapter you will learn the theories of selection and the sources of information and
processes used by professional librarians in developing library collections. We will also
examine how the selection function is carried out in most libraries. Although selection inev-
itably involves significant time and effort, when done well it is one of the most interesting
and indeed, one of the most enjoyable areas of librarianship. An overarching point to keep
in mind as you proceed through your study of the selection process is that in the future
more and more digital content will be acquired and even created by the library, and selec-
tion in that case means deciding what to preserve for the long haul.
Once a collection development librarian has in hand the results of a needs assessment
and has consulted the library’s collection development policy, it is time to select the re-
sources to which the library’s users will have access. As discussed in chapter 3, a collection
development policy should indicate the office or library positions that have responsibility
for all or part of the collection. Most such policies include a statement such as the following:
“The Library Director is responsible for the overall operation of the library, including the
material that is in the collection. The Library Director will delegate collection management
responsibility to the Adult Services Supervisor, the Children’s/YA Services Supervisor, and
the Reference Services Supervisor to fulfill responsibilities to acquire, catalog, and process
materials.” As indubitably appropriate and correct as this sort of statement is for indicating
who is ultimately responsible, it doesn’t provide much in the way of practical guidance for
the person charged with developing a library’s collection. In this chapter we will attempt
to fill that gap.

CONSIDERATIONS IN THE SELECTION PROCESS

Bases for Selection

Because the selection process is naturally at the heart of the collection development pro-
cess, as discussed in chapter 2, it is imperative for the librarian to consider the needs of the
library’s user community. This is the great baseline criterion. If librarians are to success-
fully address the many challenges presented and the opportunities that are now available
through the proliferation of both print and electronic information sources, it is necessary to
start from a clear understanding of the library’s basic missions and goals. The basic necessity

/ 49 /
50 / CH AP T ER 4

is to establish the types and kinds of library resources and services that the library should
be offering to its users. As electronic resources are added to their collections, few libraries
are likely to be sufficiently prosperous to maintain both their prior levels of acquisition of
traditional print materials and the simultaneous acquisition of the newer, electronic forms
of materials. You have to take into account what it is that the library’s users actually use, as
well as what they might want to use.
The selection decisions that a collection development librarian makes therefore
necessarily involve a form of intellectual triage. Deciding what items to acquire neces-
sarily implies what items to forgo, what to cut, and what to keep. This process is best
determined by a needs assessment rather than by an ad hoc, item-by-item procedure.
The latter approach is one that is all too often utilized by many libraries, thereby wasting
valuable limited funds and causing patron dissatisfaction due to limited or inappropriate
choices of materials.

Approaches to the Selection Process

Traditionally, public libraries have typically selected and purchased large quantities of the
latest best sellers in both fiction and nonfiction. Because of the predictability of a large por-
tion of a public library’s collection, some libraries have turned over much of the selection
process to vendors, with library staff concentrating only on the relatively small percentage
of the collection that is of local interest or on otherwise specialized materials (see, e.g., Hof-
fert 2007, 40–43). Academic libraries have done the same except that they typically acquire
their “best sellers” from more of an academic or programmatic perspective.
There has been and probably always will be a dichotomy in collection development
philosophy between two schools of thought: “give them what they want” (exemplified by
the willy-nilly purchase of best sellers described above) and, for lack of a better phrase, “give
them what they need (or should have).” Early authors on the subject of collection develop-
ment often favored the view that public libraries were part and parcel of the education sys-
tem of the United States, and were responsible for continuing education and the elevation
of cultural standards, and so it was the job of the selector to choose titles that would best
continue the education and cultural uplift of the library’s users. Often it was stated that a
key part of the librarian’s role was to bring great works of literature, thought, and scholar-
ship to the attention of patrons by making them readily available.
In contrast, however, later academic authors and commentators in the library field be-
gan to view libraries as an important taxpayer-subsidized public benefit or utility, implying
that it was necessary for the library to serve the wants, and not just the needs (as viewed
through the lens of the librarians) of their users.
In 1950, Helen E. Haines provided one of the best, and certainly most eloquent, de-
scriptions of how the role of the librarian in selecting materials reflects the theory of the
public library as a vehicle for education:

Librarianship is the only calling that devotes itself to bringing books into the common
life of the world. The materials librarians work with are the materials which furnish the
understanding, knowledge, and reason that can inform the mind and direct the will to
meet the challenge of the time, to fit ourselves to its compulsions, to discern and guide
the forces that are shaping the future. The “great trade” of publishing and bookselling,
though it is the oldest and most universal agency for bringing together the reader and
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 51

the printed word, has not the same range of opportunity nor the same variety and in-
timacy of relationship to readers of all tastes, capacities, needs, habits, and levels of
education. The spirit of delight and confidence in books, the receptive and adventur-
ous attitude toward the new and experimental, the catholicity of lifelong friendship
and understanding for literature, are attributes of librarianship more than of any other
calling. And those attributes must be fused in a dynamic of social consciousness, of
confidence and purpose, if librarians are to rise to their potential leadership in welding
public understanding and unity for the building of a safer and better world. (Haines
1950, 10)

This educational theory of the library selection or collection-building process goes consid-
erably further back than the redoubtable Ms. Haines, as she recognized:

When the first convention of librarians ever held met in 1853 in New York City, their
purpose was concisely stated by Charles Coffin Jewett. “We meet,” he said, “to provide
for the diffusion of a knowledge of good books and for enlarging the means of public
access to them.” (1950, 15)

Haines’s classical position becomes very clear in one of her eleven principles for selection:
“While demand is primarily the basis and reason [is] the supply, remember that the great
works of literature are foundation stones in the library’s own structure and therefore select
some books of permanent value regardless of whether or not they will be widely used” (1950,
41). By 1950, though, when the second edition of her book was published, the idea of trying
to provide for public wants was seeping in, but she and most others in the field still clung
steadfastly and more or less successfully to the “great books” as the most proper literary
domain for the library.
This approach to collection development continued to hold sway until the 1960s, when
demands for public accountability became more prominent. Librarians found that they
needed to pay more attention to the expressed wants and not necessarily the educational
needs of users. At this point, many public libraries began to espouse the “give ’em what they
want” theory of selection in a major way. This theory was notably popularized by Charles
Robinson at the Baltimore County Public Library. In 1990, Robinson stated:

We buy books people want to read rather than books librarians think people should
read. . . . There’s a big difference. The public successfully resists borrowing books they
don’t want to read, but librarians keep on buying the books anyway and then they keep
on building bigger and bigger edifices to house the books that nobody wants to read.
(quoted in the Baltimore Sun, November 11, 1990)

This change in emphasis brought more copies of best sellers, popular magazines, and genre
fiction into the public library. This aroused the dismay of many in the library profession,
who feared the effects of neglecting classic literature and what are sometimes called the
“great books,” but whether their dismay was justified is difficult to determine and impos-
sible to measure, especially given the ever-increasing availability of popular literature, the
rise of mass-market bookstores, and so on. Certainly, what softened many of the feared
deleterious effects of libraries’ catering to popular taste was the considerable rise in pub-
lic support for libraries in the second half of the twentieth century. Whether the relative
scarcity of public resources for library purposes in the early twenty-first century will result
52 / CH AP T ER 4

in any “dumbing-down” effect due to the possible misallocation of scarce library resources
remains to be seen.

The Way Forward

However all of this controversy may play out, with the World Wide Web’s introduction
of the phenomenon of the “long tail,” as discussed in chapter 1, simply picking the hits
(best sellers and other mass-market materials) can no longer be enough, if it ever was (or
if anyone ever did only that, which seems highly doubtful). The Web’s allowance for the
development of more niche markets for materials of interest only to small segments of the
population has, in turn, made the selecting process even more difficult for the librarian, at
least in the sense that the old dichotomy seems to have broken down. Now, we have to blend
“what they want” with “what they need.”
It appears self-evident that local priorities and needs, as limited by any local con-
straints (such as those vexing but all-important limitations on funding), are basic factors
that have to be considered in selecting print or electronic resources. However, sometimes
in the rush to meet patrons’ and the administration’s demands to become more electronic
(and hence more modern), a vendor who shows up on the library doorstep with an attrac-
tive short-term deal on a particular product that holds the promise of getting the library
out of a current funding jam can become an alluring alternative to a carefully considered
program. The timing of decision-making is a matter of paramount concern. Making de-
cisions too hurriedly can staunch a wound, but a series of hasty decisions can and usu-
ally does eventually lead to a collection structure that is best described as chaotic; this
becomes a problem not only for the staff, but also for those users who don’t understand
why the library’s resources appear to lack coherence and consistency. This cannot be em-
phasized enough: it is extremely important for librarians with collection development
responsibilities to monitor the users’ needs and priorities. This is especially true while
negotiating the tricky and rapidly changing terrain of electronic vendors and products
that promise comprehensive solutions.
Web 2.0 technologies are leading us into an age of recommendations rather than just
information. Finding materials is no longer the big problem it may once have been for the
library that could not afford all the old traditional reference books; rather, the problem is
choosing what to recommend among the millions of things that are now available on the
Internet, be it books, serials, DVDs, streaming videos, and so on. Again, it comes back to the
librarian’s crucial need to know the requirements and preferences of the users, since the
library is no longer just a provider of selected materials, but a prime source for the recom-
mendation of the best materials.
Traditionally, librarians have been trained to be in some ways informationally ag-
nostic, and have been reluctant to tell a user that one source is really better than anoth-
er. While there may be good reasons supporting this sort of thinking, in today’s highly
technological environment, the job of filtering sources for the patron is becoming more
and more the appropriate role of the librarian. Users can easily use Google and retrieve a
thousand hits on their subject, but those hits may or may not be reliable. Filtering soft-
ware of various types can help, but ultimately the librarian has the responsibility to help
the user find what he or she needs. And collection development intersects with this need
by ensuring that the library acquires the best tools, be they books, serials, access to elec-
tronic resources, and so forth.
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 53

How can we make this intersection a successful meeting of the library and its patrons?
Approaches to the selection process vary, and some degree of eclecticism in method is in-
dicated. One method or approach is not enough. Some libraries have traditionally tried to
rely almost exclusively on published reviews, including tools such as the American Library
Association’s publication Choice. Book reviews have always played an important role in the
selection of library materials and can be very helpful guides, especially for libraries with
small staffs and little time for much in the way of independent consideration.
However, research has shown, and the reader of almost any daily newspaper today can
easily confirm, that fewer and fewer book reviews are being published each year (Johnson
and Brown 2008, 105). But the past was never a golden age, since many worthy materials
were never reviewed at all. That is why a “bright-line” rule, such as the insistence that every
book or resource to be acquired must have been the subject of a published review, is often
a mistake. Certainly, many first efforts by authors, including now-famous ones, were never
reviewed, and small and alternative press books have always had a difficult time getting
reviewed by any but the most specialized publications.
There is, thankfully, some hope for the continued use of the published review as an ac-
quisitions tool, with many reviews now available on the Web. As with any web-only source,
of course, authoritativeness can be a major problem. These online reviews need to be in the
mix, however.

The catch-all phrase for recommendations and all the other tools that help you find
quality in the Long Tail is filtering. These technologies and services sift through a vast
array of choices to present you with the ones that are right for you. . . . The role of a
filter is to elevate the few products that are right for whoever is looking and suppress
the many that aren’t. (Anderson 2006, 108, 116)

To measure popularity, there are methods besides the New York Times best seller lists. For
instance, hits on web search engines can be a valuable approach and should not be ignored;
but again, some caution is in order. Although most Internet search engines today produce
results vastly superior to those of early search engines, there are still problems. Google, for
example, measures relevance mostly by way of incoming links, not how recent those links
are. Older web pages are more likely to come to the top in a Google search than a page that
a scholar put up just last night. A user may require help to find the best page from a list of
results.
Original digital content from the library, faculty, staff, business organization, and so on
should be a part of the selection process as well. “Born-digital” content has been correctly
described as promising because in the future almost any library’s most important content
will be its own unique content. But beware, as one commentator has noted, that “it is also
a source of peril because many librarians lack the awareness and technological skills to ac-
tively select, collect, and preserve this content” (Coombs 2007, 24).

SELECTION CRITERIA

General

Everyone likes to have some general rules to live by, and collection development librarians
are no exception. So here are some good general rules to get started with:
54 / CH AP T ER 4

1. Library materials are best selected on the basis of their suitability for
inclusion in the collection.
2. The collection should be an unbiased source of information that represents
as many points of view as possible.
3. Subjects should be covered in a manner appropriate to the library’s
anticipated users’ needs.
4. No material should be excluded from the collection because of the race,
religion, gender, national origin, sexual preference, or political views of the
author, the material, or the user.

No one can or should argue with much of this these days, but a short history of librarian-
ship will quickly reveal that some of these rules were often considered revolutionary or
even subversive. That they have a fine pedigree should not, however, allow them to become
selection criteria to control what a library actually acquires (within the rules, of course).
So, if we have some general rules as set out above, what are some good, general crite-
ria to govern a selection process within those rules? Fortunately, there are some ready to
hand that have stood the test of time rather well. Haines (1950, 123) succinctly states that
there are “three most important ways to judge a book: by immediate personal impression
received from reading it; by judgment of its usefulness or value to others; [and] by dissec-
tion and appraisal of its intrinsic qualities.” Within the parameters and with the caveats
discussed along the way, the following general criteria should be considered when making
selections for essentially any library’s collection:

1. User needs and wants as evidenced by the library’s own needs assessment.
2. Holdings in other libraries that are available to patrons and the availability
of materials via interlibrary loan or other cooperative resource-sharing
agreements.
3. Relationship of the proposed acquisition to the collection—does it fill a gap
or meet a need, or is it simply something fun to have?
4. Suitability for the intended audience. This criterion obviously depends
greatly upon the setting and clientele of the library.
5. Public attention, including critical reviews, web hits, movie versions, and
other positive publicity for the title.
6. Relevance to community needs. Decisions on relevance should be based
on the library’s needs assessment, information and requests from library
users, circulation and interlibrary loan information, plus any other sources
of information that reflect possible user needs.
7. Price must obviously be considered by smaller libraries as an essential
criterion. If you cannot afford the $200 art book on Van Gogh, what about
a less expensive version in the $50–75 range? Librarians should always be
on the proverbial lookout for the best resource they can afford in order to
satisfy user needs.
8. Like other big decisions that can have long-lasting impact (where to go
to college, whom to marry, etc.), the choice of formats of items must be
considered carefully. Does the library have access to equipment to handle
formats such as microfilm, DVDs, MP3 files, and so on? These examples
show how things change over time—who has a home film projector? Or a
reel-to-reel audiotape player? DVDs may already be on the way out, and
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 55

what might supersede the current Blu-ray format? We don’t know at this
moment, but what we do know is that something will eventually supplant
them.
9. Availability for purchase. Is the material still in print, or is it easily
obtainable from a secondhand dealer at a reasonable price?

Specific Criteria

For the selection of an item within the rules and meeting the general criteria, the work still
needs to be considered more closely. The following specific criteria are typically used when
making selections for the collection, in this case for nonfiction:

1. Published recently, or not. Currency is especially a concern for public

libraries and school library media centers. Academic and special librarians
may be looking for older materials for research purposes.
2. Reputation of the author and the publisher.
3. Authoritative reputation (this is a broader consideration than just technical
accuracy).
4. Grammatical correctness, well-presented material, accurately annotated
and logically organized. This obviously falls into the realm of judgment, and
sometimes only a hands-on physical examination will do in determining
whether an item meets this criterion.

These are really just a few examples of the points that the selector should always consider.
A collection development policy should always include specific selection criteria for the
various formats and subject areas in which works are being acquired.

Electronic Resources

Electronic materials have become a major part of virtually every library’s acquisition pro-
cess and budget. Here, while the rules and criteria described above continue to have rel-
evance and applicability, special criteria have to be considered. The following questions
should always be asked when selecting electronic resources (Gregory 2006, 18–20):

• Is the resource authoritative? Determining the accuracy of materials

available through an electronic resource, particularly those derived
from the Web, is critical to the selection and evaluation process. One
of the strengths of the Web is the ease of publication and distribution
of information to the world; however, this strength is also its greatest
weakness, since it essentially places the burden on the information user to
determine and evaluate the source and quality of the website’s information
(i.e., to do the very thing that collection development policies have
traditionally attempted to do for libraries and their patrons over the years).
• Does the technology make the content of the electronic resource accessible
in a manner that better serves users’ needs than an existing print resource
does which the library already maintains or could acquire, perhaps at
56 / CH AP T ER 4

a lower cost? Some electronic products may actually be more difficult

to use than their print counterparts, but others will offer significant
improvements in the ways that a user can search for needed information.
• Does the electronic resource fill current gaps in the print collection?
Electronic products should not be acquired simply because they are
available and attractive; rather, they should add needed resources to the
library’s collection.
• Does the electronic resource duplicate information or material that is
already owned by the library? Due to the common practice of the bundling
of electronic resources, libraries may sometimes find themselves forced
to accept some duplication that would have never been contemplated or
tolerated with print resources.
• Will the library replace a current print resource with an electronic
resource, and what are the price ramifications of doing so? Some electronic
resources do cost less, but only if the library also takes the print version.
Some publishers require the library to pay for the print version in order
to be eligible to subscribe to the electronic one. On the other hand, some
electronic resources really do cost less than their print equivalents, and
in the case of those that are frequently supplemented, such as tax or legal
services and reporters, the savings in filing labor costs can be enormous.
Some electronic resources carry an additional cost (above the price for
the current version or issue) for access to their archives. In addition to
price, one should also consider whether the electronic resource contains
everything that is in the print version. Are all articles included in the
electronic version? Are advertisements or illustrations deleted? Is the
electronic product as well and thoroughly indexed as the print version? Is
there an index at all, or is there exclusive reliance on word searches, for
example? Are any deletions in the electronic version important to your
users?
• If the electronic resource is licensed and not available for purchase (see
chapter 7 for more on licensing issues), can the library continue to meet
its current obligations to local or state consortia in regard to interlibrary
loan or user access to materials if some materials are only available in
restricted form? Although it is unlikely that a boilerplate license will allow
interlibrary loans, sometimes it is possible to negotiate terms that allow
such activity.
• Does the electronic resource require the purchase of additional computer
hardware or software? Will it run on your current operating platform? For
cost considerations, the selector may have to ensure that the format of an
electronic resource is compatible with the library’s existing hardware and
software (unless additional money is available to support purchases of new
hardware and software).
• If an electronic product is selected, what electronic format is the most
appropriate one to meet the library’s needs? For example, would a CD-
ROM product or an online product best meet the needs of the library and
its users?
• Does your library have enough computer resources to handle the additional
user traffic that this product would likely generate? For small libraries,
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 57

adding an electronic resource can be a significant problem; they simply may

not have enough computers or suitable space for patrons to access the new
resource in a reasonable amount of time, particularly if the library must
cease carrying print versions in order to be able to purchase the electronic
equivalent. A large set of print books, such as a multivolume encyclopedia,
might be expected to be used by a number of patrons at the same time, but
if you only have one computer that can access a particular resource (or a
number of electronic resources), only one person will be able to access the
resource at a time.

SELECTION TEAMS

Instead of relying on individual selectors for the final decisions, many libraries today utilize
a team approach, particularly for the selection of bundles of electronic resources or other
big-ticket items. This approach is similar in some ways to the methods that many public
libraries traditionally used to select audiovisual materials. Such teams should include mem-
bers from both the public services and technical services departments. Bringing together a
team with both subject and technical expertise is the most effective way to select any mate-
rials that are expensive and require equipment or software for use. Each group’s expertise
and experience can be brought to bear, hopefully with the result that the selection does
not turn out to be one that, owing to some technical difficulty or shortcoming, cannot be
utilized as anticipated.
A carefully chosen team of no more than three to five members (any more than that and
you have a conference or convention, not a team) can usually then manage subject-matter
considerations and technical matters, and gather patron and staff input as appropriate. The
team can also be responsible for other related activities as well; for instance, producing doc-
umentation and training sessions after a new electronic resource is acquired. In addition,
by establishing a planning and reviewing cycle with specified actions to occur at regular
intervals, the team can go a long way toward helping to bring order to a potentially chaotic
process if the new product differs significantly from the old one that it is replacing. Because
electronic products are still used in a rather unstable environment (i.e., the personal com-
puter), an electronic acquisitions team approach requires team members to be open-mind-
ed and flexible. Change is a constant, and selectors must be able to make decisions in envi-
ronments that are often murky rather than crystal-clear.
In academic libraries, subject specialists and bibliographers will generally work best
together as a team when considering big-ticket purchases. For less expensive electronic pur-
chases, an individual bibliographer may need to work only with the staff member dealing
with copyright and licensing issues. Yet another approach recently utilized in academic li-
braries (and some large public libraries) is to use the patrons themselves as a de facto se-
lection team, letting patron-driven acquisition processes, user requests, ILL requests, and
other expressions of needs determine the items to be purchased.
Some libraries have a single librarian or maybe two that are in charge of selecting
electronic materials. This may be the same librarian who is responsible for keeping up
with the library’s copyright, digital rights management, and licensing issues. This dual
role should be avoided if possible, however, because the managing of electronic resourc-
es presents certain difficulties and complications, and these should not be allowed to
become a paramount consideration in the selection process—something that can easily
58 / CH AP T ER 4

happen when those who have to struggle with these difficulties are also the ones charged
with selecting the resources.

SELECTION DIFFERENCES FOR INTERNET RESOURCES

Although most of the selection criteria that are used for determining the appropriateness
of print resources apply equally to Internet resources, a number of important distinctions
need to be kept in mind for the latter:

1. The librarian is truly only selecting materials, not collecting them.

Internet resources are likely to be housed on the library’s computer only
temporarily; the resources are merely accessed from the library’s catalog or
website.
2. The librarian may choose items that in print form were never considered
for purchase. For example, the library may have acquired very few
pamphlets due to problems in cataloging, shelving, and making these items
available. These items’ equivalent publication on the Web obviously does
not present the same handling problems for the library.
3. Cost is not likely to be a factor, at least in terms of purchase price for the
item, but the librarian must consider the overall cost of maintaining links
to the resource. A resource that is constantly moving and requires constant
URL maintenance and updating, either in the catalog or on the library’s
website, may well be so frustrating as to be deemed not worth the effort,
even if the information it provides is of good quality.
4. The selection of Internet resources tends to take place at a sort of macro
level, while most print decisions tend to be made at the micro level. That
is to say, Internet resources are typically chosen in a more generalized
manner. Selecting Internet resources, therefore, can quickly lead to more
duplication and can result in users having to examine more unneeded or
inappropriate resources in order to get to the ones they actually need. It is
also important to remember that by selecting a website, you are in effect
selecting everything that is linked from that page, and not all of those links
will necessarily be needed by your library’s users.
5. On the other hand, while print resources are much more likely than
online materials to be chosen without actual examination of the item but
rather through reviews or approval plans, Internet resources will typically
be chosen only after personal examination by the selector. However, a
number of the traditional selection tools are beginning to include reviews
of websites, so the practice of choosing Internet resources may tend to
become, over time, more similar to the methods traditionally used for
selecting print resources.
6. Some of the library’s Internet resources may actually be created or
published by the library itself, which is not often the case for traditional
print resources.
7. Access is a critical issue. If the server on which the resource resides is
overtaxed and therefore slow to respond, or if it is often not available at
all, the resource will probably not be selected by the library. Likewise,
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 59

technical reliability problems, no matter how accurate and authoritative

the information provided by the website may be, can become a paramount
concern if significant difficulties are encountered. An additional access
issue involves the number of users who may have simultaneous access to a
single item. A single-volume print document may typically be accessed by
only one user at a time, but the same resource, when made available on the
Web, may be accessed effectively by many users simultaneously.
8. Archiving and preservation issues are obviously much more problematic
with Internet resources than for traditional print materials. Even high-
quality websites come and go at the site owner’s discretion (and sometimes
whim), but a print resource, unless stolen, lost, or mutilated, will typically
remain in the library’s collection for a very considerable time.

TOOLS FOR ACQUIRING AND SELECTING MATERIALS

The following sections contain information describing tools that you can use to help make
selection decisions in acquiring both print and electronic resources. They are grouped by
type of item. Some of these resources are general in nature and others are more narrow in
scope, and while the list is lengthy (and it necessarily will change and be supplemented over
time) there can be little doubt that the more resources you can consult the better the results
are likely to be.

Current Books and Serials

All About Romance (www.likesbooks.com) is a website mainly intended for

devotees of the romance fiction genre, but librarians can access reviews of
new books that are much more detailed than the genre usually receives in
the mainstream review sources. There are staff reviews and reader reviews
on this site.
All Our Worlds (ow.ly/TdwGq; doublediamond.net/aow/home.php) is quite
useful for a librarian selecting books in the area of science fiction and
fantasy. All Our Worlds is a database which contains materials that
demonstrate all manners of diversity in sexuality/gender, race, disability,
and so on.
American Book Publishing Record (ABPR), published by R. R. Bowker
(www.bowker.com/index.php/component/content/article/27), is designed
specifically for librarians. ABPR has approximately 10,000 new titles each
month. It is arranged in three parts: the main section is organized by
Dewey Decimal Classification number, with the remaining adult fiction and
juvenile fiction arranged alphabetically by main entry author or title.
American Reference Books Annual (ARBAonline, www.arbaonline. com/) is
produced by Libraries Unlimited. ARBAonline has approximately 18,000
reviews of reference works published since 1997. Written by librarians for
librarians, ARBAonline’s reviews cover reference sources from more than
400 publishers in over 500 subject areas. ARBAonline is updated monthly.
More than 500 reviewers—all experts in their fields—provide thorough
60 / CH AP T ER 4

content evaluations that cover the strengths and weaknesses of each

reference resource and in many cases compare reference publications to
similar titles, giving librarians relevant information about the titles that
best fit their requirements.
Book Review Digest, published by H. W. Wilson, provides excerpts from and
citations to reviews of current adult and juvenile fiction and nonfiction.
In recent years, over 8,000 English-language books generally have been
covered by the database each year. Concise, critical evaluations are chosen
from 109 leading American, British, and Canadian periodicals in the
humanities and social and general sciences, as well as library review media.
The digest covers a wide range of review media and offers an enormous
variety of reviews—all carefully excerpted to convey the diversity of critical
opinion on a title—and it is an excellent source for anyone who needs to
obtain information about new books.
Book Review Index (BRI), produced by Thomson Gale, contains references
to more than 4,000,000 reviews of approximately 2,000,000 distinct
book and periodical titles. The file dates from 1969 to the present and
covers every review published in nearly 500 periodicals and newspapers.
Each record includes the author and title of the work being reviewed,
the journal name, date of review, and page number. Document type
indications are also included if the work is a children’s book, periodical,
children’s periodical, young adult periodical, reference work, or young
adult book. Approximately 500 periodicals and newspapers are currently
indexed by BRI (retrospective coverage varies). BRI offers broad subject
coverage due to the range of sources indexed. Subjects include the social
sciences, the humanities, the sciences, business, the fine arts, and general
interest areas.
Booklist is published by the American Library Association (www.ala.org/
ala/booklist/booklist.cfm) and is intended to provide a guide to current
library materials in many formats that are appropriate for use in public
libraries and school library media centers. The needs of small and medium-
sized libraries receive special consideration in all selection decisions. All
materials reviewed in the Adult Books, Books for Youth, and Media sections
are recommended for purchase by libraries and media centers. No negative
reviews are published. This recommended-only policy, in place since
Booklist’s founding in 1905, has been adapted over the decades to reflect
changes in the philosophy of public library service. Thus, materials are
recommended for reasons relating to both quality and anticipated demand
by library users.
Books in Print (www.booksinprint.com/bip/) is produced by R. R. Bowker,
and is available in print, CD-ROM, and web formats. The Books in Print
database offers valuable information on more than 6,000,000 U.S. book,
audiobook, and video titles, as well as another 10,000,000 international
titles, making it the industry’s largest bibliographic database. This is
an indispensable resource for booksellers, publishers, and librarians.
It offers reviews, tables of contents, full-text previews, cover images,
author biographies, awards information, annotations, and much more.
BooksInPrint.com Professional offers extensive bibliographic information
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 61

on over 6,000,000 in-print, out-of-print, and forthcoming book, e-book,

audio, and video titles. BooksInPrint.com features over 220,000 tables of
contents, 2,500,000 annotations, and over 1,000,000 reviews of titles by
more than 370,000 publishers, as well as extensive cover images and author
biographies.
Choice is published by the American Library Association (www.ala.org/ala/
acrl/acrlpubs/choice/home.cfm) and is the selection tool most commonly
used by college libraries. Choice publishes nearly 7,000 reviews annually,
spanning all academic disciplines. The reviews are written by teaching
faculty and academic librarians, and they are generally the first professional
post-publication reviews of scholarly works. Choice reviews books and
electronic resources that are appropriate for libraries serving students at
the undergraduate level, including community college or lower-division
undergraduates. Choice selectively reviews graduate-level materials when
they have value for advanced undergraduates or honor students. Strictly
professional works are excluded, as are foreign-language materials and most
reprints and undergraduate textbooks.
Criticas Spanish Language Authors and Book Reviews (www.criticasmagazine.
com/csp/cms/sites/LJ/Reviews/Spanish/index.csp) featured the latest
English-language review coverage of Spanish-language authors, book
reviews (criticas libros), best sellers, and more from the editors of Library
Journal and School Library Journal. In response to reader demand following
the suspension of the hard-copy Criticas in 2009, LJ and SLJ resumed
reviewing Spanish-language books for adults and children. Adult books are
reviewed monthly, and children’s titles every other month. The reviews are
written by librarians.
Edelweiss (www.edelweiss.plus) was originally released on the Web in 2009 and
remains a free (paid for by booksellers) online source for publishers’ catalogs,
book and author information, reviews, and electronic advanced reading
copies. It is intended for public librarians and the tools are, therefore, geared
to the public library. A selector does not have to go through the catalogs page
by page but can search and filter her search in a number of ways, such as
author, title, publisher, honors and award winners, and so on. The search can
be saved to run again. There is also an event grid that tells about any author
events in your area for books signings and presentations, but you have to
be approved for access to specific publisher(s). As noted, Edelweiss is a free
web service for librarians, since it is financed by booksellers. In 2017 there
were 8,000 unique publisher imprints represented on Edelweiss, and 15,000
librarians were registered for Edelweiss.
Edelweissplus includes analytics for the information originally on Edelweiss
and allows librarians to share information about their collections.
Librarians can get real-time market data from peer libraries and hundreds
of indie booksellers. This is a rather simple product to use, since there are
graphs and other visualizations to make selection and weeding decisions.
This service is aimed at the public library market and can be interfaced
with an integrated library system so that librarians can get title status such
as checkouts, holds, and the various formats that their library owns, plus
how the title has performed in their library and peer libraries.
62 / CH AP T ER 4

Goodreads (www.Goodreads.com) is a great social media website that allows

readers to share what they are reading, rate books, and offer comments or
reviews. For librarians, it is a good source to see what readers are currently
reading and the books they are interested in reading. Although the website
is now owned by Amazon and Amazon has gone after fake reviewers
(Addady 2016), the comments and materials are user-based, with all levels
of reviews from a basic “I like it “or “I don’t like it” to full-fledged reviews.
Used in conjunction with other review sources, Goodreads can be a great
source for a selector. Goodreads labels some of its users as librarians who
are then able to edit metadata and images in the site in order to add new
information and correct mistakes. There is even a category of “super
librarians” who can do more kinds of editing (Goodreads 2015). Currently
there are tens of millions of book reviews, recommendations, and ratings on
the site that can be helpful for readers and librarians. Thelwall and Kousha
(2017) sampled 50,000 members (out of a then total of 5,730,795) and found
from their public profiles that 75 percent were female, but there was little
difference between female and male users of the site except that the women
tended to be more critical in their comments and tended to list more titles.
Historical Fiction Review (https://historicalnovelsociety.org/magazines) is
published quarterly by the Historical Novel Society. It is the best and most
complete guide to the latest historical fiction in the world. Besides book
reviews, the magazine also features author interviews, feature articles, and
letters from subscribers.
Horn Book Guide is published by Horn Book, Inc. It rates and concisely reviews
over 2,000 titles in each semiannual issue—virtually every children’s and
young adult book published in the United States in a six-month period.
Five indispensable indexes, including an extensive subject index, make
the Horn Book Guide a primary resource for librarians, classroom teachers,
booksellers, and professors of children’s literature. The publisher also
produces the Horn Book Guide Online, which offers access to a searchable
database of over 70,000 book reviews from 1989 to the present.
Kirkus Reviews (www.KirkusReviews.com) is available online and is also
published biweekly in a print edition that has appeared ever since 1933.
Kirkus reviews more than 500 prepublication books each month, including
fiction, nonfiction, children’s, and young adult books. Kirkus does not
review books that have already been published. Kirkus does, however,
consider for review any previously unpublished, but already contracted,
titles that are submitted in galley form at least three to four months before
their publication date.
Library Journal (LJ), published by Reed Business Information, devotes a large
percentage of its pages to review sections that evaluate nearly 7,000 books
annually, along with hundreds of audiobooks, videos, databases, websites,
and computer systems that libraries buy. Books are selected for their
potential interest to a broad spectrum of libraries. Only a few areas of
publishing fall outside LJ’s scope: textbooks, children’s books, very technical
or specialized works, and books in languages other than English.
LibraryReads (libraryreads.org) is a website that contains the top titles which
librarians have nominated. Any public librarian can nominate titles. At the
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 63

end of each month, librarians vote the best titles of the month. Librarians
have generally read advanced reading copies, so there is still time to get the
titles ordered for your library before the title is on sale in bookstores and
Amazon.
Magazines for Libraries is published by ProQuest (www.proquest.com/
products-services/related/Magazines-for—Libraries.html) and provides
essential information, useful statistics, and comparative data to help
librarians support their collection decisions. It has thousands of full-
text reviews and recommendations from nearly 200 subject specialists.
Libraries of all types can benefit from this critical evaluation of journals,
magazines, and databases to create and maintain quality collections of all
sizes.
Mystery Ink (www.mysteryinkonline.com) reviews mysteries and thrillers, as
well as providing interviews with authors. This site is edited by David J.
Montgomery, who writes about authors and books for the Chicago Sun-
Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Boston Globe, and the South Florida
Sun-Sentinel.
NetGalley (https://netgalley.uservoice.com/) is a service to promote and
publicize forthcoming titles to readers of influence. If you are a reviewer,
blogger, journalist, librarian, bookseller, educator, or in the media, you can
use NetGalley for free to request and read titles before they are published.
Publishers Weekly (www.publishersweekly.com), published by Reed Business
Information, is the publishing industry’s leading news magazine, and covers
every aspect of creating, producing, marketing, and selling the written word
in book, audio, video, and electronic formats. There are fifty-one issues per
year, and the magazine is targeted at publishers, librarians, booksellers,
and literary agents. The subject areas covered by Publishers Weekly
include bookstores, book design and manufacture, bookselling, marketing,
merchandising, and trade news, along with author interviews and regular
columns on film rights, people in publishing, and best sellers. The magazine
attempts to serve all those involved in the creation, production, marketing,
and sale of the written word in book, audio, video, and electronic formats.
It reviews 7,000 new books per year and is likely the large public library’s
primary selection tool.
Reader’s Advisor is published by Libraries Unlimited of the Greenwood
Publishing Group and is now offered online (http://rainfo.lu.com/product
.aspx). Reader’s Advisor Online is a sophisticated finding tool for reader’s
advisory practitioners. The content in Reader’s Advisor Online is not
available elsewhere. It includes all of the volumes in Libraries Unlimited’s
well-known Genreflecting series, and it also contains selected essays from
the Readers’ Advisor’s Companion and Nonfiction Readers’ Advisory, and
more. Because it refines searching to look for books, it is recommended as
suitable for book groups.
Reading Reality (https://www.facebook.com/pg/ReadingReality) is a weekly
blog written by Marlene Harris, a reviewer for Library Journal and a former
member of the ALA Notable Books Council and the Carnegie Book Awards
Committee. Reading Reality publishes Ebook Review Central, a weekly
one-stop source for links to reviews of e-book-only titles. The mission of the
64 / CH AP T ER 4

website is “promoting Ebooks, Genre Fiction, Libraries, and making sure

great books have an audience, especially when they are ebooks.”
School Library Journal (SLJ) is published by Reed Business Information
(www.schoollibraryjournal.com). SLJ serves librarians who work with
students in school and public libraries, and reaches an audience of more
than 100,000 readers. It is the world’s largest and most authoritative
reviewer of children’s and young adult content—principally books, but
also including audio, video, and online works—and the magazine and its
website provide 38,000 subscribers with information that is indispensable
in making purchasing decisions. In addition to its reviews, SLJ’s news,
features, columns, and departments deliver the perspective, resources, and
leadership tools necessary for its readers to become indispensable players in
their schools and libraries. SLJ’s reviews are written by librarians working
directly with children and young adults in schools or public libraries;
library school educators; teachers of children’s literature; and subject
specialists. They evaluate books on the basis of literary quality, artistic
merit, clarity of presentation, and appeal to the intended audience. They
also make comparisons between new titles and materials already available
in most collections, and they mention curriculum connections. Grade levels
are assigned to the content by reviewers based on their expertise with
readers.
Serials Review is a quarterly peer-reviewed scholarly journal for the
international serials community published by Elsevier (www.elsevier.com/
wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/620213/). Its articles focus
on serials in the broadest sense of the term and cover all aspects of
serials information; regular columns feature interviews, exchanges
on controversial topics, book reviews, and conference reports. Serials
Review includes all aspects of serials management: format considerations,
publishing models, statistical studies, collection analysis, collaborative
efforts, reference and access issues, cataloging and acquisitions, people
who have shaped the serials community, and topical bibliographic studies.
The journal also examines emerging and changing standards, methods
of delivery, innovations, and a multitude of other issues that contribute
to understanding, managing, and publishing serials in a comprehensive,
complex, and global environment.
SF Site (www.sfsite.com) reviews the best in science fiction and fantasy, in
print, audio, and other media, whether on the Web, in print, or other
formats. In addition to reviews, the site also contains interviews with
authors and artists.
Ulrich’s International Periodicals Directory (www.ulrichsweb.com/ulrichsweb/
prodDescriptions.asp). Ulrichsweb.com contains authoritative information
about more than 300,000 serials of all types from around the world—
academic and scholarly journals, peer-reviewed titles, online publications,
newspapers, and other resources. Ulrich’s records provide details such
as ISSN and title, publisher, online availability, language, subject area,
abstracting and indexing coverage, a database searchable by table of
contents, and full-text reviews. Ulrich’s is an important tool for reference,
research, and serials management. This database provides information on
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 65

virtually every active and ceased periodical, annual, irregular publication,

and monographic series published throughout the world, plus thousands of
newspapers.
Voice of Youth Advocates (http://voyamagazine.com) is owned by Scarecrow
Press and is published bimonthly. The journal addresses librarians,
educators, and other professionals who work with young adults and is the
only magazine devoted exclusively to the informational needs of teenagers.

In addition to the above-listed sources, many websites and blogs by librarians and book
lovers may be helpful in selection. One interesting example of this type of site is BookBitch
(www.bookbitch.com). Stacy Alesi, the creator of the site, also has a blog and a Facebook
page that have reviews and discussion of new books. Many more such sites are available on
the Web, with more being added all the time.

Antiquarian and Out-of-Print Books and Serials

AcqWeb Directory: Rare and Antiquarian Book Vendors (www.library

.vanderbilt.edu/law/aqs/pubr/rare.html) contains a list of websites of rare
and antique booksellers.
Advanced Book Exchange is owned by AbeBooks (www.abebooks.com).
This site offers scarce first editions inscribed with sought-after authors’
signatures. AbeBooks offers an array of rare, valuable, and highly collectible
books. The Rare Book Room is the entrée into this remarkable collection,
and regularly features a selection of the booksellers’ most precious items.
The Collector’s Corner features a Rare Bookseller Directory, articles from
the newsletter, and information on book care as well as book fairs and
events, links to Easton Press (all leather-bound books), and a collection of
first editions for sale.
Alibris (www.alibris.com) is an excellent source for used books, textbooks,
CDs, and DVDs. If a work has gone out of print before a library could obtain
it, Alibris is a good place to begin searching for it. Bibliocity has recently
joined with Alibris to make this site an excellent one for rare as well as used
materials.
Amazon.com (www.amazon.com), which has become the largest Internet
retailer in the world, as well as everybody’s favorite online bookseller, does
in fact sell a wide range of used and rare materials through its website. The
out-of-print searcher can look for books using many options, including
publication date and format. Search results can be limited by collectability
and condition.
Biblio, Inc. has a direct link for rare books (www.biblio.com/ltd/). Biblio brings
together over 5,500 independent booksellers from around the world and
offers millions of select rare, old, used, antique, and out-of-print books
from the eighteenth through the twentieth centuries, including rare
photography books, old adventure and art history books, children’s classics,
rare historical fiction, literary criticism, rare antique military history,
paleontology, poetry, and much more.
66 / CH AP T ER 4

Bibliofind (www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html?node=299899011) has

combined with Amazon.com to provide millions of rare, used, and out-of-
print books through the online bookstore.
BookFinder.com (www.bookfinder.com/about/) is a one-stop e-commerce
search engine that searches over 150,000,000 books for sale—new, used,
rare, out-of-print, and textbooks. It saves you time and money by searching
every major catalog online and letting you know which booksellers are
offering the best prices and selection.
Powell’s Books (www.powells.com/rareandcollectible.html) carries about
9,000 volumes in their rare book collection. They offer an advanced search
(with the options to limit for first editions or signed editions), rare book
basics, and trivia; browsing by category or author is available.

Electronic Resources

To make good selection decisions regarding electronic materials, you will first need to
gather a group of titles with review information using both a local and global information
perspective. Therefore, it is important to determine a set of resources that can be used to
gather titles, and then to apply criteria to select among various materials that have a similar
subject matter. The selector will be looking for tools, such as the following, that can help
answer a variety of questions:

Current Cites (http://currentcites.org) is an electronic newsletter that contains

useful reviews of numerous electronic resources, as well as print sources in
various areas of information technology.
eReviews (www.libraryjournal.com) is a section of the Library Journal website
where Cheryl LaGuardia, a research librarian at the Widener Library
of Harvard University, reviews newly released or updated electronic
resources. Her reviews are both descriptive and evaluative.
NewJour (http://vlib.ustuarchive.urfu.ru/storon/elj_cic/new_jour.html), an
electronic discussion list, can help you identify new electronic journals.
Scout Report (http://scout.wisc.edu/Report/Current/) is a weekly electronic
publication that is produced both as a website and a weekly e-mail that
provides reviews of valuable resources on the Web.

GENERAL-REVIEW SOURCES ONLINE

The following is just a sampling of the review sources that are available on the Web to help
in selection. Although the focus of these websites is on print sources, some popular elec-
tronic products are also reviewed.

Amazon.com (www.amazon.com) provides access from its website to various

lists of best books, videos, CD-ROMs, and other materials. The selector also
has access to peer reviews and standard review media. Some selectors find
the peer reviews from readers to be helpful; they feel that the peer reviews
may be more in touch with the materials that their users are likely to want
or like.
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 67

Barnes and Noble (www.barnesandnoble.com) offers services similar to those

of Amazon.com, including peer reviews of materials. This site has links to
resellers of books, with the ability to order through the Barnes and Noble
website.
BookWire (www.bookwire.com) by Bowker contains reviews/book descriptions
and links to possible sellers.

A large number of blogs and other online reviewing sources are available on the Web. Some
of these are more authoritative than others. “Over the past 15 years, the book review land-
scape has changed seismically. Reviewing is no longer centralized, with a few big voices
leading the way, but fractured among numerous multifarious voices found mostly on the
web. In turn, readers aren’t playing the captive audience any more” (Hoffert 2010, 22).
Readers are busy talking about books on the Web through a number of sites. Some of these
sites may be helpful to selectors, at least in getting a popular opinion of books that may or
may not be covered by one of the more authoritative review sources.
If your library is trying to add self-published print or e-book titles to your collection, a
number of the traditional review journals, such as Library Journal, Booklist, and Publishers
Weekly, are now including reviews of self-published books, generally in a separate category.
Amazon is including self-published works in its overall search returns without distinction.
One of the major concerns that libraries have had about adding self-published works to
their collections is now somewhat alleviated, since these works are no longer so difficult to
discover by librarians and readers.

OTHER SELECTION MEANS

In addition to being reviewed in more or less traditional ways, whether in print publications
or on the Web, electronic resources often lend themselves well to other means of evalua-
tion, including the following:

Trial offers: Vendors of electronic resources may allow you to access or link to
their materials without cost for a trial period. After the trial period, one
must either purchase or license the materials to continue using them. Trials
are often advertised through e-mail and library websites. Thus, more users
are likely to try the products and offer advice to the selector than is likely to
be the case for traditional print materials. Some libraries (and publishers)
limit trial offers to staff use, but others open them up to their entire user
population so that feedback from users, along with usage statistics, can be
utilized in the final selection decision process. You will want to make sure
that the trial conditions are equivalent to the actual use conditions that
would apply if you purchased or licensed the product, and also make sure
that you don’t receive a poor demonstration version.
Demonstrations: Vendors will often be willing to come to your library and
demonstrate their electronic products for you. Again, be sure that the
conditions of the demonstration are as close as possible to what they would
be if the product were purchased or licensed. For example, you don’t want
to see a demonstration of a web product at 8:00 a.m. on Monday, when web
traffic would probably be much lower than on, say, Wednesday at 3:00 p.m.
68 / CH AP T ER 4

Trade shows at library conferences are also a good way to get the feel of a
product. Librarians can use the demonstrations at trade shows to hone in
on the particular systems that they would like to see demonstrated to the
entire library staff locally.
Visits to other libraries: Another way to gauge the usefulness of a product is to
visit a similar library that already has the product and see it in action there.
This approach also provides the opportunity to talk with that library’s staff
about the product and their experience with it. To be really useful, the
library that is visited should have a technological setup and user base that is
similar to yours.
Vending machines: Some public libraries are experimenting with rental kiosks
for new DVDs. Such kiosks are popping up in many locations. Library users
can insert their money and make their selections. The libraries thus have
the latest materials without having to do any selection, and as with drink
and snack vending machines, they may get a small percentage of the take.
Other libraries make these kiosks free to users with the swipe of their
library card. Library selectors can then concentrate on educational and
other “more serious” titles.

OPEN ACCESS MOVEMENT

Another consideration in the selection process involves open access journals, which make
scholarly publications available online at no charge, and have greatly reduced the cost of
publication while at the same time greatly increasing the distribution and availability of
information. Public libraries should be aware of the new opportunities for the selection of
titles that previously may not have been within their budget.
All of the major library professional associations have issued statements in support of
open access, including the Association of Research Libraries, the Association of College &
Research Libraries, and the International Federation of Library Associations and Institu-
tions. Other prominent organizations that support open access include the Budapest Open
Access Initiative, the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, the Public
Library of Science (PloS), and many others.
A few examples of open access journals include First Monday (www.firstmonday.org),
which began publication in 1996 and was one of the first peer-reviewed open access jour-
nals. PloS publishes two open access journals, PloS Biology and PloS Medicine, and has an-
nounced two new journals, PloS Computational Biology and PloS Genetics. To see a list of
open access publications, go to the Directory of Open Access Journals (www.doaj.org).
In open access publishing, the standard commercial copyright contract has been mod-
ified in one of several ways. In one model utilized by many electronic journals, the author
retains copyright and the journal simply obtains first publication rights. Many examples of
this copyright modification can be found at the Directory of Open Access Journals. Another
popular model used by many open access journals, including the PloS, is called the Creative
Commons Attributions License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/1.0/).
Another way to view open access materials is to look at what is actually delivered to
users. Open access repositories that are sometimes viewed as “green” are not peer-reviewed
before being made available, and are often not the final version that would be published
in a peer-reviewed journal. The American Society for Information Science & Technology
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 69

(ASIS&T) Digital Library, which is managed by Wiley Blackwell, allows authors to put their
last version of the article in an institutional repository or on their own website. The edited
article, which has been peer-reviewed, is only available from the Wiley Blackwell website, in
pay-per-view if the user is not a member of ASIS&T. So-called gold open access repositories
only have peer-reviewed articles.
It is still too early to know how widespread and successful the open access movement
will prove to be, but currently it offers new opportunities for libraries to add electronic
journals to their collections without hurting their pocketbooks.
A warning about “predatory journals” is appropriate when discussing open access. With
the rapid rise in the number of open access journals, a new phenomenon has also been fa-
cilitated, and that is the rapid rise in the number of predatory journals. Predatory journals
are generally open access journals of low quality, often short-lived and often deceptively
expensive for the author of the article. In some cases, abandoned websites can be found
where articles were mounted and then the journal just vanishes. Predatory journals often
advertise to authors an affordable cost to publish in their journal, only for the author to be
charged a larger sum before his or her article is published on the journal’s website. These
predatory journals are often marketed via e-mail to untenured faculty members who need
peer-reviewed articles and a quick turnaround in the publishing process in order to make
significant progress toward earning tenure at their institution (Truth 2012). Sometimes the
name of the journal is only slightly different from that of a prestigious journal—the only dif-
ference may be that the main word in the title is either plural or singular, when in the case
of the prestigious journal it is singular or vice versa; for example, Sciences instead of Science.
Junior faculty members who are not native English speakers can easily be fooled into think-
ing that their work is being solicited by a prestigious, peer-reviewed journal.
Because these journals falsely claim to be peer-reviewed (Bohannon 2013; Oransky
2013), they present a problem for collection development librarians and library users. Ac-
ademic librarians may be consulted by faculty members, department chairs, tenure com-
mittees, and others involved in evaluating faculty members about the quality of the jour-
nals in which they are publishing. In looking at the source/locations of predatory journals,
there seem to be four geographical centers for these publications: India, Nigeria, the United
States, and the United Kingdom. In some developing countries, the tenure process requires
publishing in international peer-reviewed journals. This requirement makes doctoral stu-
dents and new researchers especially vulnerable to these types of publication outlets.
As the numbers of predatory journals grow, it is important for librarians to be aware of
this phenomenon and to consider developing criteria to judge a journal as a predatory one;
obviously, the quality of articles in predatory journals is lower than that in non-predatory,
open access journals (Xia et al. 2015), but how do you spot such journals? One common
marker is that the websites of predatory journals are often abandoned suddenly by the pub-
lishers and are not maintained, but they leave the “published” artifacts behind. Librarians
and researchers must be on the lookout for these journals because they threaten the repu-
tation of all open access journals.

SUMMARY

Selection in today’s libraries involves not just the traditional factors and criteria as out-
lined in this chapter, but a number of new technical and cost factors as well. The tendency
of vendors to bundle or package various resources, titles, and images has changed much of
70 / CH AP T ER 4

the selection process from a title-by-title approach to an aggregate approach. This change
requires new decisions concerning amounts of duplication that are tolerable, consider-
ation of the differences in search engines, analysis of differences in the ease of use of the
product, and other factors. Open access electronic journals provide a promising source of
resources for librarians to select for their libraries without any additional costs beyond
their existing networking and telecommunications costs. However, the librarian’s role
and judgment in the selection process remains important, and suggests the increasing use
of teams, especially in connection with the acquisition of electronic resources and mate-
rials. Various emerging technical issues may be better addressed through a team approach
incorporating members who have both subject matter and information technology exper-
tise.

ACTIVITY

Divide the class into several groups. There should be one group for each of the major types
of libraries. Each group should assume that they have been hired to be the professional
staff of a brand-new library, and they must select the opening-day collection. What review
sources and other resources would each group use to select titles or particular subject areas
in the new collection? Ask them to justify their procedures.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. What is a collection? Consider collections in their broadest sense and then

narrow this down to library collections.
2. Would you ever select a book for your library for which you could not find a
review or a favorable review? What factors might influence your decision?
3. What do you think about using reviews from websites such as Amazon.com,
Goodreads, or LibraryReads? How reliable are such reviews? Should they be
treated the same way as, for example, a review in Booklist?
4. Do best sellers and graphic novels belong in an academic library’s
collection? Why or why not?
5. Assume that a needs assessment has determined that your library needs
more foreign-language material, predictably in Spanish, but also in several
of the eastern European languages (Polish, Hungarian, and Czech). How
would you go about searching for titles in the various languages, most of
which you do not speak or read yourself? What criteria would you use for
the selection of titles in these languages?
6. From the perspective of having a well-balanced collection, should a
librarian feel compelled to select a certain number of titles from the
Holocaust denial literature? Why or why not?

REFERENCES

Addady, Michal. 2016. “Amazon Is Cracking Down on More Fake Reviews.” Fortune 27, no. 10.
www.fortune.com/2016/10/27/amazon-lawsuit-fake-reviews/.
 SE LE C TI O N S O U R C E S AN D PR O C E S SE S / 71

Anderson, Chris. 2006. The “Long Tail”: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More. New York:
Hyperion.
Bohannon, John. “Who’s Afraid of Peer Review?” Science 342, no. 6154 (2013): 6–65.
Coombs, Karen. 2007. “Digital Promise and Peril.” Netconnect (summer): 24.
GoodReads. “Librarian Manual.” 2015. https://www.goodreads.com/librarian_manual/.
Gregory, Vicki L. 2006. Selecting and Managing Electronic Resources. Rev. ed. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Haines, Helen E. 1950. Living with Books. 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hoffert, Barbara. 2007. “Who’s Selecting Now?” Library Journal 132 (September 1): 40–43.
——— . 2010. “Every Reader a Reviewer.” Library Journal 135 (September 1): 22–25.
Johnson, Liz, and Linda A. Brown. 2008. “Book Reviews by the Numbers.” Collection Management 33, nos.
1/2: 83–113.
Oransky, Ivan. 2013. “Science Reporter Spoofs Hundreds of Open Access Journals with Fake Papers.”
http://retractionwatch.com/2013/10/03/science-reporter-spoofs-hundreds-of-journals-with-a-fake
-paper/.
Thelwall, Mike, and Kayvan Kousha. 2017. “Goodreads: A Social Network Site for Book Readers.” Journal of
the Association for Information Science and Technology 68, no. 4: 972–83.
Truth, Frank, 2012. “Pay Big to Publish Fast: Academic Journal Rackets.” Journal for Critical Education
Policy Studies 10, no. 2: 54–105.
Xia, Jingfeng, Jennifer L. Harmon, Keven G. Connolly, Ryan M. Donnelly, Mary R. Anderson, and Heather
A. Howard. 2015. “Who Publishes in ‘Predatory’ Journals?” Journal of the Association for Information
Science and Technology 66, no. 7: 1406–17.

SELECTED READINGS

Austenfeld, Annie Marie. 2009. “Building the College Library Collection to Support Curriculum Growth.”
Collection Building 34 (July-September): 209–27.
Bailey, Charles W. 2007. “Open Access and Libraries.” Collection Management 32, nos. 3/4: 351–83.
Bielke-Rodenbiker, Jean. 2004. “Review Sources for Mysteries.” Collection Management 29, nos. 3/4: 53–71.
Chen, Shu-Hsien Lai. 2002. “Diversity in School Library Media Center Resources.” In Educational Media
and Technology Yearbook, vol. 27, edited by Mary Ann Fitzgerald, Michael Orey, and Robert Maribe
Branch, 168–87. Englewood Cliffs, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Chu, F. T. 1997. “Librarian-Faculty Relations in Collection Development.” Journal of Academic Librarianship
23 (January): 15–20.
Crawford, Gregory A., and Matthew Harris. 2001. “Best-Sellers in Academic Libraries.” College & Research
Libraries 62 (May): 216–25.
Dick, Jeff T. 2009. “Bracing for Blu-Ray.” Library Journal 134 (November): 33–35.
Dilevko, Juris, and Lisa Gottlieb. 2003. “The Politics of Standard Selection Guides: The Case of the Public
Library Catalog.” Library Quarterly 73 (July): 289–337.
Donatich, John. 2009. “Why Books Still Matter.” Journal of Scholarly Publishing 40 (July): 329–42.
Downey, Elizabeth M. 2009. “Graphic Novels in Curriculum and Instruction Collections.” Reference and
User Services Quarterly 49 (December): 181–88.
Fenner, Audrey, ed. 2004. Selecting Materials for Library Collections. Binghamton, NY: Haworth
Information. Copublished as Acquisitions Librarian nos. 31/32 (2004).
Gherman, Paul M. 2005. “Collecting at the Edge—Transforming Scholarship.” Journal of Library
Administration 42, no. 2: 23–34.
Gregory, Cynthia L. 2008. “‘But I Want a Real Book’: An Investigation of Undergraduates’ Usage and
Attitudes toward Electronic Books.” Reference and User Services Quarterly 47 (spring): 366–73.
72 / CH AP T ER 4

Guedon, Jean-Claude. 2008. “Mixing and Matching the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access—Take 2.”
Serials Review 34, no. 1: 41–51.
Hadro, Josh. 2013. “What’s the Problem with Self-Publishing?” Library Journal 138 (April 15): 34–36.
Haung, Yun Kuei, Wen I. Yang, Tom M. Y. Lin, and Ting Yu Shih. 2012. “Judgment Criteria for the
Authenticity of Internet Book Reviews.” Library and Information Science Research 34 (April): 150–56.
Hiebert, Jean T. 2009. “Beyond Mark and Park: Classification Mapping as a Collection Development Tool
for Psychiatry/Psychology.” Collection Management 34 (July-September): 182–93.
Hoffert, Barbara. 2007. “Who’s Selecting Now?” Library Journal 132 (September 1): 40–43.
Jobe, Margaret M., and Michael Levine-Clark. 2008. “Use and Non-Use of Choice-Reviewed Titles in
Undergraduate Libraries.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 34 (July): 295–304.
Koehn, Shona L., and Suliman Hawamdeh. 2010. “The Acquisition and Management of Electronic
Resources: Can We Justify the Cost?” Library Quarterly 80 (April): 161–74.
Kopak, Rick. 2008. “Open Access and the Open Journal Systems: Making Sense All Over.” School Libraries
Worldwide 14, no. 2: 45–54.
Lee, Hur-Li. 2000. “What Is a Collection?” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51
(October): 1106–13.
McCulloch, Emma. 2006. “Taking Stock of Open Access: Progress and Issues.” Library Review 55, no. 6:
337–43.
Mulcahy, Kevin P. 2006. “Science Fiction Collections in ARL Academic Libraries.” College & Research
Libraries 67 (January): 15–34.
Neal, Kathryn M. 2002. “Cultivating Diversity: The Donor Collection.” Collection Management 27, no. 2:
33–42.
O’English, Lorena, J. Gregory, and Elizabeth Blakesley Lindsay. 2006. “Graphic Novels in Academic
Libraries: From Maus to Manga and Beyond.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 32 (March): 173–82.
Pecoskie, Jim, and Heather L. Hill. 2014. “Indie Media and Digital Community Collaborations in Public
Libraries.” Collection Building 33, no. 4: 127–31.
Pool, Gail. 2007. Faint Praise: The Plight of Book Reviewing in America. Columbia: University of Missouri
Press.
Quinn, Brian. 2012. “Collection Development and the Psychology of Bias.” Library Journal 82 (July):
277–304.
Randall, William M. 1931. “What Can the Foreigner Find to Read in the Public Library?” Library Quarterly
1: 79–88.
Rathe, Bette, and Lisa Blankenship. 2005. “Recreational Reading Collections in Academic Libraries.”
Collection Management 30, no. 2: 73–85.
Strothmann, Molly, and Connie Van Fleet. 2009. “Books That Inspire, Books That Offend.” Reference and
User Services Quarterly 49 (winter): 163–79.
Sullivan, Kathleen. 2004. “Beyond Cookie-Cutter Selection.” Library Journal 129 (June 15): 44–46.
Thelwall, Mike, and Kayvan Kousha. 2017. “Goodreads: A Social Network Site for Book Readers.” Journal of
the Association for Information Science and Technology 68, no, 4: 972–83.
Van Orden, Phyllis J. 2000. Selecting Books for the Elementary School Library Media Center. New York: Neal-
Schuman.
Van Orsdel, Lee C., and Kathleen Born. 2008. “Periodicals Pricing Survey 2008: Embracing Openness.”
Library Journal 133 (April 15): 53–58.
Wagner, Cassie. 2010. “Graphic Novel Collections in Academic ARL Libraries.” College & Research Libraries
71 (January): 42–48.
Willinsky, John. 2003. “The Nine Flavors of Open Access Scholarly Publishing.” Journal of Postgraduate
Medicine 49, no. 3: 263–67.
 CHAPTER 5

Acquisitions

Since some universities’ library and information science programs do not include a sep-
arate course on acquisitions, it is important to include the basics in a collection develop-
ment textbook. Because there is so much material to cover, chapters 5 and 6 should be
taken as an overview, rather than an in-depth coverage of acquisitions equivalent to a
semester-long class.

OVERVIEW

Library acquisition processes have changed immensely over the last two decades. Most
of the changes involve electronic processes and resources, both of which have altered
the library more than any other period since the invention of the movable-type printing
press. Although the process and the format may now be electronic instead of print, the
concept of acquisitions remains the same: acquiring (in any format) the materials that
library users need.
In a nutshell, library acquisitions can be simply described as the process of locating and
then acquiring the materials that have been identified in the previous phases of the collec-
tion development process.

Acquisitions departments are responsible for getting the materials needed by library
users, in the most appropriate format and in the most efficient manner. Formats and
methods change, but the responsibility and the functions of acquiring library materials
remain at the core of the acquisitions department. (Wilkinson and Lewis 2003, 9)

THE PRINCIPAL GOAL OF LIBRARY ACQUISITIONS

Virtually every library would lack a raison d’être without the use of its resources by those
persons who are its patrons, users, or customers. Thus, a library’s acquisition activities
should be structured to respond to its users’ wants and needs. Stating something that will
come as no surprise to anyone who has ever worked in any capacity in a library, Daniel
Melcher noted in his longtime bible for library acquisitions, Melcher on Acquisition:

Fundamentally, the wants of any library’s users are easily stated. They want what they
want—now. They want it when it is being reviewed, talked about, displayed in book-
store windows, or offered in coupon ads. If you haven’t got it yet, but it is in the book-
store across the street, they don’t see why you haven’t got it. If it’s in the library but

/ 73 /
74 / CH AP T ER 5

not yet cataloged, they don’t see why that should prevent you from letting them take
it out. If last year’s issues of X magazine have been reported in the bindery for the past
six months, they don’t see why you send the issues to the bindery before the bindery is
ready to bind them. (Melcher 1971, 1)

Melcher was writing in 1971. To say that his conclusion remains just as true in this day of
instantaneous web communication and electronic access to materials over the Internet is
a significant understatement. If it is possible for items to be wanted faster than now, that
is when users will want the newest books, as well as the DVDs and other formats that can
spread quickly through the Internet. Any library that receives public support disregards the
public’s wishes at peril to its continued existence. Any technical or special library that fails
to keep itself current risks irrelevancy in the eyes of its constituency. Even a library that
views itself primarily as an archival resource and repository must ultimately be responsive
to users’ needs. In short, the never-ending, never-done work of the collection development
and acquisition staffs of virtually any library has to accelerate to keep abreast of new items
that are needed or demanded by users, and the staff has to order these works in advance of
their publication. This is the central goal of acquisitions: matching the library’s resources
(once simply described as its collection, but now a much broader range of materials) with
the library users’ needs and wants.

THE NATURE OF LIBRARY RESOURCES

Library resources may be deftly, if not very precisely, described as either print or electron-
ically published matter, with “published” being a looser concept today than it traditionally
was. Here we are less concerned with format than with the conditions surrounding pub-
lished materials’ acquisition and use. From this viewpoint, we can distinguish three basic
classes of information items:

1. Those that are owned by the library

2. Those that are leased by the library
3. Those that are accessed electronically by the library (or its users)

The acquisition of items in each of these classes is subject to varying procedures and com-
mercial and legal controls, usually depending on whether one is referring to physical own-
ership or usage rights. The acquisition of items falling into each class will carry with it cer-
tain imperatives, which must be clearly understood if the library is to allocate its resources
efficiently and effectively.
Owned materials are those materials that are acquired by the library through purchase
and exchange or that are obtained free; this obviously includes the entire range of printed
books, serials, and other traditional materials. Regardless of whether the library paid cash,
traded, or obtained the materials for free, the common element is that they are now owned
by the library and are under its control. Although there remain legal and institutional re-
strictions on what the library may do with these materials (the copyright aspects of which
are discussed in detail in chapter 9), basically these are materials that may be managed by
the library and its staff.
Leased materials are items under the temporary physical control of the library, which
are acquired through contractual arrangement with the actual owner of the material. Public
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 75

libraries in particular often find it advantageous to lease current, popular books under what
is usually referred to as a McNaughton plan from a library vendor. In addition, all types of
libraries from time to time lease databases (typically on CD-ROM or streaming media that
are suitable for hosting on the library’s computer information system) on a contractual
basis. The library pays for the use of these materials in accordance with a contract between
the vendor and the library. In a sense, such materials are similar to serials, since updates,
additions, or completely revised versions are supplied at intervals according to the contract.
If the library should stop paying the fees, some contracts provide for the return of the orig-
inal, while others render the information inaccessible past a certain date. Some vendors
allow continuing access to materials that have previously been leased. The applicable lease
agreements can be very complicated and may include restrictions on where the materials
can be used (such as a particular building or computer) and to a specified group of users
(such as the faculty and staff of a particular institution).
Larger libraries and library consortia are generally the ones acquiring on-site databas-
es, which are leased for a specified time and price. In addition to the periodic leasing costs,
the library must also budget for the operational costs of initially setting up and then run-
ning the database and making it available to users.
Accessed materials are those that involve leasing the right to view (and sometimes
download or print) electronic materials through an aggregator. The large serials vendors
now generally aggregate collections of electronic publications (often referred to in the li-
brary science literature as the “big deals”) and lease the right of access to these materials. So
that libraries don’t have to negotiate with each individual electronic publisher, the aggre-
gator attempts to add value by putting together a package of electronic databases, journals
and other periodicals, or other such materials. The library then leases the package, which
is not the same as ownership of the materials, but is rather the right to access them for the
term of the contract.
The traditional ownership paradigm often infects the acquisition librarian in subtle
ways that can result in the library acquiring contractually based items on quite disadvanta-
geous terms, especially given the often high cost of the items. Acquisitions librarians must
be careful when considering the impact of license restrictions on the future use of their
collections (Schaffner 2001). For instance, digital packages frequently include less desirable
items that must be accepted in order to get the items the library actually wants. There also
may be unexpected restrictions that apply as soon as the shrink-wrapped software package
is opened. Recent court cases in a number of jurisdictions upholding the validity of “shrink-
wrap licenses” certainly make vigilance in this regard a necessity for all libraries in the
future.
Because budgetary constraints have often significantly reduced the purchasing capaci-
ty of many libraries, it has become increasingly common for electronic document delivery
to substitute for purchasing hard copy. Whether or not the library pays the costs involved,
in such situations the purchased material does not belong to the library, with a concomitant
loss of control. In addition, the price may include both fees and royalties. Some libraries
fund these unpurchased materials from their collection development budgets. Others re-
quire users to pay some or all of the fees. Still others have developed some kind of hybrid
arrangement where they may fund a certain amount of materials for a patron over a spec-
ified period, or ask a patron to pay, for example, $5 per document whereas the actual cost
may be in the $10–20 range. All such arrangements create an element of uncertainty as to
exactly how much money should be budgeted for purchases and how much for the costs of
electronic access.
76 / CH AP T ER 5

METHODS OF ACQUIRING MATERIALS

Although the kinds of library resources, along with the addition of electronic ones, have
stayed the same for some time, the methods that libraries use to acquire books are changing.
There are now five major ways that libraries go about acquiring the materials they need.
Firm orders are probably the oldest method of making acquisitions. This method en-
compasses libraries ordering new materials title by title from either a wholesale vendor
or the publisher directly. All libraries use this method for some portion of their materials
purchases. If a library needs replacements or needs to fill in gaps in a series, it can do this
best on a title-by-title basis. Some smaller libraries do nearly all of their acquisitions in this
manner; they check reviews, examine advanced reading copies, and make individual pur-
chasing decisions on each title that is added to their collections. Larger libraries with sizable
materials budgets always need to utilize some of the other materials acquisition methods
for at least a portion of their purchases.
Approval plans are primarily used by academic libraries, but in recent years, many li-
braries have cut down on the percentage of their materials budget that is devoted to ap-
proval. An approval plan can be defined as “an acquisitions method under which a library
receives regular shipments of new titles selected by a dealer, based on a profile of library
collection interests, with the right to return what it decides not to buy” (Nardini 2003, 133).
The acquisitions librarians work closely with the vendors to refine their library’s profile,
so that, ideally, over time very little or nothing needs to be returned. The books in an ap-
proval plan are generally intended for undergraduates, or sometimes a specialized master’s
degree program. Research materials are not normally included in approval plans. Although
approval plans in the past have accounted for a large part of the book budgets of academic
libraries, libraries that have moved into customer-based collection development (see below)
have begun to divert funds from approval plans to these newer customer-based programs.
Public libraries, and a few other types of libraries as well, often rent or lease books
rather than purchase them. Leased books come ready for the shelf, with no local process-
ing needed. The price is somewhat less than that for purchasing the material, but the real
advantage is that the library can acquire for a time but is not stuck with 500 copies of a
best seller years later. After a period of its choosing, the library can return the materials to
the leasing agency; generally, the library will have an option to keep a few of the materials,
sometimes at a very low cost.
Subscriptions, including e-book and streaming audio and video packages, are yet anoth-
er way to acquire library materials. Subscriptions have traditionally been used for periodi-
cals and serial reference books, of course, but with the advent of e-books, e-book packages
have become yet another form of subscription. Academic libraries in particular have begun
purchasing a number of e-book packages to either augment or supplement their book ac-
quisitions.
Patron-driven or customer-centered acquisition is among the newest methods and is en-
joying growing popularity. Although this method is primarily associated with e-books and
academic libraries, it can also be applied to other types of materials and libraries. Caminita
describes the chief benefit of the customer-based collection development of e-books:

It shifts the buying emphasis from the just-in-case model, where items are purchased
in the hope that patrons will find them and use them, to the just-in-time model, where
patrons search for and access requested items directly. The benefit to the patrons of
adopting such a model is the ease of access to information. Patrons find records of pos-
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 77

sible e-books integrated within the library catalog itself. . . . Patrons can then access the
e-books immediately with no mediating order process required. (Caminita 2014, 1–2)

Libraries have experienced difficulties with budgeting for this type of acquisitions model,
since users may quickly download e-books to the point that the library’s budget for such
books can be completely used up early in the years of the contract. Variations on this model
have been developed to help libraries stay within their budget, including plans where librar-
ies are renting the materials but only when they are requested by users. There may be a pur-
chasing algorithm in place that triggers a purchase when three or more uses are made of the
material; otherwise, at some point the library would be paying more to rent the materials
than if it had purchased or leased them.
Of course, to be customer-based, an acquisitions program does not have to be as direct
as seeing a title in the library catalog and getting instant access to it. For the last twenty
years or so, libraries have used customer-based collection development techniques with
their print collections by using customer requests, interlibrary loan records, user surveys,
and other methods to determine what their users want, and then using that data to order
materials to meet the demand. These methods work well for print and nonelectronic media,
and generally the way they are set up gives the library more control over what is added to
the collection, so as to prevent one or two users from seriously denting the materials bud-
gets in a couple of very narrow fields.

SOURCES OF LIBRARY MATERIALS

Libraries and Publishers

Despite the large number of books and other materials purchased each year by libraries,
most publishers do not consider libraries their primary market. That role belongs to online
retailers like Amazon.com and bookstores like Barnes & Noble. As a result, these companies
enjoy the benefit of huge discounts from publishers, often ranging up to 50 percent, while
libraries generally are offered discounts in the range of only 10–20 percent. The publish-
ers of serials are notorious for almost never giving libraries a discount (except for popular
magazines), and all too often academic publishers charge libraries more than individual
subscribers, sometimes significantly more, despite the fact that libraries are usually the
major customers for these publishers’ titles. In the United States, this has led to consider-
able antagonism between librarians and serial publishers, and it has spurred the growth of
the open access movement.

Library Vendors: Domestic and International

Libraries generally acquire materials directly from publishers, booksellers, and vendors or
jobbers. Although not all publishers will deal with third-party library vendors (the pub-
lishers of reference materials are especially resistant to doing this), the majority of library
materials can be obtained through a vendor that specializes in selling to libraries. These
vendors are called by a variety of names, including dealers, suppliers, agents, booksellers,
and jobbers. These vendors allow libraries to deal with just a few companies while order-
ing library resources published by hundreds of presses and other organizations. There are
78 / CH AP T ER 5

major overall vendors, such as Baker and Taylor, and smaller vendors that deal with specific
types of materials, formats, or materials from outside the United States, often from a spe-
cific country or in a specific language (figure 5.1). These specialized vendors can be located
by consulting sources such as the American Book Trade Directory or Literary Market Place.
There are also vendors, such as EBSCO, that specialize in serial publications and electronic
databases. There is a list of library vendors and the types of materials that they provide in
the appendix at the end of this book.
In addition to the benefits of one-stop shopping, libraries favor the use of vendors be-
cause of the array of other services they can offer. A librarian can expect a vendor to provide
access to databases with bibliographic information, including title, author, publisher, price,
and ISBN (International Standard Book Number) or ISSN (International Standard Serial
Number). In addition, many vendors will ship the books to the library already cataloged
and prepared for the shelf. Libraries can also get pricing trends for books and serials to help
them in planning their budgets.
Online bookstores such as Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble are now widely utilized
by libraries for popular titles that are needed quickly or for out-of-print materials (see the

Type of Library
Vendor Generally Serviced Vendor’s Specialty
Baker and Taylor Public and academic Books, DVDs, CDs and other major
formats

Brodart School media centers and small Books, DVDs, CDs, popular magazines
public

Reed Elsevier Academic and special Academic journals and scientific and
technical books

EBSCO All types Serials and subscription databases

Follett School media centers and Books, DVDs, CDs, and other major
public formats

H. W. Wilson All types Subscription databases and printed

indexes

Harrasowitz Academic and special Books and other publications from

European countries with an emphasis
on German language materials

Ingram All types Popular materials

Proquest Academic and special Subscription databases

SWETS Academic and special Serials

Yankee Book Academic Academic books, but can supply

Peddler almost anything

FIGURE 5.1 Major library vendors

NOTE: This is meant to be a representative sample, not a complete list of vendors.
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 79

section “Out-of-Print Purchasing” below). Some libraries are even ordering books demand-
ed by users and having them shipped directly to those users. When finished, the user then
brings the book to the library. Local brick-and-mortar bookstores may also be a good source
of materials needed quickly. If an extremely popular book blindsides the library, buying
a few copies at a local bookstore can help the library quickly satisfy users’ demand. Some
libraries use specially issued credit cards for such purposes.
In addition to firm orders (materials that are ordered title by title), there are a number
of ways to save the librarian’s time and ensure that books and other materials are already in
the library when needed. These may be summarized as follows.

Mass Gathering Plans

Since most medium-sized to large libraries cannot afford enough librarians who specialize
in collection development to individually select every title, a number of mass gathering
plans have been devised over the years to collect most of the standard materials that a
library needs so that the librarians can work on areas of special interest, as well as the kinds
of “gray” literature, association literature, and international publications (to name a few)
that are not readily available. These mass gathering plans consist of the following methods:

• Approval plans are frequently used by academic or large public libraries.

Titles are shipped from a wholesaler or vendor on approval according to a
profile set up by the library and vendor. Libraries can return items, but it
is important to the vendor that these returns be kept low, so profiles are
generally revised to the point that few items are returned.
• McNaughton plans are heavily used by public libraries. These are rental
or lease systems for popular works that a public library will need multiple
copies of in order to meet the anticipated demand.
• Standing orders and blanket orders are similar in that, in both cases, the
library commits to purchasing everything sent by a publisher or vendor,
provided the materials match the terms of a formal agreement. A standing
order is generally placed for a series, while a blanket order is placed with
a particular publisher for a subject field, a grade level, or a particular
country’s publications.

Serials

Scientific journals began in the seventeenth century to disseminate research among mem-
bers of a few scientific societies and, needless to say, this process grew and grew until
scholarly journals are now a large percentage of the budget of most academic and research
libraries. In a broader sense, the term serials covers scholarly journals, popular magazines,
newspapers, conference proceedings, annual publications, and anything published in
a series, including some government documents. They may exist in print, electronic, or
even multimedia formats. Serials may be published on a regular basis, be it daily, weekly,
biweekly, monthly, quarterly, yearly, or even biennially. Much to the professional catalog-
er’s (and library shelvers’) dismay, serials can also be and often are published on an irregular
basis; they can merge and split and change titles, sometimes only occasionally or seemingly
80 / CH AP T ER 5

on a yearly basis. It takes a special person to love working with serials, and the fact that such
professionals fortunately exist does nothing to obviate the censure due to serials publishers
for their haphazard ways.
A crisis arose in the serials field beginning in the 1970s owing to the skyrocketing cost of
subscriptions for them, and this crisis continues and has grown worse today. Year after year,
the prices of scholarly journals, and especially those in the fields of the sciences, technology,
and medicine, have grown exponentially, requiring a larger and larger percentage of library
resources budgets. In the late 1970s, libraries began trying to cut the cost of their serial sub-
scriptions in order to preserve a reasonable percentage of the acquisition budget for book
purchases. In the 1990s and continuing today, the pressure to lease more and more elec-
tronic serials and databases has likewise put pressure on the resources budgets for nearly all
types of libraries (figure 5.2). Some journals are available in print and electronic form with
different pricing schemes, but other electronic journals are free, with a paid subscription
to the print version. Sometimes there is a relatively small supplemental cost to have both
the electronic and print versions. No generalizations can be made, and getting the best deal
for the money has never been more necessary for acquisitions librarians who are seeking to
create a balance between electronic, multimedia, and print resources.
One of the remaining issues surrounding electronic serials is who will maintain per-
petual archives, so that back copies of the journal will always be available. Some serial
publishers promise this, but in today’s world of mergers and consolidations, whether these
agreements will mean anything in the future remains to be seen. Research and academic
libraries are looking for long-term solutions to the crisis in scholarly publishing in several
ways. JSTOR and SPARC are just two of them.

JSTOR

JSTOR is a project that was initiated by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to provide aca-
demic libraries with back runs of important journals in electronic form. It combines both
academic and economic objectives. The academic objective is to build a reliable archive of
important scholarly journals and provide widespread access to them. The economic objec-
tive is to save libraries money and shelf space by eliminating the need for every library to
store and preserve materials.
The JSTOR collections are organized by discipline—economics, history, philosophy, and
so on. The first phase involved 100 journals from 15 fields. For each journal, the collection
usually consists of all issues from the first up to about five years before the current date.
JSTOR was established in 1995 as an independent, not-for-profit organization. Librar-
ies are charged to access its database, but the fees are set lower than the comparable cost of
binding and storing paper copies of the journals. JSTOR has straightforward licenses with
publishers and subscribing institutions. By emphasizing back runs, JSTOR strives to avoid
competing with publishers, whose principal revenues come from current subscriptions
rather than back numbers.

SPARC

The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) was founded in 1998
as a direct result of discussions involving the future of scholarly publishing. Libraries had,
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 81

MODEL CATEGORY EXAMPLE

FTE Approximate use $3,000 for schools under 5,000 FTEs

Book budget Approximate use $3,000 for schools below $100,000 book budget
Simultaneous users Approximate use $1,495 for four simultaneous users
Number of documents Approximate use $20 per document
Number of abstracts Approximate use $0.20 per abstract
Number of downloads Approximate use $1.00 per record downloaded; view for free
Number of views Approximate use $0.50 per view
Number of faculty Approximate use $100 per faculty member
Personal copy price Approximate use $100 for individual copy
Usage last year Approximate use Pay fixed amount now, next year’s price based
on use
Institution type Approximate use Public library, high school, ARL, community
college prices
Price per computer Approximate use $3 per computer
LAN price Approximate use $500 price for a LAN
WAN price Approximate use $1,000 price for a WAN
Unlimited site license Approximate use $7,000 unlimited use within defined site
Purchasing paper copy Discount 20% off for purchasing paper and electronic
Purchasing web copy Discount 90% off for purchasing CD and web
Multiyear discount Discount 5% off for purchasing 2 years
Multisite discount Discount 5% off for multisite purchases
Multicopy discount Discount 5% off for purchasing multiple copies of same
product
Prepub discount Discount 5% off for buying before publication
Consortium discount Discount 20% off for 20 sites participating
Multiple database Discount 5% off for purchasing more than 10 products at
discount once
Early purchase incentive Discount 5% off if you purchase without a trial
Country discount Discount Developing country discount
Free Sponsored No charge
Remote usage surcharge Value added $500 to add a remote campus
Ownership surcharge Value added $15,000 for outright purchase of the data for a
site
Hard disc surcharge Value added $500 to download data onto a hard disc
Software maintenance fee Value added To ensure technical support and software
updates
Update frequency Value added 4 updates yearly for $1,000; 12 updates $2,000

FIGURE 5.2 Representative pricing samples for electronic serials

NOTE: ARL = Association of Research Libraries; FTE = full-time equivalent; LAN = local-area network; WAN = wide-area network.
82 / CH AP T ER 5

as noted earlier, experienced huge increases in journal costs, particularly in the sciences,
technology, and medicine. At the same time, libraries were experiencing flat or declining
budgets. In order to limit their expenditures in the face of skyrocketing costs for journal
subscriptions, libraries responded with yet another round of serials cancellations. “Both the
high prices and steep annual increases have forced libraries to cancel thousands of journal
subscriptions, prompting publishers to raise prices higher to make up the loss” (“SPARC
and Chemists” 1998, 1).
SPARC was formed to work with scholarly societies and scholars to create new journals
that could be sold for less money while still maintaining high-quality input, in direct com-
petition with established commercial publications. These journals are frequently priced at
least 50 percent below their commercial counterparts and are sometimes essentially free.
SPARC is also working with academic societies that have in the past twenty years or so
given up the publishing aspect of their journals to big commercial publishers, in an effort
to take back their publications and then charge lower costs to subscribers. (Of course, some
of these societies have been living off the royalties earned from the commercial publishers,
making this a difficult decision for many.)

Government Publications

Government publications come in all the formats previously discussed, but there are signif-
icant differences in the acquisition process. The challenges of selecting government docu-
ments are similar to those of selecting other types of materials, but obtaining publications
from government offices does offer special problems for acquisition or document librari-
ans. A large percentage of the material published throughout the world comes from local,
state or provincial, national, and international agencies and governments. These issuing
bodies may change or regroup with no notice and little record. Their publications vanish
or reappear with new titles and frequencies, making acquisition as much a matter of luck
as the application of specialized training, experience, and diligence. Historically, the most
effective method for the acquisition of state and local documents has been through direct
agency contact, and the usual method of acquisition of U.S. federal documents has been
either through the Federal Depository System or the Government Printing Office. Cur-
rently, more and more government documents are being made available only on the Web.

Library Consortia

Consortia are groups of libraries that come together to cooperate or act jointly for various
purposes. They can be large, such as OCLC and its regional networks SOLINET or AMIGOS,
or they can be more localized consortia covering parts of states, such as TBLC and SEFLIN
in Florida. The purchasing power of library consortia should not be ignored. Early consortia
were based on cooperative collection development and then cataloging, but now library
consortia are also acting as middlemen in purchasing electronic resources. Consortia are
often able to get lower prices on large packages of resources than individual libraries can in
negotiating licenses on their own. In contrast to smaller libraries, consortium staffs have
more experience in negotiating license agreements and are thus able to get the kinds of con-
cessions needed for resource-sharing that saves them a great deal of money. Larger libraries
will probably have staff members that deal with licensing agreements, but the impact of a
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 83

large number of libraries negotiating as one entity may allow them to get a better deal than
negotiating alone.

OUT-OF-PRINT PURCHASING

All libraries may find themselves needing to purchase a title that is no longer in print. Even
classic titles that no library should be without can be out of print or sometimes out of stock
indefinitely, meaning that the publisher does not want to declare the title out of print but
has no more copies to sell at present. Thus, the acquisitions librarian is sent into the sec-
ondhand or even the antiquarian book market. The library may need to replace a lost or
mutilated item, or a new area of interest may evolve where both current and older titles are
needed for the collection. Academic librarians may need to serve a new academic program
and thus need to collect titles that are not currently on the market. And, of course, special
collections librarians mostly work in this environment.
Acquiring out-of-print materials is labor-intensive and often expensive, but it is a very
worthwhile endeavor to keep older titles available to users. A user may go down to the local
bookstore and buy a new best seller, but an out-of-print book will lead them to the library. It
is really too early to tell whether e-books will have a major impact on keeping titles available
longer, but it is possible that at some point in the near future, e-books may make getting and
replacing older titles easier.
Another way that new digital technologies are helping in acquiring formerly out-of-
print titles is through print-on-demand publishing. In this process, titles are scanned onto
a disc and are printed on demand when they are requested. Random House has been a lead-
er with its “backlist extension plan,” which is essentially on-demand publishing. Academic
librarians have been acquiring dissertations in this manner for a long time. However, the
process is less expensive and quicker with new technologies, making it likely that more
publishers will use it in the near future.
The University of Michigan’s Undergraduate Library in Ann Arbor now provides books
on demand in a library setting; it was the first university library to install an Espresso Book
Machine, which produces perfectly bound, high-quality paperback books on demand, in
this case out-of-copyright books from the university’s digitized collections. The books are
available to researchers, students, and the public at a cost of about $10 each.
Before going into the out-of-print market, the first step is to make sure that the book
is really out of print. It is not unheard of for a library vendor to report that a book is out of
print when it really is still available. There are a number of reasons why this may happen,
including the following:

• Academic titles that may be used as textbooks sometimes change

publishers, with the original publisher selling the rights to the title to
another publisher. An order from the vendor may result in an out-of-print
response because they may not refer the order to the new publisher.
• A title can be out of print from the publisher’s standpoint, but copies may
still be available from some vendors that stocked the title earlier and have
not sold all of their copies.
• Mistakes do happen, since publishers’ inventories are usually based on
ISBN or other standard numbers, and these can be transposed or otherwise
incorrectly keyed.
84 / CH AP T ER 5

Public libraries may want to consider carefully whether to buy out-of-print books, since
these will not come with the usual library discounts. The books are often used, and they
may be marked or otherwise show wear and tear. The book jackets are often in bad shape or
are missing altogether. Moreover, the search and purchase of out-of-print titles may not fit
neatly into a single year’s budget cycle.
The availability of out-of-print materials through Amazon.com, AbeBooks, and other
online sources has taken a lot of the guesswork out of a title search and may make the cost
more competitive and the purchasing process more timely for the library’s fiscal year. To
entirely forgo the out-of-print market can lead to serious gaps in the collection.

GIFTS AND EXCHANGES

Within the context of acquisitions and collection development as discussed in earlier chap-
ters in this book, the 800-pound gorilla in the room is always the ever-increasing costs of
materials and the funding problems those costs engender. Financial resources are always
limited, and thus those involved in the selection process are under pressure to make the
best possible choices and selections, or get the “most bang for the buck.” Sometimes, though,
acquisitions are not made through selection but are instead received from other sources.
This section looks at gifts and donations to the library.
Gifts can be a double-edged sword for collection development librarians. Accepting gifts
from library supporters can enrich a library’s collection by providing otherwise unattainable
resources, but if care is not taken in weeding out redundant, unnecessary, or improper mate-
rials, librarians run the risk of alienating their users, or even those who are inclined to bestow
such gifts on the library. You don’t have to contemplate gifts within the field of collection
development for very long to discover the conundrum they can present. The collection devel-
opment position can become a very critical one when gifts are involved because the librarian
must always respect the interface of the library with both its users and benefactors. At their
best, gifts can lead to the development of a special collection that can make the library’s name
a household word for scholars, and maybe even the public as a whole. This can be a laudable
goal for any library, but only a few libraries have been lucky enough to find themselves in this
position. You may think that all of the great special collections have been set up already, but
this is not necessarily the case. Suppose a famous writer grew up in your public library’s town,
remembers the library fondly, and wants his manuscripts, letters, and diaries to form the
basis of a special collection about his work and life. This can be a wonderful opportunity for a
library, but on the other hand, the best-intentioned gift may not always fulfill a library’s col-
lection development goals. For example, what library needs a donation of someone’s fifty-year
collection of National Geographic magazine when the library already has its own complete set?
What if many of the donated items have torn pages, squashed bugs, and coffee-ring stains?
How do libraries end up with these kinds of gifts? Often, gifts are bestowed following
the death of a family member who once treasured these items, and the person’s heirs think
the library is the perfect recipient for them. In other cases, certain well-off individuals want
to see their materials cataloged and protected for future generations to enjoy. These sorts of
situations can be tricky for the library because such donors may have other materials that
the library would love to have, but that aren’t presently featured on the donor’s gift list. Col-
lection development librarians must keep in mind that for the common in-kind donation,
it is important to express clearly to the donor that, although gifts are welcome, not all gifts
can be added to the library’s catalog.
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 85

So when you are faced with a gift that doesn’t meet your library’s collection devel-
opment goals, you will need to consider a few alternatives before throwing the gift in the
dumpster if good relations with donors are to be maintained. One such alternative is a
Friends of the Library used-book sale. Donors may welcome the knowledge that the library
might still realize a benefit from their donation through sale of the materials, and the li-
brary can use the money to buy items that it desperately needs. An added benefit is that
the work in question may find a home with a new owner who will value it as much as the
previous owner did.
Wilkinson and Lewis present an excellent philosophy for a library to adopt in accept-
ing gifts:

Libraries need clear policies describing the types of materials they will and will not
accept. Larger libraries may have collection development policies that describe the col-
lection priorities of the institution, and these are helpful to gifts personnel who deal
with donors. Developing descriptions of the types of materials that are not wanted is
equally important, if not more so, than describing the subject areas in which the library
collects materials. For example, some libraries will not accept recent newspapers, pop-
ular magazines, paperback fiction, or textbooks, while other libraries want those types
of materials. (Wilkinson and Lewis 2003, 178)

In general, libraries normally add to their collections only a small percentage of the materi-
als given to them, which means that they can and do have large numbers of items to dispose
of in some manner, and they can’t all wait for the annual book sale. First, consider whether
these sorts of materials may be given to other libraries, either for their collections or to
be sold at their Friends’ book sales. Recycling gift materials is another possibility, though
this may not necessarily be the best option with a donor’s family collection, for instance.
Recycling books also poses some practical problems, such as the need to remove bindings
or glossy paper that are unacceptable to the recycling agent. A good alternative for many
libraries is to establish an arrangement with a used-book dealer whereby the dealer buys
items the library does not want at a fixed price per volume (or pound). Increasingly, libraries
are even offering some of their more interesting but unwanted materials on Amazon.com,
CraigsList, and eBay to bring funds into the library that can then be used for new materials.

Responsibility for Handling Gifts

The responsibility for handling gifts usually resides, naturally enough, in the library’s acqui-
sitions department. Sometimes in a small library setting, however, the director is the public
face of the library, and so she will undertake this responsibility, at least for the initial accep-
tance of gifts, passing them on to acquisitions or collection development for final decisions
as to the dispensation of items—keep, sell, give away, and so on. When performing this sort
of triage for donations that duplicate library holdings, and if time permits, check to see
which copy of a title is in better physical condition—the gift item or the book currently on
the shelf—and keep the best one.
Many acceptance policies depend on the size of the library and the amount of dona-
tions that they are likely to receive from donors over a given period of time. In a research
institution, there will probably be a librarian whose responsibilities include the active so-
licitation of gifts. Part of this person’s job is to know the kinds of collections that exist in
86 / CH AP T ER 5

libraries in the local area, as well as throughout the state and the nation, so that accepted
items which are not necessarily appropriate to the receiving library can be given a “good
home” elsewhere.
More importantly, this person’s responsibility is to cultivate relationships with those
persons who will make decisions about the placement of their potential gift items. Estab-
lishing such contacts can be difficult, but narrowing your objectives to those potential do-
nors with some ties to your institution, those who have already offered donations, or those
who live in the area and utilize the library’s services will boost the possibilities of success.
The successful negotiation of a large or important gift may also require the involvement of
higher administration. Obtaining useful gifts for the collection is not, however, an impossi-
ble task. College & Research Libraries News features a column in each issue about important
donations received by university and research libraries. Keep in mind, however, that suc-
cessful solicitation of the types of gifts featured in this column generally requires coordinat-
ed work among various members of an institution’s staff.

Before Accepting and Adding Materials to the Collection

In addition to determining whether the materials proposed for donation are appropriate for
your collection, the physical condition of the materials must be assessed. Gifts can bring mold
and mildew or even insect and small rodent infestations into the library. Unless questionable
materials are perceived as obviously valuable owing to their age, provenance, or rarity, it is
better to err on the side of caution. Always ask about where the items have been stored.
Books that have been stored in an attic or basement are candidates for mold, mildew, and
infestation. Mold can be a serious problem for paper-based and even microfilm collections be-
cause, given a warm and humid environment, just a small amount of mold can build up quick-
ly. In addition to having to wipe each book to remove the mold, staff with allergy problems
may also become ill. A gift of medical periodicals from a lab may bring with it droppings from
white mice used in experiments, which can wreak havoc on the collection, not to mention
the nerves of staff members. The most likely problem, though, is insect infestation because
insects will often hitch a ride in or on the boxes containing gifts. This is how cockroaches,
silverfish, and larder beetle larvae (the proverbial bookworm) typically get into a library, and
they can eat their way through any collection. Cockroaches seem to target the glue used in
bindings, and book lice will eat the starch and gelatin sizing on paper. The problem is not just
the initial damage, but also the potential damage of these insects’ progeny.
So, if the library receives a lot of gifts, it is best to have a separate room to store the
materials initially, away from the general collection, in order to minimize potential damage
arising from infestations in the donated materials or the containers they arrive in. Although
good remedies exist for all of the aforementioned problems, getting rid of mold and insects
is always harder than examining the acquired items thoroughly before introducing them to
areas where the general collection materials are located (which includes the acquisition and
cataloging areas, as well as the stacks and reading rooms).

Beware of Gifts with Strings Attached

Although donations can be useful to libraries in many ways, as indicated earlier, some
donors aren’t content with simply giving materials to a library; they may also try to place
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 87

burdensome restrictions on their gifts, such as requiring that the items be housed in a par-
ticular collection or in certain prominent locations. Some may even want the books back
if they are ultimately judged to be inappropriate for the collection (Kertesz 2001). As Mor-
risey explains:

Just keep to the motto that what you do for one donor you should do for all. Most librar-
ies will not accept every book unless it fits with the collection development profile of
the library. Stipulations that donors want can’t be abided by unless there are separate
funds to help with the set up of a special collection. Your collection development policy
should address these issues. (Morrisey 2008)

Other times, the donor may simply want a bookplate put in the materials indicating their
gift or in memory of a loved one who may have been the original owner of the materials.
This kind of stipulation is not so difficult to deal with, and is often accommodated by the
library as an effective “marketing” tool to encourage other gifts and donations in kind.

Legal Issues Involving Gifts

A more complete discussion of general legal issues involved with collection development
and acquisition can be found in chapter 9; however, a review of those issues relating specif-
ically to gifts warrants inclusion here.

Tax Matters: Appraisals of Gifts

Donors to college and university, school and public, and nonprofit libraries designated by
the Internal Revenue Service can claim a deduction for the value of their gifts on federal
income tax returns (subject to certain limits depending generally on the income of the
donor). If the donation is valued at more than $250, the library’s written acknowledgment
of the gift must be provided. The monetary value of the gift is the key to the amount of
the tax deduction available to a donor, and the valuation must be provided by an outside
agency, not the library; thus, usually the library will often not know how much the donor
may be claiming. The library should provide in all cases a written acknowledgment describ-
ing the items given if the donor wishes one. If a donor wishes an appraisal of the value of
the gift, the library should, at most, provide a list of people who are qualified to perform an
evaluation, but there must be no relation between the library and the appraiser.

Copyright Issues with Manuscripts, Letters,

and Works Published by the Donor

Copyright issues with unpublished materials can be problematic for libraries. When nego-
tiating with the donors of such materials, it is critical to determine who in fact holds the
copyright to the materials. For example, the copyright of a letter resides with its author,
not the person who received the letter and may be donating it to the library. In the case of
a donation of letters and manuscripts after the death of the author, the author’s estate or a
relative may now hold the copyright. In this situation, a written document that describes
88 / CH AP T ER 5

what can and cannot be done with the materials becomes most important. It should cover
such questions as these:

• May future authors quote from the materials?

• May a user of the library publish a single or several letters as a part of a
biographical work?
• If the materials contain photographs, can a user of the collection reproduce
one or more photographs as a part of a work being written for publication?

The library needs answers to these questions, and perhaps others, depending on the nature
of the items being donated, so that it can inform users as to how the donated collection may
be used, and can direct users to the proper source to obtain permission for a specific use.
Libraries should prefer to receive a grant of the copyright when they receive such materials,
but this may or may not be possible for all donations of unpublished materials that they
may want to add to their special collections.

Exchange Programs

Exchange programs among libraries can involve either unwanted older materials or the
exchange of new materials. Public libraries may have arrangements with libraries in
poorer areas to provide duplicates or other unwanted materials to them at little or no
cost. Research libraries are the ones most often involved in the exchange of new materi-
als, and they may especially be involved in exchange programs involving hard-to-obtain
international publications and serials. In the case of academic libraries, the library or
its university may have serials titles published by the university that can be offered to
other libraries in return for similar publications from their organizations or countries.
These programs are often used to obtain materials from less-developed countries where
it is sometimes difficult to order or even know about the existence of such publications.
Wilkinson and Lewis (2003) mention that often exchange programs can be part of a pub-
lic relations effort to get a university’s scholars’ materials out to a wider audience or to
improve the university’s public image.
The items received in the course of exchange programs are often treated as gifts because
they need to be examined to see if they belong in the collection, and to determine whether
there are signs of mold or insect manifestations before adding them to the collection.

A WORD ON FORMATS

Obviously, a work cannot be purchased in a format in which it is not made available, but
with the advent of electronic materials, there are often new choices to consider now. In
addition to the print versus electronic decision, there are other formats that the library
may need:

Many publishers roll out a title’s various formats over a period of time. Titles expected
to sell well were traditionally only available as hardcover for their first year of publi-
cation. Still, the ubiquity of ebooks—which are generally released simultaneously with
a book’s first printing—has shortened the publishing cycle, since the release of both
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 89

major formats leaves paperbacks with fewer takers. Paperbacks are now issued earli-
er, sometimes only six months after the hardcover. Large print is issued three to four
months after the first publication either from the original publisher or a press special-
izing in the format. Also, as publishing budgets shrink, more books are being released as
trade paperbacks only. (Peet 2015, 34)

In addition to the formats mentioned above, there are various forms of media in which
books may be published; for example, audiobooks may be published in CD or MP3 formats
or other formats, including cassette tape. When audiobooks become available is hard to
predict because they may be published simultaneously with the initial release, or a few days
later, or weeks or months later, or not at all.
Sometimes materials are originally published only in electronic form, but often they
become available both as print books or print serials and in electronic form. The decision
on format may mean the difference between the library’s owning the work (print) versus
leasing the work (electronic) and agreements that often involve contract restrictions. Some
libraries have policies to the effect that the library will purchase electronic over print or
vice versa. Some (with better budgets) may allow the purchase of both formats. Format de-
cisions are policy decisions that must be made by the director and/or librarians. This type
of policy should be included in the collection development policy.

SUMMARY

This chapter has only scratched the surface of acquisitions processes and concerns. Your
library and information studies program may have a separate acquisitions course, but if not,
it is hoped that this chapter at least gives the student some idea of the kind of work involved
in the acquisition of library materials.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Suppose that you have been using a vendor (books or serials) that is no
longer in business; how would you go about selecting a new vendor? What
features or services would be the most important to you in making that
decision?
2. Some library administrators argue that acquisitions is basically a business
process and someone with an undergraduate business-related degree can do
the job better and cost the library less in salary than hiring a professional
librarian. Do you agree or disagree? Why? Why not?
3. Someone at the circulation desk refers a potential book donor to you in
your role as the head of acquisitions. After a brief discussion, you realize
that this might be a gift of manuscripts worth over a million dollars, but
the materials do not initially strike you as ones that fit the library’s current
collection development plan. How do you proceed?
4. Your local community is known for being very generous to your library with
its donations of both money and materials. The only problem is that a large
number of the gifts are not deemed useful enough to add to the library’s
collection. How do you deal with the donations?
90 / CH AP T ER 5

5. If your library and information studies program does not have one,
would you like to see a course in acquisitions, separate from collection
development? Do you feel that there are enough professional skills to be
learned in this area to justify a separate course?

REFERENCES

Caminita, Christina. 2014. “E-Books and Patron-Driven Acquisitions in Academic Libraries.” In Customer-
Based Collection Development: An Overview, edited by Karl Bridges, 1–12. Chicago: American Library
Association.
Kertesz, Christopher J. 2001. “The Unwanted Gift: When Saying ‘No Thanks’ Isn’t Enough.” American
Libraries 32 (March): 34–36.
Melcher, Daniel, with Margaret Saul. 1971. Melcher on Acquisition. Chicago: American Library Association.
Morrisey, Locke J. 2008. “Ethical Issues in Collection Development.” Journal of Library Administration 47,
no. 3/4: 163–71.
Nardini, Robert F. 2003. “Approval Plans.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, 133–38. New
York: Marcel Dekker.
Peet, Lisa. 2015. “Format Follows Function: Inside the Complexity of Selection Decisions.” Library Journal
140 (January 1): 34–37.
Schaffner, Bradley L. 2001. “Electronic Resources: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing?” College & Research Libraries
62 (June): 239–49.
“SPARC and Chemists to Collaborate on New Reduced-Cost Journals.” 1998. ARL: A Bimonthly Review 199:
1–2.
Wilkinson, Frances C., and Linda K. Lewis. 2003. The Complete Guide to Acquisitions Management.
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Willinsky, John. 2006. The Access Principle: The Case for Open Access to Research and Scholarship. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.

SELECTED READINGS

Abel, Richard. 1995. “The Origins of the Library Approval Plan.” Publishing Research Quarterly 11 (spring):
46–56.
Ballestro, John, and Philip C. Howze. 2005. “When a Gift Is Not a Gift: Collection Assessment Using Cost-
Benefit Analysis.” Collection Management 30, no. 3: 49–66.
Bostic, Mary. 1991. “Gifts to Libraries: Coping Effectively.” Collection Management 14, nos. 3/4: 175–84.
Bridges, Karl, ed. 2014. Customer-Based Collection Development: An Overview. Chicago: American Library
Association.
Cassell, Kay Ann. 2008. Gifts for the Collection: Guidelines for the Library. The Hague: International
Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.
Chadwell, Faye A. 2010. “Good Gifts Stewardship.” Collection Management 35 (April-June): 59–68.
Dali, Keren, and Juris Dilevko. 2005. “Beyond Approval Plans: Methods of Selection and Acquisition of
Books in Slavic and East European Languages in North American Libraries.” Library Collections,
Acquisitions and Technical Services 29, no. 3: 238–69.
Eaglen, Audrey. 2000. Buying Books: A How-to-Do-It Manual for Librarians. 2nd ed. New York: Neal-
Schuman.
 AC Q U ISI TIO N S / 91

Farrell, Katherine Treptow, and Janet E. Lute. 2005. “Document-Management Technology and Acquisitions
Workflow: A Case Study in Invoice Processing.” Information Technology and Libraries 24 (September):
117–22.
Fowler, David, and Janet Arcand. 2003. “Monographic Acquisitions Time and Cost Studies: The Next
Generation.” Library Resources & Technical Services 47 (July): 109–24.
Gagnon, Ronald A. 2006. “Library Vendor Relations from a Public Library Perspective.” Journal of Library
Administration 44, nos. 3/4: 95–111.
Heller, Anne. 1999. “Online Ordering: Making Its Mark.” Library Journal 124 (September 1): 153–58.
Hellriegel, Patricia, and Kaat Van Wonterghem. 2007. “Package Deals Unwrapped . . . or the Librarian
Wrapped Up? ‘Forced Acquisitions’ in the Digital Library.” Interlending and Document Supply 35, no. 2:
66–73.
Hill, Dale S. 2003. “Selling Withdrawn and Gift Books on eBay: Does It Make Sense?” Journal of Interlibrary
Loan, Document Delivery & Information Supply 14, no. 2: 37–40.
Holley, Robert P., and Kalyani Ankem. 2005. “The Effect of the Internet on the Out-of-Print Book Market:
Implications for Libraries.” Library Collections, Acquisitions and Technical Services 29, no. 2: 118–39.
Kulp, Christina, and Karen Rupp-Serrano. 2005. “Organizational Approaches to Electronic Resource
Acquisition: Decision-Making Models in Libraries.” Collection Management 30, no. 4: 3–29.
Lam, Helen. 2004. “Library Acquisitions Management: Methods to Enhance Vendor Assessment and
Library Performance.” Library Administration and Management 18 (summer): 146–54.
Leonhardt, Thomas W. 1997. “The Gift and Exchange Function in ARL Libraries: Now and Tomorrow.”
Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory 21: 141–49.
———. 1999. “A Survey of Gifts and Exchange Activities in 85 Non-ARL Libraries.” Acquisitions Librarian 22:
51–58.
Prabha, Chandra. 2007. “Shifting from Print to Electronic Journals in ARL Libraries.” Serials Review 33, no.
1: 4–13.
Quinn, Brian. 2001. “The Impact of Aggregator Packages on Collection Management.” Collection
Management 25, no. 3: 53–74.
Roberts, Elizabeth Ann. 2008. Crash Course in Library Gift Programs: The Reluctant Curator’s Guide to
Caring for Archives, Books, and Artifacts in a Library Setting. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
 CHAPTER 6

Budgeting and
Fiscal Management

OVERVIEW

In this chapter we will look at some of the budgeting and fiscal issues involved with library
acquisitions, including the allocation of funds. This chapter also has a section dealing with
bookkeeping and basic accounting terms and procedures. Although most acquisitions
departments in larger libraries will have a bookkeeper or financial controller, it is import-
ant for librarians concerned with collection development to understand the terminology
well enough to be able to read and understand a basic financial spreadsheet and statements.
Being too dependent upon the bookkeeper or other authority to interpret fiscal information
can lead to a multitude of problems and potentially troublesome misinterpretations; a basic
understanding of just the terminology alone will go a long way to helping the acquisitions
librarian or supervisor feel more comfortable with budgeting and accounting for library
funds.
Since most libraries will use some type of public funds in their operations, there is
a great responsibility placed on those selecting and ordering materials to stay within the
budget and to spend the money in the way that their library’s users expect. Depending on
the rules of the institution for which the selector is working, there may or may not be an
easy way to switch funds from one category or another. If category-switching is difficult or
impossible, the budget planning process becomes critical in order to allocate funds with
maximum effectiveness. The flip side of this is that the librarian does not want to leave any
money unspent at the end of the year, unless the institution allows money to be carried for-
ward to the next year, which circumstance is frankly unusual. In many cases, the amount of
unspent money this year will not appear in next year’s budget on the presumption that the
library did not need it enough to spend it in the past year. This is often truly unfair, since
many unforeseen occurrences and circumstances can cause money to be unspent, such as
last-minute cancellations by the publisher.
Since the annual operating budget is the major financial planning document of a li-
brary, the annual resource budget is the plan for the acquisition of all library resources.

Financial planning . . . takes a great deal of care. There must be clear justifications as
a defense against those who see their own expectations deferred. One budget action
might, for example, be the establishment of a postal fund to cover deliveries of mate-
rials borrowed through a cooperative, or funds to cover the photocopying of articles
from cancelled journals. All such adaptations must be planned as proper extensions
of collection development rather than simply being allowed to happen. Coping with

/ 93 /
94 / CH AP T ER 6

change is always traumatic, and the immediate needs tend to overshadow longer-term
considerations. Thinking through the consequences of each action will help to mini-
mize later problems, and ensure that the library continues to provide the best possible
service consonant with the available budget. (Martin 1995, 44–45)

As we have noted, today’s typical library budget is concerned not only with the purchase
of books, serials, and other print materials, but also with access to electronic materials,
cooperative resource-sharing, and direct document delivery. Issues involving nontradi-
tional assets often devolve into debates of access versus ownership. Switching or evolving
away from the traditional mission of acquiring ownership of physical materials to a primary
concern with information access requires a comprehensive approach, including the review
and redevelopment of the library’s mission and goals statements, and therefore a collec-
tion development policy that accurately reflects those statements and specifies the ways in
which the collection’s evolution is to be handled.
First, there is a need to define properly just what new or expanded services, such as
on-demand document delivery, will in fact mean in the future for the library’s users, and
how these new forms of access will be implemented and funded. For instance, if you plan to
rely on access as opposed to ownership of certain materials, this implies that those materi-
als may be owned by another library. With regard to physical materials, it is axiomatic that
all libraries cannot rely exclusively on access—some library somewhere does need to be the
owner and to maintain the materials. Such a library cannot be expected to be one whose pa-
trons have so little use for the materials that sharing them is not problematic. Cooperative
resource-sharing efforts need planning and careful implementation—and to succeed they
require supportive budgeting.
As indicated earlier, librarians must consider the overall effect of relying on external
services to supply needed materials, and they must decide whether such a move is sufficient-
ly consistent with the library’s priorities. Access, of course, can mean merely access to bib-
liographic records, in which case further action remains necessary to retrieve the wanted ma-
terials and is likely to result in the incurrence of further costs. It can also mean direct access
to the materials themselves, traditionally through physical interlibrary loan, and today most
likely in an electronic format (which itself may be costly and may even require purchase of
the print version before electronic access is available). The paperless future aside, electronic
formats usually indicate a need to print or download the information for use. Access can also
mean the ability to utilize the resources of other libraries, whether by way of a shared library
card for borrowing or simply through permitted use in the other library.

ACCOUNTABILITY

The postwar economic boom of the 1950s and 1960s can be seen today as the halcyon years
for collection development. Difficult though it may be to believe in the current climate of
fiscal austerity, back then it often seemed that librarians could not spend money on mate-
rials fast enough to keep up with the flow of funds. Those days, of course, are long gone
and are likely never to return. Since the late 1970s, with the widespread recognition of the
limits to growth and the imposition of both budgetary and tax limitations, libraries’ fis-
cal accountability to the governmental bodies that fund them has become more important
than ever before. Today, librarians may not assume and must be able to prove that they are
using taxpayer or organizational monies in the wisest manner possible.
 BU DG E TI N G AN D FI S CAL MAN AG E M E N T / 95

Accountability is a broad concept and does not simply mean setting up a budget that
adequately reflects institutional goals and objectives (although this is important), but also
the continuous monitoring of the budget and purchasing activities to see that the library’s
goals and objectives are actually being met. Too often, this process does not run smoothly or
according to plan; there may be midyear budget cuts or pro-rations, institutional spending
freezes on purchasing, or even the release of newly added funds near the end of the fiscal
year; the latter sometimes require a prompt expenditure before they are lost for the year.
All of this mandates that the budget itself, and the process by which it can be changed, be
appropriately flexible and able to deal with all sorts of issues on typically short notice.

FISCAL YEAR

Many public institutions, such as public libraries and public colleges and universities, oper-
ate on a fiscal year and not the calendar year. Generally, this means that the budget runs
from July 1 to June 30 of the following year, though a fiscal year running from October 1 to
September 30 is also popular. In most cases, the budget planning process for public colleges
and universities, since their funds come from state legislatures, is undertaken a year in
advance, so that a proposed budget is presented to the legislature as soon as the next session
convenes, even though the budget may not pass until the closing minutes of the session
months later. To a new librarian, this process can be bewildering, but having a mentor who
is experienced in the process, if even for a different institution in your state, can be very
helpful.

TYPES OF BUDGETS

A budget is most simply defined as a plan for the expenditure of funds over the period of
time those funds are anticipated to be available. Most libraries have a parent organiza-
tion, whether it is a governing board or board of trustees, a governmental entity (often
with divided executive and legislative functions), or some other entity, that either exercises
direct control or has significant influence on budgetary matters. The parent organization
may also be responsible for entities other than the library and may therefore develop a
number of different budgets with various procedures. The type of budget used by the par-
ent entity must necessarily have a direct effect on how the library develops and uses its
resources budget.
The budgets for libraries typically fall into one of four general categories: (1) an object
of expenditure or line-item budget, (2) a lump-sum budget, (3) a program budget, or (4) a
formula budget (which is particularly the province of many academic libraries). A short
summary of each type of budget in the library context may be useful.
A line-item budget is just what its name implies; it is essentially a listing of objects of
expenditure with dollar amounts on each line, which add up to the total amount of money
that is available for expenditure. Some line-item budgets are rather broad in terms of cate-
gories for the lines, while others are much more detailed. The process for a line-item budget
is usually incremental, with each line changing from year to year (or other budget period) by
amounts based upon the examination of changes in particular data or criteria from one year
to the next, as opposed to establishing a linkage between the budget amounts and stated
objectives or long-range plans. When broad categories are used, the overall budget that the
96 / CH AP T ER 6

library receives may have, for example, a designated resource budget but with few fixed cat-
egories, thereby allowing the library professionals to break down the budget lines according
to internal criteria or schemes they may have developed, for example, between adult and
children’s materials, nonfiction and fiction, books and serials, electronic resources, and so
on. This broad line approach is obviously best from the library’s perspective. Where the
lines are more specific, concerns quickly arise in determining whether funds can be moved
from one line item to another, without running afoul of either legal or institutional rules
and practices.
A lump-sum budget is also a fairly clear-cut device that usually provides for the allo-
cation of a specified amount of money to an organization or entity as a whole. Lump-sum
budgeting allows administrators maximum flexibility in expenditures, but it obviously pro-
vides very limited built-in accountability to the parent organization. Library directors may
elect to similarly pass on lump sums to the library resource budget and other budgets or, to
better address the accountability problem, may convert the overall amounts into internal
line-item budgets for each department.
A program budget is intended to take into account the actual cost of undertaking the
purposes of the budget. Often such budgets try to force a continuous link between the
planning of activities and the budgeting for them, and thus relate organizational objectives
more directly to the expenditures necessary to meet those objectives. This type of budget
approach can be described as non-incremental, and it often makes use of the zero-sum or
zero-based budgeting approach, meaning that financial considerations are returned to the
first dollar or zero amount rather than using the previous year’s expenditures and alloca-
tions as starting points.
A formula (or formula-driven) budget is a method of allocating available resources on the
basis of objective quantitative criteria, based either on history or formulaic projections. It
has obvious appeal to the scientist and is the type most likely to be found in higher education
contexts, and therefore is often used in the resource budgets of university and college librar-
ies. Budget formulas vary greatly in their complexity, and can range from relatively simple
allocations of a certain percentage of available monies per student credit hour, to the division
of earmarked funds based on complex mathematical formulas. However they are comput-
ed, at least in the higher education arena, most formula budgets can be seen as essentially
enrollment-driven. Many academic libraries use formulas based on the relative numbers of
undergraduates and graduate students, the absolute number of faculty, the subject areas of
emphasis at the institution, the presence and number of doctoral degree programs, and so on.
Formula budgets have the look and feel of greater objectivity, especially when compared to
seemingly arbitrary lump-sum budgets, but it is in the setting-up of the formula and its deter-
mining criteria that external factors such as politics can come into play.
For instance, in a state appropriations context, if doctoral programs are heavily favored
in the formula (i.e., if their presence yields a higher overall appropriation, as they usually do),
then the result of the formula should be that the resource needs of doctoral degree-granting
departments receive more attention in the library resources budget than a department that
may have large numbers of undergraduates, but few or no graduate students.

BUDGET SCENARIOS

The first requirement in developing a resource budget is to define the programs involved.
The traditional library programs are set out below along with concerns for electronic media,
 BU DG E TI N G AN D FI S CAL MAN AG E M E N T / 97

document delivery, and interlibrary loan. The listing provides a framework for deciding
what kinds of materials should be purchased or accessed and how. The general empha-
sis here is on the ways that the library can acquire materials, but the same principles are
involved whether the materials are acquired or merely accessed.

1. Direct purchase

° Publisher
° Dealer/jobber/vendor
2. Approval plans and blanket orders
3. Subscriptions

° Direct
° Vendor
4. Standing orders

° Publisher
° Vendor
5. Gifts and exchange

° Books
° Periodicals
6. Preservation

° Binding and mending

° Other preservation measures
7. Leasing and access (to include document delivery and interlibrary loan costs)
8. Replacements
9. Multiple copies

SETTING BUDGET PRIORITIES

As any library sets out to define (or redefine) its budget, it has to set some priorities. Although
these priorities extend across the total library budget, here we are most concerned with the
ones affecting library materials expenditures and their equivalents:

1. Basic needs

° Mission-related
° Primary community
° Ongoing
° One-time
2. Type of material

° Monographs
° Serials
98 / CH AP T ER 6

° Audiovisual and electronic products

° Government documents
° Microforms
° Electronic services
3. Special needs

° Research-related
° New programs
° Retrospective needs
° Replacements
4. Budgetary settings

° Steady-state budgets
° Decreasing budgets
° Increasing budgets
° Special funds

A budget is one of the most important planning documents that a library has. The budget
translates the organization’s mission and goals into dollar terms. To be able to effectively
budget for library materials, you must fully understand the political realities under which
your institution must function, plus any legal restraints on the expenditure of its funds.
Materials and personnel are the two largest portions of the library’s operating budget. To
be in charge of collection development and acquisitions means being responsible for the
expenditure of a large percentage of the overall library budget.

GATHERING INFORMATION FOR A LIBRARY MATERIALS

BUDGET REQUEST

The quest for information begins with what you already know. Existing records show where
you are now and give a preview of the future. Since you usually begin preparing a budget
request for the next year shortly after the beginning of the current fiscal year, the latest
complete records will be for the previous fiscal year (for a sample budget, see figure 6.1).
The current year may also provide information about any trends in orders or price changes.
In a sense, the budget request is prepared as part of a three-year cycle, and information is
often sought as to the library’s requirements for a further year beyond the one that will be
affected by the next budget. Trends and changes are therefore of vital importance when
looking into the future. We can extrapolate only from what we already know about the
near past and what is currently happening. Many vendors provide information about book
and serials prices and projected increases. Library Journal publishes such information about
serials every April.
The end result of the budgeting process seldom exactly matches any initial distribution
among categories. There are many reasons for such differences:

• Materials may not have been published either in the expected quantities or
by the expected times.
• Shipping, postal, or other strike action may have disrupted the normal flow
of supply.
 BU DG E TI N G AN D FI S CAL MAN AG E M E N T / 99

ELECTRONIC

% OF TOTAL
STANDING

SERIALS
BOOKS

ORDER

MEDIA

TOTAL
AREA

Adult
Reference 13,000 17,800 5,000 13,700 400 49,900 19.63
Nonfiction 44,200 0 0 0 2,600 46,800 18.41
Business 4,000 2,500 3,200 3,000 1,200 13,900 5.47
Careers 2,000 450 1,900 1,900 700 6,950 2.73

Serials 0 0 20,000 32,200 0 52,200 20.54

CDs/DVDs 0 0 0 0 11,000 11,000 4.33
General fiction 28,000* 0 0 2,000 0 30,000 11.80
Mystery 2,000* 0 0 400 0 2,400 0.94
Romance 1,200* 0 0 400 0 1,600 0.63
Paperbacks 2,000 0 0 0 0 2,000 0.79
McNaughton [6,500] 0 0 0 0 [6,500]

Large print 3,400 0 0 0 0 3,400 1.34

Subtotal 89,600 2,950 30,100 40,800 15,500 170,250 66.99
Young Adult
Nonfiction 3,100 0 500 0 0 3,600 1.42
Fiction 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000 2.36
CDs/DVDs 0 0 0 0 3,900 3,900 1.53
Subtotal 9,100 0 500 0 3,900 13,500 5.31
Children
Reference 2,200 0 1,100 1,800 0 5,100 2.01
Nonfiction 3,100 0 0 0 0 3,100 1.22
Fiction 5,000 0 0 0 0 5,000 1.97
Picture books 6,100 0 0 0 0 6,100 2.40
CDs/DVDs 0 0 0 0 1,200 1,200 0.47
Subtotal 16,400 0 1,100 1,800 1,200 20,500 8.07

GRAND TOTALS 128,100 20,750 63,900 20,400 21,000 254,150 100.00

% OF TOTAL 50.40 8.16 25.14 8.03 8.26 100.00

FIGURE 6.1 Typical public library materials budget ($)

*E-books are included in the book budget for each category of fiction and nonfiction to a maximum of 10% of that budget
category. If a library were using an e-books subscription or package service, e-books would no doubt be listed as a separate
budget category.
10 0 / CH AP T ER 6

• Prices may have increased more than allowed for in the original projection.
• Any price increases were probably unevenly distributed and have had
more impact on some areas than on others. In the budget in figure 6.1, an
increase in serials costs was offset somewhat by restricting the amount
spent on books.
• Unexpected vacancies or other work pressures may have reduced the
output of selectors.
• A special donation may have added to the workload and skewed the original
distribution.
• Unforeseen events may have increased the demand for replacements or
duplicate copies.
• Financial crises may have reduced or increased the original budget.

Substantial year-end encumbrances may exist for material requests processed late in
the year. (Encumbrances represent the cost of orders that have been placed but not yet
received.)

CONSORTIUM PURCHASES

All purchases may not be the sole responsibility of a particular library. More and more pur-
chases, especially of electronic resources, are being made through consortia. A study focused
on the OhioLINK consortium concludes:

By evolving from individual to group-based licensing we can dramatically expand the

information licensed per dollar spent and expand usage far above that possible through
individual library action. We can significantly reduce the annual rise in licensing costs
versus individual library action. These are good and necessary achievements that we
should not sell short nor fail to maximize. (Sanville 2008, 13)

However, it always behooves the librarians who are responsible for selection and retention
and those who oversee the budget to determine if the library is really getting what it needs
from consortium purchases. The library may be getting more resources for its dollars, but it
is still important to make sure that the library and its users are getting the right materials.
Thus, deciding when to join and leave “big deals” through a consortium is both an economic
and a collection management decision.

BOOKKEEPING TERMINOLOGY 101

It is now time to turn to the practical business of receiving and paying for shipments of
materials or for licenses to access materials. The first thing that happens is that you get an
invoice for materials either in the shipment or, for electronic materials and serials, through
the mail. Once the materials have been checked against the purchase, it is time to approve
the invoice for payment.
But what if something is missing? When the company is notified of the problem, they
may issue the library a credit memorandum in the amount of the missing item in order to
speed up payment of the invoice. The invoice might be for thousands of dollars, while the
 BU DG E TI N G AN D FI S CAL MAN AG E M E N T / 10 1

missing item costs only $10.00. Then, depending upon arrangements with the company, the
item is either reordered or sent later.
As the acquisitions librarian begins to handle this nitty-gritty end of the collection
development process, it might seem that morphing into a CPA would be advisable. This is
not true, but you do need to understand a little about the terminology and the methodology
underlying financial statements. The main thing to keep in mind is that what you need most
is to become comfortable with the vocabulary. Here are some terms that will typically be
encountered.

The Accounting Vocabulary of the Acquisitions Process

accountability budget categories lump-sum budget

accounts payable cash-basis accounting operating budget
accounts receivable contingency fund program budget
appropriation cost accounting purchase order
approval plan credit memorandum requisition
audit double-entry accounting standing order
blanket order encumbrance subscription
bookkeeping endowment funds voucher
budget line-item budget zero-based budgeting

An ordinary dictionary will see you through most of these terms, but it is important in the
context of encumbering and paying for acquisitions not to assume that you know what they
mean, so some research and reading is advisable. While it is beyond the scope of this work to
delve deeply into the intricacies and medieval origins of accounting, a little familiarity with
the double-entry bookkeeping system traditionally used by accountants may be helpful.
Double-entry accounting requires that each transaction be recorded in at least two ac-
counts, resulting in a debit to one or more accounts and an offsetting credit to one or more
accounts. This method provides for checking accuracy because the sum of all debits should
equal the sum of all credits. Modern personal finance software does not usually require dou-
ble-entry accounting, but often actually performs and simply hides it from the user, pre-
sumably to prevent confusion. But in large entities like universities, accounting systems are
clearly based on the double-entry system, and the librarian must be able to understand it
generally in order not to misapprehend, for example, the monies that are actually available.
Basically, accounting for money may be seen as an equation. When revenue equals ex-
penses, the following equation applies:

assets = liabilities + equity (the investment in the enterprise)

Of course, revenue does not usually exactly equal expenses. So, the accounting equation
becomes:
assets = liabilities + equity + (revenue − expenses)

In double-entry accounting, this equation must always be true, for any time period. Then
the accounts are said to be in balance. If the accounts are not in balance, you know an error
10 2 / CH AP T ER 6

has occurred. For accounts to remain in balance, a change in one account must be reflected
by a change in another account.
These changes are made by accounting entries, which are called debits and credits.
Whether one uses a debit or credit to increase or decrease an account depends on the ac-
count’s normal balance. Asset and expense accounts have a normal balance of debit. Liabil-
ity, revenue, and capital accounts have a normal balance of credit. On an accounting ledger,
debits are recorded on the left side and credits on the right side for each account. Since the
accounts must always balance, for each transaction a debit will be made to one or several
accounts and a credit made to one or several accounts. The sum of all the debits in connec-
tion with any transaction equals the sum of all the credit entries. After each transaction,
therefore, the sum of all the accounts with a debit balance must equal the sum of all the
accounts with a credit balance.
In the acquisitions context, the librarian must keep in mind that when an item is paid
for, there are always two accounting entries, a credit to the cash asset account (the monies
available for purchase) and a debit to the book asset account. If the library uses an encum-
brance system, the debit will be to that account, reducing the encumbrance to balance the
cash credit amount. Knowing at least this little bit will help you to read and better under-
stand the financial statements and account balance information you may receive. It is not
the librarian’s job to design or make entries in the library’s accounting system, but having a
general idea of the intricacies and basic theory involved will make you more knowledgeable
about the effects of each day-to-day financial transaction and how to read and understand
the library’s financial statements and accounts.

ACTIVITY

In groups of three to five students, manipulate the budget shown in figure 6.1 based on the
situations described below. Assume that you have the authority to make changes to the
budget allocations, but must still make the overall budget balance. You may or may not want
to create line items below the level in figure 6.1 in order to ensure that particular types of
materials are not overlooked.

1. The mayor’s office calls and needs information concerning endangered

wildlife in your state. A quick check of the library collection does not bring
to light anything newer than the year 2000. Given the interest by the mayor
in this subject, it is a good assumption that others may come to the library
looking for such materials. At present there is no allocation in the budget
for such materials, since your nonfiction allocation is already encumbered,
but there is still money in other categories of your budget. What do you do
to solve the immediate need? How will you budget for this in the future?
2. A digital photography and camera club gets permission to meet in the
library, and attendance is huge. It seems like everybody has received a
new i-Phone or other digital camera for Christmas and interest is high in
photography, the printing of digital images, and their permanent storage.
After the first meeting, some of the attendees tell the circulation librarian
that the library collection is outdated, and they would really like to be able
to borrow some more recent books, especially on digital photography. They
ask if there are current magazines that deal with digital photography. How
would you handle this situation?
 BU DG E TI N G AN D FI S CAL MAN AG E M E N T / 10 3

3. A community meeting reveals that new residents want and need materials
in several Slavic languages. At present the library has a collection of English
and Spanish materials, but no other languages are represented. The library
has no employees who speak any of the Slavic languages. How should the
library respond to this new need?
4. A local church group protests the low numbers of pro-life materials in the
library. They claim that the library holds a substantial number of items
about abortion, but very few items that reflect their views. How should the
library respond?

REFERENCES

Martin, Murray S. 1995. Collection Development and Finance: A Guide to Strategic Library-Materials
Budgeting. Chicago: American Library Association.
Sanville, Tom. 2008. “Do Economic Factors Really Matter in the Assessment and Retention of Electronic
Resources Licensed at the Library Consortium Level?” Collection Management 33, nos. 1/2: 1–16.

SELECTED READINGS

Anderson, Douglas. 2006. “Allocation of Costs for Electronic Products in Academic Library Consortia.”
College & Research Libraries 67 (March): 123–35.
Bailey, Timothy P., Jeannette Barnes Lessels, and Rickey D. Best. 2005. “Using Universal Borrowing Data in
the Library Book Fund Allocation Process.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services 29,
no. 1: 90–98.
Canepi, Kitti. 2007. “Fund Allocation Formula Analysis: Determining Elements for Best Practice in
Libraries.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services 31, no. 1: 12–24.
Clendenning, Lynda Fuller, J. Kay Martin, and Gail McKenzie. 2005. “Secrets for Managing Materials
Budget Allocations: A Brief Guide for Collections Managers.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, and
Technical Services 29, no. 1: 99–108.
Disher, Wayne. Crash Course in Collection Development. 2014. 2nd ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Gerhard, Kristin H. 2005. “Pricing Models for Electronic Journals and Other Electronic Academic
Materials: The State of the Art.” Journal of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4: 1–25.
Hallam, Arlita, and Teresa R. Dalston. 2005. Managing Budgets and Finances: A How-to-Do-It for Librarians
and Information Professionals. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Hoffert, Barbara. 2017. “Under the Surface.” Library Journal 142 (February 15): 30–32.
Holt, Glen E., and Leslie Edmonds Holt. 2016. Crash Course in Library Budgeting and Finance. Santa
Barbara, CA: Library Unlimited.
Martin, Murray S., and Milton T. Wolf. 1998. Budgeting for Information Access: Managing the Resource
Budget for Absolute Access. Chicago: American Library Association.
Schmidt, Karen, Wendy Allen Shelburne, and David Steven Vess. 2008. “Approaches to Selection, Access, and
Collection Development in the Web World.” Library Resources and Technical Services 52 (July): 184–91.
Smith, A. Arro, and Stephanie Langenkamp. 2007. “Indexed Collection Budget Allocations: A Tool for
Quantitative Collection Development Based on Circulation.” Public Libraries 46, no. 5: 50–54.
Walters, William H. 2007. “A Regression-Based Approach to Library Fund Allocation.” Library Resources and
Technical Services 51 (October): 263–78.
Wu, Eric FuLong, and Katherine M. Shelfer. 2007. “Materials Budget Allocation: A Formula Fitness
Review.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services 31, nos. 3/4: 171–83.
 CHAPTER 7

Assessment and Evaluation

of the Collection,
including Deselection (Weeding)

OVERVIEW

In this chapter we will look at various methods to evaluate or assess your library’s collection
with an eye to determining when and how to weed out or deselect items and materials.
Every library needs to periodically assess its collection. Determining what you have, what
you don’t have, what you need, and what to keep is a central component in the collection
development process that is often ignored in favor of acquisitions. While public librarians
and school media specialists usually instinctively understand that they must do a lot of
weeding to keep their collections current and circulating, this is an issue in academic, archi-
val, and special libraries as well. However, it is always wise to keep in mind the following
admonition:

Weeding, like the original selection, requires judgment: weeding in a particular library
requires judgment based on factors which could be known only to the librarian[s] of
that particular library. The general injunctions for weeding, like the general injunctions
for selecting, must be interpreted and adapted by type of library and type of material,
and they will certainly be adapted by the type of librarian doing the job. (Carter, Bonk,
and Magrill 1974, 170)

As is apparent, it is all too easy to throw the baby out with the bathwater, which can lead to
public outcries and articles in the local newspaper. Nevertheless, weeding is a job that has
to be done.
The missions of public and school libraries require almost constant remaking of their
collections to reflect changes in tastes and needs and to replace quickly worn-out or lost
components of their collections. Academic and special libraries often need to assess their
collections to ensure inclusion of the materials most needed by their institution’s research-
ers and students.
Since collection evaluation and assessment are usually studied together with weeding
in most library school curricula, some students may think the terms are nearly synony-
mous, but they should not be so viewed. Indeed, the evaluation or analysis of a collection
does not necessarily imply weeding at all. Assessment can result in a determination that
certain materials currently in the collection ought to be deselected or weeded, but there are

/ 10 5 /
10 6 / CH AP T ER 7

many other reasons to assess a collection apart from weeding. A quick example will suffice:
an academic library may be interested in assessing its materials in a particular subject area,
for example, early modern European history, because the university’s history department
is actively considering and needs to make a case for adding a PhD program in that specialty
to its curriculum. Such an assessment would inevitably lead not to deaccession or weeding,
but rather to the need to purchase additional materials on the subject.
Likewise, special accreditation reviews of programs in many disciplines (such as those
conducted by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, or the American
Library Association) almost always require a written analysis assessing the adequacy of the
library’s support of and collection in the particular program subject area or discipline be-
ing reviewed, prior to an initial or continuing accreditation visit by the reviewing agency.
Libraries are also part of the review process, as part of the regional accreditation generally
conducted by accrediting entities for the institutions of which they are a component (e.g.,
the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools), which typically entails an overall
assessment of the library’s collection.

EVALUATING OR ASSESSING THE COLLECTION

Collection assessment and evaluation necessarily include a number of different activities

and processes. Although there is some distinction between assessing and evaluating a col-
lection, it is generally a matter of the type of library involved. According to Disher, pub-
lic libraries tend to say they “evaluate” their collections, whereas academic libraries say
they “assess” theirs. He generalizes the difference between the two as follows: assessment
focuses on the quality of the collection, while evaluation concentrates on the use being
made of the collection (Disher 2014, 21).
Before commencing an evaluation or assessment project, the very first thing that you
need to do is determine the goal. If the goal of your assessment project is clearly stated, it
will make choosing the methods and analysis of the data much easier. Do not try to make
one overarching project out of assessing the entire collection. Some areas of potential need
may stand out when the results from a community or needs assessment are considered;
therefore, needs determined through user surveys, comments, and observation may be a
good place to start. In all events, devise a specific goal for the assessment project to help
guide the process and keep the project from getting bogged down by including too many
areas of the collection in the assessment.
When the librarians have reached a decision concerning the goal of the project, then
and only then is it time to develop a comprehensive description of the library’s existing
resources at that particular point in time. This description will include not only an assess-
ment of past and current collecting strengths, but also a determination of what the library’s
future collecting strengths should be. Increasingly, the overlap in full-text resources among
vendors must also be considered, since bundled resources often contain titles that are al-
ready owned or licensed by the library. An assessment project also evaluates the effective-
ness of the library’s collection in supporting the mission and goals of the organization of
which it is a part, and it should lead to a plan of action detailing how the library’s collection
development activities should proceed in order to obtain the best match between the col-
lection and the mission and goals of the library.
Don’t decide to evaluate the entire collection in one project; instead, you should choose
only certain areas within the collection for study and evaluation. Of course, some areas
 A S SE S SM EN T AN D E VALUATION OF TH E C O LLE C TIO N , I N C LU DI N G DE SE LE C TIO N ( W E E DI N G ) / 10 7

will present more difficulties than others. Interdisciplinary study fields can be particular-
ly difficult—“Women’s Studies is problematic for collection developers because of its in-
terdisciplinary nature, its lack of commercially published materials, and its various user
populations” (Bolton 2009, 221). Other more traditional disciplines may not reach across
so many fields and so may be better defined, particularly within the library’s classification
scheme, but they may still be too large for a single project. A large academic library, for in-
stance, would probably not choose to evaluate the entire history collection in one project,
but would likely find it profitable to break it up by geographical area, such as American his-
tory or British history, or by periods of time, such as Middle Ages, Renaissance, and so on.
The moral of the story here is simple: in any collection evaluation project, limit what you
are trying to capture to the resources you have available at hand.

Getting Started with Evaluating a Collection

In carrying out the collection evaluation process, librarians have traditionally sought to
gather both qualitative and quantitative data. While not an end in itself, such informa-
tion-gathering is important. The following areas should be looked at and determined:

• Circulation statistics, with an emphasis on the frequency of usage of

particular items
• Title count
• Median age of items in the collection, within categories
• Shelf observation conducted by subject experts
• Holdings checked against standard lists and bibliographies
• Interlibrary loan requests
• User surveys conducted and focus groups organized to discuss library
holdings and their perceived adequacy

The information garnered using these methods can be equally important in evaluating both
print and electronic resources. An important aspect of the evaluation process is the consid-
eration of all formats of materials and how they fit into the library’s overall collection. Some
special characteristics of electronic collections need to be considered in their evaluation
and assessment. Specifically, information and data need to be collected and analyzed in the
following areas:

• The type of Internet connection used by the library itself and that used by
patrons to access the library remotely
• The capabilities and distribution of computer workstations and printers
provided in the library building
• Internet and other network service costs, including the costs associated
with remote dial-up capabilities
• Web page and database hits, searches, printing, and the like

Although vendors may be able to supply statistics for the use of their networked resources,
the proliferation of federated or metasearch software means that these statistics require
additional study to determine the true usefulness of particular sources to patrons because
of the very nature of the federated search. In addition, not all vendors report usage
10 8 / CH AP T ER 7

statistics in the same way, so care always has to be taken when comparing across vendor
products.

Evaluation Methods

We will look at the major methods of collection evaluation, out of the numerous methods
available. Almost none of these is right for every situation, and perhaps not absolutely so
for any situation, but they may be considered tried and true. Sometimes a mix of at least
two of the methods may make for a better result and more accurate and useful evaluation.

Checklist Method

In 1849, Charles Jewett at the Smithsonian Institute engaged in the first recognized use of
what has come to be called the checklist method of evaluating a collection. This, the oldest
method still in general if not widespread use, may be considered subject matter-specific
and involves checking the library’s holdings against bibliographies or lists of notable books
in specific subject areas. There are hundreds of standard lists available for librarians to use.
Public libraries generally have standard catalogs in their collection such as Best Books for
Public Libraries, Fiction Catalog, or other “best book” lists of award-winning books, such
as the ALA Carnegie Medal Longlists, the National Book Award finalists, the Mann Booker
Awards shortlists, and so on. There are many award lists for different types of fiction and
nonfiction that can be used, depending on the goal of your assessment.
Obviously, picking the checklist or bibliography that is right for your particular library
or situation is critical. While the checklist method generally involves the use of a standard
bibliography or other authoritative work, the bibliographies appearing in theses and dis-
sertations in particular subject areas are also good sources to check against. In evaluating
undergraduate libraries, student papers may also be checked to see if the materials cited are
available in the library, since students may have used other libraries to conduct their re-
search. The basic premise here is to determine whether the student paper could have been
written solely utilizing the student’s home library’s collection. To the extent that this is de-
termined not to be the case, the collection can be seen as arguably less than fully adequate.
A popular bibliography for use in evaluating college and university libraries is Resources
for College Libraries (RCL), published by the Association of College & Research Libraries.
This is a comprehensive and valuable list, but it also provides an excellent example of the
caution needed in picking a checklist, and indeed a problem with the checklist system gen-
erally. For instance, if a library has previously used RCL in connection with its purchasing
and acquisitions decisions (which many naturally do), using the same list to evaluate your
collection presents obvious inbreeding problems, as it were. In such a situation, the evalu-
ating librarian would be well advised to find other bibliographies for evaluation purposes.
And while a good plan might involve using RCL for evaluation purposes initially and then
using the results for deselection purposes, the next time an evaluation is performed, anoth-
er resource must be used as the checklist. Otherwise, the collection runs the risk of likely
becoming narrower than desirable.
A more up-to-date and faster checklist approach would involve evaluating your col-
lection using an online database such as WorldCat with assessment software for research
libraries (Perrault 1999, 47–67), or a product such as Follett’s TITLEWAVE for public
 A S SE S SM EN T AN D E VALUATION OF TH E C O LLE C TIO N , I N C LU DI N G DE SE LE C TIO N ( W E E DI N G ) / 10 9

libraries. Again, however, caution is important, and the use of another checklist the next
time would likely be desirable.

Subject Experts Physically Check the Shelves

Hiring a consultant who is an expert in a particular subject area, who visits the library and
literally scans the shelves in a particular subject area, can be a useful evaluation technique.
Experts can spot materials that are missing from the collection and which they consider
vital to any collection on a given subject. This technique can give the library feedback on
its holdings—either your library has all the materials that the expert feels are critical to the
collection, or the library may get a list of materials that the consultant feels are needed or a
list of subtopics that are missing entirely or are underrepresented.

Circulation and Interlibrary Loan Statistics

Circulation statistics can be a valuable evaluation tool. This approach involves looking at the
number of times that particular items have been checked out within a given period. Obvi-
ously, these sorts of statistics can inform the collection development librarian in numerous
ways; for instance, about which subject areas enjoy the greatest circulation, and the per-
centage of titles in a particular subject that are checked out at the same time or, conversely,
the number of books on a particular subject that are waiting on the shelves at a given time.
In the mid-1990s, Carpenter and Getz (1995) studied the subject areas contained in a
broad curricular field (economics) to try to determine just which books published in a given
year did not circulate. Their premise was that a book held by libraries that did not circulate
was a collection error, just the same as a failure to have a book on hand that was needed was
an error. They labeled these non-circulating books as “type II errors,” and classified as “type
I errors” those books not purchased by the library but obtained through interlibrary loan,
often more than once. Carpenter and Getz emphasized the importance of the frequently
ignored type II error, which indicates a waste of resources that could be used to remedy
type I errors, while advocating the use of both of their derived error statistics in evaluating
any collection.
As indicated in the Carpenter and Getz study, interlibrary loan statistics can be an
excellent source of data when evaluating a collection because these records can, almost by
definition, show the titles that users have needed which were not available in the library
when they needed them.

Citation Analysis

On the college and university level, citation analysis can be a useful tool. This approach
involves a study of the bibliographies from faculty publications, student dissertations and
theses, or other student work to determine how many items (or what percentage of items)
cited in these bibliographies are in fact available in the college or university library. The
purpose of this type of study is to determine whether the academic work produced by the
college’s faculty and students could have been written using primarily materials in the insti-
tution’s library. While the citation analysis approach is most often used and generally best
110 / CH AP T ER 7

suited to colleges and universities, high school media centers may use this technique as well
when students are asked to write major research papers. Worth examining is a study by Ash-
man (2009, 112–28) of the research objectives of citation analysis studies published between
January 2005 and March 2008. Not all of these deal with analysis of a collection, but this
study provides the reader with a good feel for the many effective uses of citation studies.
With regard to the evaluation of electronic resources, a number of technology-aided
methods of collection assessment are available:

1. Scripted user surveys or assessments: To conduct this type of assessment, the

library’s users of electronic resources are provided contemporaneously with their
session a pop-up box (or some other similar method) on-screen, allowing them
to rate the value of the resource used to resolve their particular information
need. This type of user survey at the point of actual use of an electronic resource
can prove valuable (although patron complaints can be expected to outnumber
compliments and praise, and some correcting for this factor has to be made).
2. Transaction log or web log analysis: This is an arguably more objective, if not
necessarily adequately qualitative, approach that can provide data for the analysis
of user transaction activity at a website or in interaction with an electronic
resource. Some electronic resource vendors provide library licensees with useful
statistics on resource usage both on a regular basis and upon request. These
statistics can be used to make decisions concerning the desirability of database
renewal, as well as revealing the number of simultaneous users of the electronic
resource for which the library may need to provide. Examples of statistical
data that can be gathered include the number of queries per specific database,
number of sessions, number of menu selections, number of items available to
be examined, citations displayed, and the number of times users were denied
access because the maximum number of simultaneous users was exceeded. Such
statistics, unfortunately, do not usually provide much information concerning
the relative usefulness of a resource and whether the patron received exactly the
information that was desired, but they can provide some information about how,
and how often, the particular product is being used; this information can then be
supplemented through one or more of the qualitative assessment techniques.

Network Usage Analysis

Network usage analysis measures the use of web-based services by the collecting network or
by terminal use, which can provide important information, such as the load on the library’s
network server or router, user access points, and numbers of users both simultaneously
and in the aggregate. This information showing network load and capacity can also indicate
what services are being used and how frequently.

Vendor-Supplied Statistics

For networked electronic resources, the vendors can supply the library with a great deal
of statistics on the use of the particular resource. Often these statistics are not compara-
ble across products and almost certainly are not comparable across vendors. Given that
the statistics provided to libraries are non-standardized, librarians must be careful not
 A S SE S SM EN T AN D E VALUATION OF TH E C O LLE C TIO N , I N C LU DI N G DE SE LE C TIO N ( W E E DI N G ) / 111

to compare apples with oranges when making decisions based on those data. Vendors
should be able to supply librarians with statistics in a form that the library specifies, but
at present this is not usually the case. It generally falls to the libraries to attempt to keep
their own statistics if they are to make purchasing and retention decisions based upon
statistical data; however, most libraries do not have the staff to keep thorough statistics
across products and vendors.
Generally, the best assessments will involve at least two and sometimes even three
different methods. Using more than one method tends to rid the assessment of most of the
biases that inevitably work their way into an evaluation using only one method. In research
terms, the use of such multiple methods is called triangulation.

DESELECTION OR WEEDING THE COLLECTION

While the evaluation of a collection does not invariably lead to deselection or weeding,
in public libraries and school media centers, evaluation and weeding typically do go hand
in hand. As noted above, all libraries must inevitably engage in some weeding to keep the
collection in good shape for users. This is true even for libraries with significant archival
missions, where multiple copies and editions can come to clog the shelves.
The definitive modern work on deselection is Weeding Library Collections: Library
Weeding Methods, by Stanley J. Slote (1997), who has published several editions of this im-
portant text on weeding. Based on a lifetime of research, Slote (1997, xix) draws an im-
portant distinction between the basic parts of a library’s collection, which he refers to as
the core collection, and the library’s “weedable” collection. Different types of libraries will
naturally exhibit different distributions of their core and weedable components. For exam-
ple, an academic library will usually consist primarily or mostly of core materials, with only
a relatively small number of items in its weedable collection. Public libraries and school
media centers, by contrast, will typically have just the opposite proportions. To gain a more
thorough understanding of weeding and the various methods of doing it, Slote’s Weeding
Library Collections remains the most authoritative source and is highly recommended, es-
pecially in regard to a primarily print collection.
No matter what the type of library, weeding is always a politically sensitive part of
managing the collection. To provide an overview of the emotional dynamics of weeding,
Ann Agee (2017) analyzed editorials, articles, and book chapters describing weeding in aca-
demic libraries in order to study faculty responses to weeding from a psycholinguistic view-
point. Using computer-based text analysis software, she accounts for the amount and type
of emotional content in the categories of “clout, emotional tone, and affect.” The purpose of
this research was to help guide librarians in the way they introduce weeding projects to the
academic community.
An examination of the literature and newspaper articles does demonstrate that com-
munication is key, no matter what the type of library, unless your library actually wants to
be featured on the front page of the local newspaper or the TV evening news broadcast for
throwing away hundreds or thousands of books.

Why Weed?

As noted earlier, virtually every library needs to weed or deselect. Slote maintains that
there are no less than seven very good reasons to weed any collection:
11 2 / CH AP T ER 7

1. To stimulate circulation
2. To save space
3. To save time
4. To enhance appeal
5. To establish credibility
6. To respond to community needs and interests
7. To make room for new technologies and formats

Let’s look at each of these reasons. An examination of the shelves may reveal ten copies of
an old textbook that has not circulated in years. Sometimes theses and dissertations may
actually study old textbooks for stereotypes and changes in curricula, but one copy placed
in a special collection will certainly cover that possible need. For example, the history of
medicine is very interesting, and old textbooks do show how much medical procedures have
changed, but these books don’t need to be in the general collection where unwary students
may assume that they are correct and describe current methods.

Circulation
Weeding has been shown time and again to be one of the best ways to stimulate circula-
tion, especially in public libraries, since overcrowded shelves discourage browsing by users.
Crowding also tends to make particular items difficult to find, which is a problem in aca-
demic libraries as well. To illustrate, figure 7.1 shows a small section of a bookcase that most
likely could benefit from significant weeding. Even if these groaning shelves contain noth-
ing but items central to the library’s core collection, they present difficulties for browsers.
Only if the library’s shelves are uncluttered
will users easily be able to find what they
want, thereby improving the tendency for
patrons to check out more items.

Space
Weeding can naturally save space on the
shelves. Shelf space in any library should
generally be seen as a finite (and certainly
expensive) resource, so why waste valuable
space on items that don’t circulate or are
outdated? Weeding provides the necessary
room for needed materials that are more
likely to circulate than those that should be
deselected.

Time
Weeding saves time for both librarians and
users and can make the library more appeal-
ing to users. Items can be shelved more
easily and accurately and located faster on
shelves that are not overcrowded. FIGURE 7.1 Shelves in need of weeding
 A S SE S SM EN T AN D E VALUATION OF TH E C O LLE C TIO N , I N C LU DI N G DE SE LE C TIO N ( W E E DI N G ) / 113

Appeal
Ridding the collection of damaged or unattractive materials makes a better impression on
users, and making the library more appealing makes it more likely to be used. People, for
whatever reasons, do tend to judge books by their covers. And from the library staff side,
uncluttered shelves make for a more pleasant work environment, presumably resulting in
improvements in the quality and accuracy of their work.

Credibility
Weeding helps the library establish credibility with its patrons. A bloated collection
crammed onto the shelves is not necessarily a good collection. Indeed, often quite the oppo-
site is the case. It is more important to have items that users actually need and that are
up-to-date to satisfy current users’ needs.

Community Needs and Interests

A well-weeded collection tends to send a message to users that the library is concerned with
keeping up with the community’s needs and is in touch.

Making Room for New Technologies

Hand in glove with making shelf space available is the idea that in today’s electronic
resource environment, not all of the library’s space needs to be devoted to the maintenance
of a large, traditional print collection. Where unlimited building funds are not available
to provide needed additional space, trimming the print collection can be a necessary step.

Issues That Discourage Weeding

If weeding is such a good idea and is so basic to any good library’s collection, why isn’t it high
on everybody’s to-do list? Slote (1997, 5–6) lists five factors that tend to discourage weeding:

• Emphasis on numbers: The numbers of books and other items are time-
honored criteria used in standards of accreditation, as well as internal
reports and decision-making. Administrators in institutions of all kinds
often try to avoid being overly subjective in their decision-making by
relying on seemingly objective statistics and numbers. This leads to far too
many key library decision-makers viewing more materials as necessarily
better, and thus discouraging their librarians from too much weeding.
• Time constraints and professional work pressure: There is never enough
time to do everything that needs to be done, in a library or anywhere
else, and this limitation often makes weeding difficult to schedule. Proper
deselection is correctly seen as a professional library function, but this does
not mean that volunteers cannot assist in getting the job done.
• Public displeasure: Especially in the case of tax-supported libraries, if
the general public becomes aware that the library seems to be throwing
away valuable books, serious objections will almost inevitably arise. The
same holds true in academic libraries, where faculty typically hold strong
11 4 / CH AP T ER 7

opinions regarding the value of particular works and materials. Generally,

this displeasure and consternation occur when a collection has not been
weeded regularly and then too much has to be done in a relatively short
time (see, for example, St. Lifer and Rogers 1997). “Weeding is politically
incorrect. Citizens go nuts when they find out that libraries discard
thousands of books each year” (Manley 1996, 1108). This adverse reaction
puts an additional burden on library staff to explain what they are doing
and why it is consistent with the library’s goals and mission, a burden that
doing nothing might be seen as avoiding. Some of these problems can be
overcome if another library that wants and needs the items can be found.
When a major weeding is underway, part of the process should involve a
search for likely recipients for deselected items.
• Sanctity of the collection: Libraries are traditionally and rightfully seen
as repositories of the ideas on which civilization itself is based, and
this attitude can cause many people to express deep emotional as well
as intellectual arguments to support keeping a collection fully intact.
Certainly, the great effort that likely has gone into establishing a collection
can be seen as being unjustifiably rendered as something of a waste.
But not every library has the mission and goals of the great Library in
ancient Alexandria, and trimming a collection should not be viewed as the
equivalent of a great fire endangering the world’s intellectual patrimony.
At best, a library collection will always have items that are lost, stolen, and
mutilated, so no collection ever really remains fully intact. Education of the
public about the goals of deselection and weeding are the best answer here.
• Conflicting criteria: Libraries are often faced with the dilemma that many
good books do not seem to be needed by the library’s users, but many
poorer-quality items, including those that seem unrelated to the collection
or the library’s mission and goals, circulate frequently. Who wants to
throw away a printed compilation of Christopher Marlowe’s plays? But
who will likely read them if the library supports a technical or trade school
curriculum? These kinds of situations can lead to paralysis in the weeding
process, especially when the library is not archival. Look at the nature and
goals of the library, its institution, and its public as the best touchstones for
what to keep and what to discard.

When and Who Should Weed?

When to weed is easy: it should be done often, but not always early, in order to give items
sufficient time to prove their worth. But it is important to weed routinely. Problems with
the public over weeding generally occur when the library has let weeding go for a long period
and then needs to remove a large number of items. To avoid this, set up a schedule by sub-
ject area to ensure a continuous and thorough approach to weeding. If your library has a
collection of e-books, they should also be included in your weeding projects with the same
criteria as for printed materials (fortunately, these resources will not have appearance or
condition issues to be considered). Items that are returned to the library should be checked
for damage. Such materials may need to be weeded or replaced. When new editions are
acquired, it is a good idea to check for earlier editions that then need to be weeded.
 A S SE S SM EN T AN D E VALUATION OF TH E C O LLE C TIO N , I N C LU DI N G DE SE LE C TIO N ( W E E DI N G ) / 115

In considering the weeding process as strictly a professional job, weeding this way can
be a big mistake. Yes, the responsibility must ultimately be a professional one, but all staff
can and should have a role in keeping the collection properly weeded. Pages and shelvers
should be instructed to pull damaged and worn items when shelving or accessing materials.
Library assistants should do the same when checking in materials or retrieving items on
hold. Librarians should evaluate their assigned sections of the collection on a routine basis.
Everyone should take responsibility for some aspect of assessing the collection as they are
working with it for the benefit of users in the stacks.

Determining What to Weed

Besides the criteria of appropriateness to the library’s collection, frequency of usage, and
considering whether an item meets the library’s collection assessment standards, and
whether multiple copies of an item exist, selecting particular items that need to go is
important. Condition matters, so besides looking at the cover, flip through the material to
make sure that the pages are in reasonable condition and not loose. Also check the binding
to see if it is loose. If you have someone on staff who does repairs, the item can be sent for
repair, or it can be weeded if the condition is bad enough. In an academic library, you might
be more likely to send it to be rebound. In public and school media centers, there is a feeling
that rebound books are not popular with patrons, so in that environment, if repairs will
be extensive, weeding is likely indicated. Stained, moldy, or mildewed items should also
be strongly considered for weeding. Water damage, mold, or mildew in all events require
removal of the affected items from the stacks promptly upon discovery, since mold and
mildew can quickly spread, flu-like, through an entire collection.
Even if the material passes all the physical and appearance tests above, and particularly
if you are working in a school media center or public library, check to see when the item last
circulated. In such a library, adult fiction that has not circulated for two or three years has
probably passed its prime. Multiple copies should certainly be weeded and a decision made
as to whether even one copy remains useful. Without being too judgmental, it is a good idea
to keep at least one copy of items that are generally recognized or regarded as classic litera-
ture. Although the circulation and use of these works may be sporadic, users rightly expect
any good library to have copies of them.
For nonfiction, along with circulation data, you need to be concerned about whether
the information contained in the work remains valid and current. Computer books are no-
torious for being outdated almost as soon as the ink is dry; history books, however, have a
much longer shelf life. Many libraries work out a plan based on the classification scheme
indicating when every subject area in the library should be weeded. This is usually a very
satisfactory approach.
While academic and research libraries are much more conservative in their weeding or
deselection processes and practices, weeding is still necessary in them. For instance, items
may be required for particular classes, which will usually result in multiple copies being
ordered to be held in reference room reserve. After some period, when the course ceases
to be offered or the professor who required the readings retires, it may be that only one
copy is still needed. Care should be taken in deselecting seemingly outdated materials in
research library contexts. Consider such questions as whether to keep materials with dated
information in case someone later wants to undertake a history of the subject, as opposed to
weeding them in order to keep students from using the old materials instead of the newer,
11 6 / CH AP T ER 7

more up-to-date works. Here, consultation with relevant faculty members in the field can
be a good approach.
The continuous review, evaluation, and weeding (CREW) method has been used in li-
braries since 1976. It is specifically designed for small and medium-sized libraries. The heart
of the method is a set of criteria on which to base weeding decisions. There are differences
in its instructions according to the average subject needs of these libraries.
The CREW method gives six general criteria for considering weeding an item from the
library’s collection, summed up with the acronym MUSTIE:

M = Misleading—factually inaccurate
U = Ugly—worn beyond mending or rebinding
S = Superseded—by a new edition or by a much better book on the subject
T = Trivial—of no discernible literary or scientific merit
I = Irrelevant to the needs and interests of the library’s community
E = Elsewhere—the material is easily obtainable from another library (Larson
2008)

The website for the Texas State Library and Archives Commission (www.tsl.state.tx.us/ld/
pubs/crew/) provides a manual for the CREW method (Larson 2008). The website also has
PowerPoint slide shows and other teaching materials to further one’s understanding and
answer questions about the CREW procedures. Specific sections of the CREW manual deal
with children’s materials and reference materials. The manual also gives specific guidelines
for weeding each part of the collection as organized by the Dewey Decimal classification.

A Note on the Typically Negative Public Reaction to Weeding

A study by Nikkel and Beltway (2009) describes an interesting event in library history:
the University of New Brunswick’s decision to severely weed and ultimately discard what
many considered to be one of the best library collections of science fiction and fantasy
books in the country. A considered decision was made by the library to weed the collection.
Following that, the remaining collection did not contribute significantly to the academic
curriculum of the university and was therefore eliminated. In the introduction to their
study, Nikkel and Beltway pose a number of interesting questions relating to the philosophy
underlying the deselection process:

What happens when once actively used special collections are neglected and become
underused or ignored? Do we as librarians maintain them in their current state in the
hope that they will somehow receive the recognition they deserve or because they rep-
resent a significant investment of time and resources that we are loathe to do away
with? (Nikkel and Beltway 2009, 195)

Although almost 5,000 works were weeded, the collection was largely saved, ultimately
because of protests from outside the university, and a new specialized collection policy for
science fiction and fantasy was developed to help improve the library’s collection in that
area and rationalize future acquisitions. Academic libraries don’t usually feel much pressure
to bow to public opinion, if for no other reason than that the public may lack a feeling of
ownership, but public libraries, with their typical dependence on public and tax funding,
 A S SE S SM EN T AN D E VALUATION OF TH E C O LLE C TIO N , I N C LU DI N G DE SE LE C TIO N ( W E E DI N G ) / 11 7

quite often have to deal with the public’s strongly expressed displeasure when users don’t
understand why the library is suddenly discarding thousands of books. These stories hit the
media relatively often, sometimes accompanied by unhappy visuals of dumpsters crammed
to the rim with what appear to be perfectly useful books that were presumably purchased
at considerable public expense. Famously, the San Francisco Public Library aroused a
firestorm of public criticism in the 1990s when the collection was heavily weeded before
moving into a new library building. The problem, as usual, was that the library’s collection
had not been weeded systematically over a fairly long period of construction, with the result
that a much larger than usual number of books and serials needed to be removed from the
collection.

SUMMARY

Faye Chadwell, in an article published in Collection Management, sums up the future of col-
lection building and assessment very well:

As we move forward and make more progress in the transition from print to digital, it
is clear that it is going to be easier and easier to determine the impact that our collec-
tion building has on our users’ daily lives. It is also going to be imperative that we keep
our users’ developmental, education, and entertainment needs in mind—more than
we ever did in the print realm. If libraries and collection managers wish to compete
with other user-focused services, we need to enlist our users regularly in collection
building and collection management activities that once were mediated by library
staff. We may risk losing relevancy in our users’ daily lives if we do not. (Chadwell
2009, 77)

While most librarians are book lovers at heart, and therefore are usually keen to acquire
more books, developing and maintaining a quality collection requires a commensurate abil-
ity to undertake the more onerous jobs of continuous evaluation and deselection. These
tasks are just as critical to the development of a high-quality library collection as the acqui-
sition of items in the first place. Sufficient time to do the job right must be scheduled or
found. Evaluating and weeding the collection properly on a systematic and regular basis will
save you much grief and trouble. Just as no garden can prosper if left unweeded, so will a
library collection inevitably fall into disrepair, if not outright ruin, if methodical and care-
ful approaches to deselection are not undertaken.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Assume that you have just been hired to handle collection development
and you are instructed to assess your new library’s existing collection.
What methods would you use, and why would you choose those particular
methods? First put your answer in the context of a particular type of library
and provide a hypothetical collection size, and then describe how you would
proceed.
2. Assume that you have just taken a position as the sole librarian or collection
development librarian in a public or school library that has not, from
118 / CH AP T ER 7

all appearances, been weeded for a considerable time. How would you
proceed? Describe any public relations, consultation, and so on that you
would do. Assuming that you have support for weeding, how would you
organize and proceed with such a project? What would the differences be in
your procedures if the library were an academic or special library?

ACTIVITY

Divide the class up into groups of three or four students. Visit any type of library that has
a book collection and choose a range of call numbers to examine. Have at least one shelf
for each student in the group. In a large library, the classification area should be stated
narrowly enough so that you have no more than two shelves per person. Examine each title
on your shelves and decide if it needs to be weeded, repaired, replaced, or simply put back
on the shelf. Use the rest of your group as a committee for tough decisions. (Your professor
may wish to know which libraries the class will be using so that this activity can be cleared
with the appropriate librarians.) Report back to the class as a whole the problems you had
in making decisions and how your group went about trying to address the issues.

REFERENCES

Agee, Ann. 2017. “Faculty Responses to Deselection in Academic Libraries: A Psycholinguistic Analysis.”
Collection Management 42, no. 2: 59–75.
Ashman, Allen B. 2009. “An Examination of the Research Objectives of Recent Citation Analysis Studies.”
Collection Management 34 (April-June): 112–28.
Bolton, Brooke A. 2009. “Women’s Studies Collections: A Checklist Evaluation.” Journal of Academic
Librarianship 35 (May): 221–26.
Carpenter, D., and M. Getz. 1995. “Evaluation of Library Resources on the Field of Economics.” Collection
Management 20, no. 1/2: 49–89.
Carter, Mary Duncan, Wallace John Bonk, and Rose Mary Magrill. 1974. Building Library Collections. 4th ed.
Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow.
Chadwell, Faye A. 2009. “What’s Next for Collection Management and Managers? User-Centered
Collection Management.” Collection Management 34 (April-June): 69–78.
Disher, Wayne. 2014. Crash Course in Collection Development. 2nd ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries
Unlimited.
Larson, Jeannette. 2008. “CREW: A Weeding Manual for Modern Libraries.” Austin: Texas Public Library
and Archives Commission. www.tsl.state.tx.us/ld/pubs/crew.
Linton, Janice, and Ada Ducas. 2017. “A New Tool for Collection Assessment: One Library’s Response to the
Calls to Action Issued by Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” Collection Management 42,
nos. 3-4: 256–79.
Manley, Will. 1996. “The Manley Arts: If I Called This Column ‘Weeding,’ You Wouldn’t Read It.” Booklist 92
(March): 1108.
Nikkel, Terry, and Liane Beltway. 2009. “When Worlds Collide: Dismantling the Science Fiction and
Fantasy Collection at the University of New Brunswick, Saint John.” Collection Management 34 (July–
September): 194–208.
Perrault, Anna H. 1999. “National Collecting Trends: Collection Analysis Methods and Findings.” Library
and Information Research 21, no. 1: 47–67.
 A S SE S SM EN T AN D E VALUATION OF TH E C O LLE C TIO N , I N C LU DI N G DE SE LE C TIO N ( W E E DI N G ) / 119

Slote, Stanley J. 1997. Weeding Library Collections: Library Weeding Methods. 4th ed. Englewood, CO:
Libraries Unlimited.
St. Lifer, Evan, and Michael Rogers. 1997. “City Rebukes Philadelphia Library on Weeding Practices.”
Library Journal 122 (May 15): 12.

SELECTED READINGS

Adams, Brian, and Bob Noel. 2008. “Circulation Statistics in the Evaluation of Collection Development.”
Collection Building 27, no. 2: 71–73.
Bobal, Alison M., Margaret Mellinger, and Bonnie E. Avery. 2008. “Collection Assessment and New
Academic Programs.” Collection Management 33, no. 4: 288–301.
Chant, Ian. 2015. “The Art of Weeding.” Library Journal 140 (June 15): 34–37.
Coughlin, Daniel M., Mark C. Campbell, and Bernard J. Jansen. 2016. “A Web Analytics Approach for
Appraising Electronic Resources in Academic Libraries.” Journal of the Association for Information
Science and Technology 67 (March): 518–34.
Dilevko, Juris, and Keren Dali. 2004. “Improving Collection Development and Reference Services for
Interdisciplinary Fields through Analysis of Citation Patterns: An Example Using Tourism Studies.”
College & Research Libraries 65 (May): 216–41.
Fenner, Audrey. 2004. “The Approval Plan: Selection Aid, Selection Substitute.” Acquisitions Librarian 16,
nos. 31/32: 227–40.
Feyereisen, Pierre, and Anne Spoiden. 2009. “Can Local Citation Analysis of Master’s and Doctoral
Theses Help Decision-Making about the Management of the Collection of Periodicals?
A Case Study in Psychology and Education Sciences.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 35
(November): 514–22.
Franklin, Brinley, and Terry Plum. 2008. “Assessing the Value and Impact of Digital Content.” Journal of
Library Administration 48, no. 1: 41–57.
Fundy, Gerri, and Alesia McManus. 2005. “Using a Decision Grid Process to Build Consensus in Electronic
Resources Cancellation Decision.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 31 (November): 533–38.
Haycock, Laurel A. 2004. “Citation Analysis of Education Dissertations for Collection Development.”
Library Resources and Technical Services 48 (April): 102–6.
Hiott, Judith, and Carla Beasley. 2005. “Electronic Collection Management: Completing the Cycle—
Experiences at Two Libraries.” Acquisitions Librarian 17, nos. 33/34: 159–78.
Kohn, Karen. 2013. “Usage-Based Collection Evaluation with a Curricular Focus.” College & Research
Libraries 74 (January): 85–97.
McAbee, Sonja L., and William L. Hubbard. 2003. “The Current Reality of National Book Publishing
Output and Its Effect on Collection Assessment.” Collection Management 28, no. 4: 67–78.
McAlister, Alex D., and Allan Scherlen. 2017. “Weeding with Wisdom: Turning Deselection of Print
Monographs in Book-Reliant Disciplines.” Collection Management 42, no. 2: 76–91.
Metz, Paul, and Caryl Gray. 2005. “Public Relations and Library Weeding.” Journal of Academic
Librarianship 31 (May): 273–79.
Nisonger, Thomas E. 2008. “Use of the Checklist Method for Content Evaluation of Full-Text Databases.”
Library Resources and Technical Services 52 (January): 4–17.
Pancheshnikov, Yelena. 2007. “A Comparison of Literature Citations in Faculty Publications and Student
Theses as Indicators of Collection Use and a Background for Collection Management at a University
Library.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 33 (November): 674–83.
Roy, Loriene. 1994. “Weeding.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science 54, Supplement 17:
352–98. New York: Marcel Dekker.
12 0 / CH AP T ER 7

Samson, Sue, Sebastian Derry, and Holly Eggleston. 2004. “Networked Resources, Assessment and
Collection Development.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 30 (November): 476–81.
Singer, Carol A. 2008. “Weeding Gone Wild: Planning and Implementing a Review of the Reference
Collection.” Reference and User Services Quarterly 47 (spring): 356–63.
Slote, Stanley J. 1997. Weeding Library Collections: Library Weeding Methods. 4th ed. Englewood, CO:
Libraries Unlimited.
Smith, Rochelle, and Nancy J. Young. 2008. “Giving Pleasure Its Due: Collection Promotion and Readers’
Advisory in Academic Libraries.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 34 (November): 520–26.
St. Clair, Gloriana. 1999. “Assessment: How and Why.” In Virtually Yours: Models for Managing Electronic
Resources and Services, edited by Peggy Johnson and Bonnie MacEwan, 58–70. Chicago: American
Library Association.
Waugh, Mike, Michelle Donlin, and Stephanie Braunstein. 2015. “Next-Generation Collection
Management: A Case Study for Quality Control and Weeding E-Books in an Academic Library.”
Collection Management 40, no. 1: 17–26.
 CHAPTER 8

Cooperative Collection
Development and
Resource-Sharing

OVERVIEW

In this chapter we will explore how libraries can enhance their services to users by means of
cooperative collection development (CCD) activities and participation in resource-sharing
consortia. These practices are not new. There is evidence that cooperation among libraries
to share resources goes back a long way, at least to the first half of the thirteenth century,
when monasteries developed what we would today recognize as union catalogs of manu-
scripts to aid in their scholarly activity. As interesting as this historical tidbit might be,
however, we focus in this chapter on CCD and other resource-sharing activities developed
in the twentieth and now the twenty-first centuries.
Many librarians have dreamed of rebuilding the ancient Library of Alexandria, which
supposedly contained all of the classical world’s learning, by linking the collections of re-
search libraries around the world to create the ideal, complete, and comprehensive research
library. While the results of recent attempts to do just this continue to fall well short of
that ideal, libraries are nevertheless digitizing and making available enormous amounts of
research materials from multiple sources through the Web. The Institute for Museum and
Library Services, along with its granting agencies, has financed a large number of digitiza-
tion projects so that research libraries can make their unique or rare collections accessible
on their own campuses and also available worldwide through the Web. At no time in the
past have various technologies combined to make the dream of universal access so close to
attainability. Earlier CCD initiatives focused more or less exclusively on the acquisition of
materials, but more recent projects have concentrated on wider user access to materials
(Burgett, Haar, and Phillips 2004, 2).

LIBRARY CONSORTIA

As noted above, the history of library cooperation can be traced back to medieval times
and monasteries. But it was the nineteenth century that witnessed the development of
true united or union catalogs, which allowed libraries to know with some certainty the
full extent of what other libraries owned; these union catalogs became the key to early

/ 121 /
12 2 / CH AP T ER 8

successful resource-sharing and CCD efforts. Neither CCD nor resource-sharing can work
well if libraries don’t know what other libraries own.
A library consortium is a group of libraries that work together to engage in enterprises
that are beyond the resources of any one member. Today, all types of libraries engage in
consortial activities.

Academic, public, special, and even K–12 school libraries face numerous challenges
such as diminishing funds, limited space and staff, outdated assessment policies, print
resources as opposed to nonprint resources, and technology concerns. In an effort to
address these challenges, libraries have turned to various collaborative endeavors. One
such endeavor has been the development of consortia. A library may belong to several
consortia simultaneously depending upon the needs of the library and the mission of
the consortia. (Kinner and Crosetto 2009, 419–20)

There are many reasons for a library to belong to a consortium, but here we focus on the
library’s collection and getting needed resources to users.
The development of consortia is primarily a phenomenon of the mid-twentieth centu-
ry. Following World War II, librarians began to realize the strength that would come from
combining their resources to build collections, union catalogs, and, today, digital libraries.
The Farmington Plan was a post-World War II CCD approach that arose in response to
the increased difficulty experienced in getting scientific information from other countries
during the war. Individual research libraries agreed to accept responsibility for collecting
scientific information or a specific subset of scientific information (physics, chemistry, etc.)
from a particular country or area of the world. The Farmington Plan flourished for some
years as growing sums of money were put into libraries owing to the national defense build-
up, the space race, and other Cold War competitions in the hard sciences. When that money
began to dry up in the 1960s, not all libraries involved could afford to continue their com-
mitments. The Farmington Plan thus eventually fell apart in the 1970s, becoming some-
thing of a footnote, though an important one, in the history of CCD.

COOPERATIVE COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT DEFINED

In library and information science, the generally accepted definition of CCD is “coopera-
tion, coordination, or sharing in the development and management of collections by two or
more libraries entering into an agreement for this purpose.” Some CCD agreements focus
primarily on the reduction or elimination of overlap between different libraries’ collections,
particularly for expensive, specialized materials. Other projects seek to focus on expanding
the availability of resources and may require the creation of a pool of money from multiple
libraries with which to fund new purchases and acquisitions. Burgett, Haar, and Phillips
(2004, 4) define CCD as “multiple libraries coordinating the development and management
of their collections with the goal of building broader, more useful combined collections than
any library in the group could build individually.”
CCD projects have achieved positive results in spite of many false starts and even some
complete failures. True progress, however, often remains somewhat elusive, since their
benefits and results are difficult to quantify and measure, and opinions therefore vary as to
the relative success of the programs. Yet the substantive recognizable benefits of numerous
collaborative library projects cannot be disputed. Even though many CCD projects have
 C OOPER ATIV E C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D R E S O U R C E - SH AR I N G / 12 3

not always met librarians’ expectations, CCD in the aggregate has demonstrated tangible
benefits to participating libraries.
Ideally, all libraries should be able to provide locally all items that are in heavy demand
by their particular users. However, because some types of materials may be used only occa-
sionally by the patrons of a particular library, the library can seek to provide access in ways
other than directly purchasing them. It is in providing these types of materials that CCD
programs can come into play.

BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF COOPERATIVE

COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT

Benefits:

• Reducing unnecessary duplication by working together to create a plan for

the acquisition of expensive materials. Every library will need to own the
basics, particularly in the case of academic libraries, to cover undergraduate
students’ needs, but more expensive materials needed for research by
faculty and graduate students can be shared among the consortium
members. This service requires a means of delivery from one campus to
another.
• Enlarging the pool of materials available to users through cooperative
purchasing plans is a natural result of a CCD plan involving all the
members of the consortium.
• Working together on technological solutions for keeping track of and
making electronic resources available to the member libraries has been very
important in the past, since it is the technology that has allowed easy access
to the catalogs of the member libraries and sending resources from one
campus to another.

Challenges:

• Reductions in budgets can hurt consortial activities of any type. Hard

times for library cooperation inevitably occur when there is an economic
downturn and budgets and staffs are reduced. Ironically, cooperation,
which should logically be viewed as a money-saver, seems to thrive more
during good funding times and likewise to suffer more during hard times.
• Maintaining materials to satisfy local interests can generate problems for
libraries participating in consortial programs. Libraries naturally tend to
spend their money so as to protect local interests first, and then use the
remaining funds to cover the costs of cooperation, including purchasing
books, serials, and other library resources to meet their respective portions
of the goals of the consortium or CCD agreement.
• Interpersonal conflicts can seriously affect cooperation. As one so often
finds in any collaborative effort, people and personal conflicts present
intractable problems which can lead to failure in a consortium or CCD, with
egos snuffing the candle all too easily. For instance, one library member
may develop the feeling (whether justified or not) that they are doing all
124 / CH AP T ER 8

the work, spending all the money, and doing all the lending, and that the
other libraries in the consortium are simply taking advantage of them. And,
perhaps surprisingly, in fact, it is often the smaller libraries that can feel
disadvantaged as they find themselves comparatively swamped by other
libraries’ requests that they are insufficiently staffed to meet.

CONSORTIAL AND ACCESS RELATIONSHIPS

Although libraries will mostly continue to purchase materials independently to meet

their own users’ needs, there is a growing and promising trend toward buying within a
consortial framework. While no one would suggest that this is an ideal way of replacing
individual library-based acquisition programs, it does offer a significant level of improve-
ment over independent selection choices at a time when library budgets are strained to
meet even the most basic needs. A consortium of academic libraries, for example, can
often obtain lower prices for a bundle of serials than its individual members can obtain on
their own. Another way to use consortia is to look at the areas where a member of a con-
sortium provides unique resources, and adapt the other members’ acquisition programs
accordingly.
To a large degree, the actions taken by an individual library will reflect the ways in
which it cooperates with other libraries. Where there is a close relationship, each library
will consider the effects of its policy changes on the cooperative. Where the relationships
are looser, each library will tend to follow its own path, regardless of the consequences for
the group. The likely future financial environment suggests that librarians would be well
advised to look carefully at the benefits of cooperative activities and to seek ways in which
to meld them into their collection strategies.
As a case in point, in recent years, there has been significant CCD activity in Florida,
particularly in the state university library system. Some cooperative purchases can be seen
in the databases available through the shared online system. Also, Florida’s latest distance
education initiatives have led to consortial buying of access to such products as the Ency-
clopaedia Britannica, OCLC’s FirstSearch, and other similar publications and systems. In
addition, Sunlink, a Florida school networking initiative, provides public school media spe-
cialists an opportunity for CCD based on a statewide database of holdings. The ability of
the Sunlink database to allow the sharing of MARC records and the development of shared
catalogs (or Internet access to stand-alone catalogs) has greatly increased the ability of li-
brarians in Florida to initiate CCD programs at all levels.
CCD can be especially useful when a group of libraries come together and indicate the
areas or subject specialties that they intend to collect in depth. This allows purchases of
materials that are not heavily used to be better planned. If one library takes responsibili-
ty for collecting materials on a narrow subject, say, the Arthurian legend, another library
in the group will probably not need to purchase expensive, research-oriented materials in
that area but would instead purchase popular, best-seller, or course-related materials. The
second library would then rely on the first library for research materials relating to the
Arthurian legend. This is simple enough in concept, but more difficult to implement than
you might imagine.
CCD projects proceed from the premise that, in a constrained economic climate, li-
braries can no longer expect to be able to build superior or even adequate collections inde-
pendently. If each library proceeds unilaterally as periodic recessions and slow economic
 C OOPER ATIV E C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D R E S O U R C E - SH AR I N G / 125

growth force it to acquire ever-smaller portions of the published universe, it risks unnec-
essarily duplicating many little-used materials that its users could borrow from other li-
braries. Conversely, libraries may fail to acquire many items that are not readily available
elsewhere. By coordinating their acquisitions with each other, libraries can maximize their
aggregate purchasing power even as their individual financial situations stagnate or de-
cline. They can better position themselves to build broad-based collections by identifying
resources that need to be held by only one or perhaps a few libraries and which can be
provided to the others through document delivery or online connections. Each library can
continue to acquire core resources for its clientele while redirecting its remaining funds
toward intensive purchasing in predetermined fields. It will then be able to share materials
in these fields with consortial partners and rely on the partners to build and share intensive
collections in other fields.

INTERLIBRARY LOAN

Some CCD programs rely heavily on traditional interlibrary loans (ILL), since the
very essence of CCD hinges on the ability to share resources. Of course, you can have
resource-sharing without CCD (e.g., conventional interlibrary loan), but the focus of interli-
brary loans is almost the opposite of collection development, since it by definition necessar-
ily involves accessing what you do not have. Certainly, interlibrary loan is likely to remain
an integral part of most libraries’ information services for the foreseeable future. The major
cloud on the horizon concerns electronic materials, and whether libraries will continue to
have the same fair-use rights to share those materials that they have traditionally had with
print materials. Under even the best scenario, however, the role of interlibrary loan will
probably change as libraries take into account the newer electronic methods of information
delivery. There will be differences between what can be accomplished by document deliv-
ery services or databases and by the traditional sharing of printed resources.
The cost differentials between various information service patterns have not yet been
fully explored. What is appropriate in one setting may be inappropriate in another. A li-
brary must take into account such differences in setting up its budget. Borrowing from an-
other library makes sense when the original library is unable to purchase or obtain the item,
when the item is rare or scarce, or when the patrons of the original library would only use
the item infrequently. When libraries are part of a consortium that provides courier ser-
vices to minimize delays in the materials reaching the patrons, interlibrary loan may be an
attractive alternative for items that are not in heavy use.

SUMMARY

CCD is clearly seen by most librarians as very useful for most libraries. Some libraries are
even more enthusiastic about it; after an intensive evaluation and analysis of the Ohio con-
sortium named OhioLINK, Kinner and Crosetto (2009, 436) concluded that the benefits of
“being a member of an academic consortium are immeasurable. From sharing resources to
assistance in purchasing products to collection development support, membership perks
continue to grow.” They also pointed out that for CCD to work, all the participants have to
operate cooperatively. If libraries only cooperate to further their own, insular needs, the
consortium is naturally less likely to succeed.
12 6 / CH AP T ER 8

CASE STUDY

The area surrounding a medium-sized city in South Carolina has three small private uni-
versities. In the 1970s the three came together in a consortium to provide better services
and collections for graduate students in education, the liberal arts, and business. Each uni-
versity library took primary responsibility for one of these subject areas, attempting to
acquire what the students of all three institutions would require in that area. The resources
included books, audiovisual materials, serials, and, of late, e-books and electronic databases.
Each university had programs in all three areas of study that were included in the consortial
agreement for CCD and document delivery.
During the Great Recession that began in 2008, all three universities suffered finan-
cially, but one in particular suffered a large decrease in its foundation monies. This insti-
tution is responsible for the business collection. The university’s administration has asked
the library to take a substantial cut in its acquisitions budget to the point that the library
cannot fully meet its obligations to the consortium. Maintaining its current commitment
in the electronic databases for all three institutions is particularly problematic. All three
libraries are scheduled to meet in two weeks.
Divide your class into three groups, one for education, one for liberal arts, and one for
business. Each group is assigned one of the universities and should prepare a response that
addresses the following:

• Is the consortium still viable? What difference might it make if the cost
of each institution’s purchases on behalf of all three is roughly equal? Is
some redistribution possible that the institution in financial trouble could
accommodate?
• How can the three institutions as a whole strive to maintain the business
collection?
• Prepare a one-page memorandum that the libraries would submit to their
higher administration that explains how the situation can be resolved.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Do you know or can you find references to CCD agreements in your

state? Are they a part of the services of a library consortium, or are
they individual agreements among libraries? If you cannot find specific
examples, are there consortia or other library activities that could result in
CCD in the future?
2. Compare and contrast interlibrary loan with CCD.
3. Do you believe that participation in a consortium is necessarily
advantageous to all libraries? Why or why not?

REFERENCES

Burgett, James, John Haar, and Linda L. Phillips. 2004. Collaborative Collection Development. Chicago:
American Library Association.
 C OOPER ATIV E C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D R E S O U R C E - SH AR I N G / 12 7

Kinner, Laura, and Alice Crosetto. 2009. “Balancing Act for the Future: How the Academic Library Engages
in Collection Development at the Local and Consortial Levels.” Journal of Library Administration 49
(May-June): 419–37.

SELECTED READINGS

Allen, Barbara McFadden. 1999. “Consortia and Collections: Achieving a Balance between Local Action and
Collaborative Interest.” Journal of Library Administration 28, no. 4: 85–90.
Atkinson, Ross. 2003. “Uses and Abuses of Cooperation in a Digital Age.” Collection Management 28, nos.
1/2: 1–20.
Connell, Ruth R. 2008. “Eight May Be Too Many: Getting a Toe-Hold on Cooperative Collection Building.”
Collection Management 33, nos. 1/2: 17–28.
Croft, Janet Brennan. 2005. “Interlibrary Loan and Licensing: Tools for Proactive Contract Management.”
Journal of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4: 41–53.
Gammon, Julie A., and Michael Zeoli. 2003. “Practical Cooperative Collecting for Consortia: Books-Not-
Bought in Ohio.” Collection Management 28, nos. 1/2: 77–105.
Hazen, Dan. 2005. “Better Mousetraps in Turbulent Times? The Global Resources Network as a Vehicle for
Library Cooperation.” Journal of Library Administration 42, no. 2: 35–55.
Hoffert, Barbara. 2006. “The United Way: Will Public Libraries Follow Academics as They Take
Collaborative Collection Development One Step Further?” Library Journal 131 (May 1): 38–14.
Hruska, Martha, and Kathy Arsenault. 2000. “Back to the Future: Building a Florida Library Research
Consortium.” Collection Management 24, nos. 1/2: 79–85.
Irwin, Ken. 2008. “Comparing Circulation Rates of Monographs and Anthologies of Literary Criticism:
Implications for Cooperative Collection Development.” Collection Management 33, nos. 1/2: 69–81.
Perrault, Anna. 2000. “The Printed Book: Still in Need of CCD.” Collection Management 24, nos. 1/2: 119–36.
 CHAPTER 9

Legal Issues in Collection

Development

OVERVIEW

In this chapter we will examine several of the major legal questions and issues that are rel-
evant to collection development activities. For electronic resources in particular, the prob-
lems are especially knotty, since both statutory law and the applicable judicial decisions
have only just begun to cover all the potential issues involved with or suggested by the
acquisition of intellectual property in a form other than on the printed page.
This chapter is, of course, not intended to make lawyers out of librarians, but it will
introduce you to a number of important legal issues in order to better inform you about
those issues and advise you on how to proceed when you are confronted with them. The
recognition of a legal problem or issue is the all-important first step. Sometimes you can
take the next step yourself, but consultation with your library’s attorneys to make sure that
you are proceeding in the way that they feel is appropriate may also be indicated, especially
in terms of developing general policies, in final review of contracts, and so on.
In this chapter we will also explore a number of issues involving diversity and disabil-
ity that can have legal ramifications for library collection and management. Some of these
issues are purely legal in nature and can be technical, but others involve simple common
sense, whether they are, for example, interactions with new arrivals in this country whose
command of English is less than fully adequate, or simple accommodations to make users
with special needs feel more welcome and comfortable in using the library. American soci-
ety has always been diverse and is becoming more so all the time. By the early twenty-first
century, roughly 40–50 percent of all schoolchildren could be considered to belong to one or
another racial or ethnic minority that is recognized by the federal government (U.S. Census
Bureau 2005).
As noted, legal issues are always implicitly, and often directly, connected to collection
development activities. The most obvious areas involve copyright and licensing. The laws
surrounding these concepts have become increasingly important as more and more of any
collection’s materials are received or made available in electronic form. Digital rights man-
agement (DRM) software and hardware also present important questions for the collection
development librarian. This chapter is intended to provide a few answers and some sugges-
tions as to how to resolve these questions.
Another and more traditional legal issue with which many collection development li-
brarians must regularly deal involves the legal aspects of handling gifts and donations to
the library; there are questions of rightful ownership to resolve, as well as questions about

/ 12 9 /
13 0 / CH AP T ER 9

meeting the donor’s desire to obtain allowable income and estate tax deductions for his or
her donations, which librarians are often called upon to answer.
A further problem involves censorship. Librarians are usually comfortable when select-
ing materials that represent cultural and ethnic differences because this is generally consid-
ered as simply the right thing to do with regard to the even-handed and impartial provision
of information; it is not and should not be done because it might or might not be deemed
politically correct, one way or another. However, librarians may find it much more difficult
to avoid self-censorship when selecting materials dealing with political, social, and moral
issues that do not represent their own beliefs. We will look at this issue closely.

COPYRIGHT AND LICENSING

Copyright became a collection development issue long ago—at about the time of the inven-
tion of the moveable-type printing press. The invention of a practical way to print and make
available written materials and manuscripts relatively quickly and cheaply moved intellec-
tual property from the hands of the repository of choice at the time in Western civilization,
that is, the church, to the populace at large (or at least the portion of the populace that could
read). Consequently, decrees and eventually laws began to be made to protect authors from
the unauthorized mass reproduction of their works.
Copyright may be described as a governmentally created right granted to the creators
of literary works to protect their individual interest in their works by prohibiting the print-
ing, publishing, importing, or selling of multiple copies of those works without their per-
mission. This right of permission belongs either to the work’s creator or to a person or orga-
nization to whom the author has sold or given that right; in essence, copyright functions as
a protection from the unauthorized mass reproduction and commercial sale of the author’s
work. From the author’s or creator’s point of view, this doubtless seems exceedingly fair, but
copyright laws can also be viewed as a serious limitation or restriction on something that is
arguably more important and central to the role of libraries and librarians—the unfettered
dissemination of information.
Copyright developed in the West in conjunction with the Renaissance and with the rise
of the nation-state; this was a time when any individual’s rights, such as they were, were es-
sentially being wrenched from the prerogative of monarchs, who previously could dispense
or withhold those rights at their own pleasure. Thus, when the Constitution of the United
States in Article I provided that Congress would have the power “to promote the progress
of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclu-
sive right to their respective writings and discoveries,” it reflected the intention of civilized
societies to move away from the arbitrary rule of monarchs to the exercise of governmental
power for rational purposes. This short but powerful statement in the U.S. Constitution is
the basis for all of our nation’s laws dealing with copyright and intellectual property. It is
remarkably well thought out and carefully drawn, and it reflects a view that access to infor-
mation is an inherent right and not a matter of royal or other governmental dispensation
and favor. In the United States, copyright has thus always been meant to reflect a balance
between the rights of authors and inventors on the one hand, and the broad dissemination
of knowledge and information for the public good on the other.
There is a tension that is naturally created by copyright laws; that is, the restriction on
resource-sharing imposed by the rights of authors to be compensated for or otherwise to
restrict the use of their work through limitations on copying. Libraries have long served as
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 131

a well-established method for disseminating information on a mass basis, free of charge to

the library patron, through the purchase and maintenance of authorized copies of works.
This dissemination is the quintessential application of what is usually referred to in copy-
right circles as the “first sale doctrine” enshrined in U.S. copyright law, which provides that
the owner of a legally obtained copy of a work has complete control over that physical copy.
The owner can use it, read it, lend it, suppress it, or even burn it; but any additional copying
of that work is regulated by the copyright laws. Thus, the owners of a physical item may
basically do anything they want with the work, except copy it.
The development in the last third of the twentieth century of fast and cheap pho-
tocopying, and the widespread use of scanning technology in the last decade, eventually
evaporated many of the physical limitations on making copies, and thus new problems for
librarians quickly arose. For instance, while only a single copy might be made for any given
patron, the aggregate number of copies was potentially extremely high. In fact, the volume
of photocopying became so great by the 1980s that copyright holders felt that their rights
were being significantly violated, and the rules of copyright in the United States had to be—
and eventually were—adjusted to reflect the new copying realities.
For librarians today, and for collection development librarians in particular, new forms
of electronic resources, scanning equipment, and optical character recognition software
have intensified exponentially the potential problems in this area, both for libraries and for
copyright holders. The rapid growth of online and electronic resources also affects our laws
and commercial relationships. The copyright issues raised by digital media’s ease of use and
access have elicited a response from owners and publishers: restrictions on the use of elec-
tronic resources through digital rights management systems incorporated into the licensing
agreements that are required of users of electronic resources as a condition for obtaining
access. The development of increasingly powerful and sophisticated communications net-
works and associated information resources will continue to have a significant impact on
intellectual property rights in the United States and around the world.
The basic philosophy underpinning copyright laws in the United States was well artic-
ulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in a case decided in 1984:

The monopoly privileges that Congress may authorize are neither unlimited nor pri-
marily designed to provide a special private benefit. Rather, the limited grant is a
means by which an important public purpose may be achieved. It is intended to moti-
vate the creative activity of authors and inventors by the provision of a special reward,
and to allow the public access to the products of their genius after the limited period
of exclusive control has expired. (Sony Corp. of America vs. Universal City Studios, 1984)

Presently, under the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, which was enacted in part to
bring U.S. law more into line with the tenets of the World Intellectual Property Organiza-
tion, copyright protection in the United States extends for the life of the author plus 70
years. The 1998 law also provides that works with so-called corporate authorship and works
that are anonymous or pseudonymous are protected for 95 years after the date of first pub-
lication or 120 years after their creation, whichever comes first. Prior to the passage of the
1998 act, works first published in 1923 would have passed into the public domain at the end
of 1998; these works were thereupon scheduled to remain out of the public domain until at
least 2019, which means we can expect to see further copyright term extension legislation
introduced in Congress in an attempt to avoid or extend the upcoming deadlines for various
works.
13 2 / CH AP T ER 9

It should be noted that U.S. copyright law also provides copyright protection to unpub-
lished (i.e., not printed for sale) works as well as published ones.
Under U.S. copyright laws, as well as the laws of most European countries, there are
stated exceptions to the exclusive rights granted to copyright owners, and these exceptions
are critical for libraries. In the United States these exceptions include the following:

• The right held by everyone to use and reproduce materials that are in the
public domain, for example, works created by U.S. federal government
employees, works never copyrighted, or works that have passed beyond the
copyright protection period
• The fair use (within the meaning of the copyright laws) of copyrighted
materials for the purposes of research, teaching, journalism, criticism, or
even parody
• Archival preservation rights for libraries, that is, the right to photograph,
archive, or otherwise copy an item in order to protect or preserve the work
• Copying for interlibrary loan for the use of another library’s patrons

Drawing the line between creators’ and users’ rights has always presented lawmakers with
a vexing and complicated problem. The creators of works, as well as of patentable inven-
tions, must be encouraged to risk creating something new while still making their work
available in some form to the public; if their work risks becoming free for the asking (i.e.,
if there were no copyright protection), the author or inventor would be strongly discour-
aged from even bothering to create it—the avoidance of which unhappy result has always
been a major justification for the copyright laws. But users of materials also have needs,
and they enjoy certain rights that the copyright laws recognize. The proper balancing of
these interests forms the basis for any discussion of the proper extent and nature of the
copyright laws.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), passed by Congress in 1998 in con-
junction with the Copyright Term Extension Act, contains a number of special restrictions
that are specifically applicable to electronic resources. For instance, the law prohibits the
“circumvention” of any effective “technological protection measure” utilized by a copyright
holder to restrict access to the copyrighted materials. In other words, no breaking of pass-
word protections or encryptions is allowed. The DMCA also prohibits the manufacture of
any device, or the offering of any service, that is primarily designed to defeat such a protec-
tion measure. Thus, digital rights management (DRM) systems are protected in the United
States through the provision in the DMCA of legal remedies against both actions taken to
avoid or defeat DRM systems and the suppliers of circumvention technologies and equip-
ment intended to allow persons to do just that. This anti-circumvention clause presents a
major legal concern that libraries have with DRM systems. Under the DMCA, anti-circum-
vention appears to be an absolute offense (i.e., either a crime or a civil offense) no matter
the reason why the circumvention occurred; within the European Union, however, rights
holders must allow bona fide uses that are exceptions to the exclusive rights of the copyright
holders, regardless of how those rights may be protected. Thus, the balance in Europe may
be fairly said to be in favor of the user, not at the stage of sanctions for circumvention, but
rather at the earlier stage of the very exercise of the exception constrained by a technical
measure.
Upon the widespread introduction fifty years ago of the practical and inexpensive-
to-operate photocopying machine, many librarians had to become intimately familiar with
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 13 3

copyright law and its provisions regarding hard copies of works. In this century librarians
must become accustomed to dealing with copyright issues in connection with the electronic
delivery of information services. At first glance, it might be relatively easy to consider that
the same restrictions should apply to electronic materials as those applicable to hard copies;
that is, no copies of material not in the public domain may be made without permission be-
yond those needed for fair use, archival, or interlibrary loan purposes. But the restrictions
applicable to electronic resources can extend much further. This is because the restrictions
can be effected through licensing agreements, which are really extensions not of copyright
law at all, but of the application of principles of contract law.
Licensing issues are dealt with extensively in the balance of this chapter. But it is im-
portant to keep in mind that the Internet and the Web did not introduce libraries to the
concept of resource licensing. For instance, OCLC, Dialog, and other online mainframe sys-
tems have for many years required libraries to enter into network resource license agree-
ments. But CD-ROM acquisitions, quickly followed by Internet and web resources such as
electronic journals and other full-text resources, have opened the proverbial Pandora’s box
of issues and problems for libraries in the area of copyright and licensing.
Distance education has also increased the strain on libraries in regard to copyright and
licensing issues, although the Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act of
2002 updated copyright law to broaden instructors’ legal use of copyrighted materials in
online instruction at accredited, nonprofit educational institutions.

Creative Commons Licenses

A different approach to copyright involves the relatively new concept of Creative Commons
licenses. The Creative Commons website (http://creativecommons.org/choose/) provides
the templates for each of their four types of licenses. In granting such a license, the copy-
right holder retains the rights to his or her work, but is able to specify ways that the work
can be used or distributed without the user first having to seek copyright permission from
the holder. Many researchers, artists, musicians, and scholars would rather see their mate-
rials used than restricted, so long as their authorship is appropriately acknowledged. The
Creative Commons license ensures that the author gets credit for the material used, but it
does not make the user jump through legal hoops to use it. The license therefore seeks to
encourage, not discourage, use.
The Creative Commons licenses are of four types:

1. Attribution
2. Share alike
3. Noncommercial
4. No derivative works

The attribution license allows others to copy, distribute, display, or perform the copyrighted
work and make derivative works based upon it, but only if they give credit in the way the
copyright right holder specifies in the license. The share alike license allows others to dis-
tribute derivative works only under a license identical in effect to the license that governs
the original work. The noncommercial license, as the name indicates, allows others to copy,
distribute, display, and perform the copyrighted work and derivative works based upon
it, but only for noncommercial uses. The no derivative works license allows others to copy,
13 4 / CH AP T ER 9

distribute, display, and perform only exact copies of the copyrighted work, but not any
derivative works based upon it (http://creativecommons. org/about/licenses).
Now let’s examine the principal ways in which DRM and licensing interact with library
uses of materials.

Fair Use

One of the most important tools for users of copyrighted information in the United
States, often called the safety valve of copyright, has always been the doctrine of fair
use. A highly simplified definition of fair use states that it “permits the reproduction,
for legitimate purposes, of material taken from a copyrighted work to a limited extent
that will not cut into the copyright holder’s potential market for the sale of copies.”
(Schlosser 2006, 12; emphasis in original)

Educational institutions rely heavily on fair use to bring materials other than textbooks to
students.
The Copyright Law of 1976 brought together and formalized in statutory form numer-
ous court decisions to distill four basic factors to be considered when determining what
constitutes permissible fair use:

• The purpose and character of the use

• The nature of the copyrighted work
• The amount and substantiality of the portion of the work used
• The effect of the use upon the potential market for the copyrighted work

The most ubiquitous and easiest to apply of these criteria has been the amount and substan-
tiality criterion, which can be observed and measured objectively. Fair use has been the ref-
uge for all who step up with some loose change or a debit card to use a photocopy machine.
The limited copies allowed for research, teaching, and so on have traditionally worked more
or less satisfactorily. But many of the traditional fair use rights (or in a slightly more lim-
ited way, the “fair dealing” requirements in the United Kingdom and Canada) that libraries
have enjoyed in regard to print materials are not necessarily ensured in the new age of
electronic information. Contracts for the acquisition and utilization of electronic resources
have become increasingly common and at the same time have become more complex. This
is an area where acquisitions librarians generally have been slow to react. Although it is
obvious that electronic products do not function in the same way as most traditional print
resources, the corollary that electronic publishers will not function in the same way as print
publishers seems to have come as a surprise.
Nevertheless, it remains an important requirement for library acceptance of DRM that
those systems allow for a proper modicum of fair use or fair dealing with protected content
if the library is to continue to carry out its traditional role of disseminating knowledge to
all who want to acquire it.
All of these considerations came to a head in a federal copyright infringement lawsuit
originating in 2008 in Atlanta against Georgia State University’s librarians. The lawsuit was
brought by the Cambridge University Press and other major textbook publishers in regard
to the library’s practices in facilitating an e-reserve system for excerpts from copyrighted
items selected by university professors for the use of their students along the lines of the
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 13 5

photocopied “course-packs” of course-related articles that were traditionally placed on re-

serve in the library. This lawsuit, in which almost all the items “e-copied” were originally
ruled as coming within the fair use protection, has been watched by universities around the
country for its interpretation of the fair use doctrine in regard to electronic copies created
for educational use. The question was: were the e-reserves a fair use of copyrighted material
or, as the publishers argued, were they a “flagrant and ongoing unauthorized distribution of
copyrighted materials” facilitated by the library’s e-reserve system?
In 2012 a U.S. district court found copyright violations in only 5 of 99 of the e-copied
excerpts, and it found that the Georgia State University library’s policy had constituted a
good faith interpretation of the fair use provision. The court also ordered the plaintiff pub-
lishers to pay Georgia State University’s attorney fees, which were substantial. The ruling
was appealed by the Oxford University Press to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and
in 2014 that court reversed and remanded the case, with instructions to the trial judge to
rebalance the various factors considered in determining fair use.
Once the case wound its way back to the trial court level, the judge, applying the ap-
peals court standards, still found only four cases of infringement—one fewer than in her
first ruling. Not to be outdone, the publishers appealed again; the re-appealed case was
argued before the 11th Circuit for the second time in July 2017. Regardless of the ultimate
result of the Georgia State case (portions of which remain pending as of this writing, Sep-
tember 2018), fair use is a topic that will likely wind up in the lap of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Congress may have to step in and revise the law yet again, which could generate further
litigation. As the lawyers will tell you, this presents a hard case to decide, and these sorts of
cases have the potential “to make bad law.” Stay tuned.

Purchasing versus Licensing

When a library acquires any new electronic resources, the first key issue to consider is
whether the library will actually be purchasing the resource outright, or only obtaining a
right or license to use or access it. Electronic vendors rarely, if ever, offer to sell their elec-
tronic products outright today. Rather, they simply provide to libraries something that falls
far short of the ownership that the collection development process implies—a mere license
of the right to access the products—and for good measure a license may be revocable under
certain conditions. Print materials are even being licensed in some cases, primarily in fields
such as law and medicine, where the currency of information may be more important than
its historical or archival significance.
The contrast to a collection development librarian’s traditional process of perma-
nent book acquisitions could not be more stark. Licensing and DRM systems have shifted
the focus from reliance on copyright laws to the provisions of the contracts between the
rights holder and the user to determine what can be done with a work. Thus, dealing with
licensing agreements is an unavoidable task for acquisitions librarians. Moreover, manag-
ing and negotiating these licensing agreements presents a daunting task for many librar-
ies because the number of available databases and other electronic resources continues
to increase rapidly, and the variety of licensing restrictions and special clauses applicable
to them seems to be growing at an even more rapid rate. In addition to the licensing re-
strictions, these electronic resources may also bring with them DRM systems that serve
to enforce (and sometimes effectively extend the scope of ) the license agreement. The
distinction between purchasing and licensing may appear inconsequential at first sight,
13 6 / CH AP T ER 9

but it is critical regarding the fair use rights of the library purchaser, for it determines
the library’s long-term access to the material, which is a major collection development
consideration.
From the beginning, the drafters of copyright laws have generally agreed that at least
some kinds of copying should always be permitted. Over the years there developed the con-
cept of fair use, whereby a purchaser of, for example, a copyrighted book might lawfully
copy without fee or restriction a few pages for personal use, copyright notwithstanding. The
problem lies in defining what constitutes fair use, which is differently applied in different
countries (most countries do not apply the fair use concept as liberally as has traditionally
been the case in the United States). As noted above, U.S. copyright law codifies the fair
use doctrine in general terms, referring to such permissible purposes or uses as criticism,
comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Looking at all these factors,
and depending on the circumstances, fair use might cover making not only a single copy but
also multiple copies. For example, the statute specifically states that multiple copying for
classroom use may fall within the category of fair use copying.
The current U.S. copyright law also recognizes a first sale doctrine, which allows the
purchaser of a legally produced copy of a copyrighted work (e.g., a book that has been pur-
chased from the copyright holder, such as a publisher) the right to sell or loan that copy
to others. But if the actual legal title to the work itself is still retained by the vendor (i.e.,
if the work itself is not sold), access to the work is said to be licensed, and the purchaser
obtains only a right to the use of the item, rather than the full bundle of rights that a
purchaser ordinarily obtains when he buys a book. This means that, since a sale has not
occurred, copyright concepts such as fair use and the first sale doctrine are simply not
directly applicable.
These distinctions are important in the library context. For instance, a licensed right of
use does not automatically allow the library to do all the things it typically and traditionally
has done with its library materials (such as loan, circulate, or even sell the work to others).
In a licensing regime, what the library can legally do with the resource being obtained is
limited to those activities or uses that are specifically set forth in the contract or license
document pursuant to which the library acquires the item. Therefore, the license document
itself becomes a much more critical instrument than a typical purchase order, and in the
case of libraries, the terms of use contained in a license agreement become matters of such
importance that they should always be carefully negotiated by the library with the vendor
of the item whenever possible.
This distinction is particularly sharply drawn for library purchases of computer soft-
ware. Many, but not all, purchase agreements for computer software allow the buyer to
make a backup copy of the software in case the original is destroyed. If this element is not
contained in the purchasing agreement, Section 117 of the Copyright Act actually authorizes
such a backup if the software was purchased. But Section 117 does not apply to licensed soft-
ware. If a library is not a purchaser of software, the library has no Section 117 rights; rather,
it has only the rights set out in the licensing agreement, which may not allow for archival
or backup copies.
Initially, when many libraries began ordering computer software and CD-ROMs, the
so-called shrink-wrap licenses printed in small type on the envelopes containing the soft-
ware were often simply ignored; many users thought, probably with some justification, that
these obscurely worded and inconspicuous licenses were so one-sided as to be virtually un-
enforceable. However, most librarians have begun to realize that these provisions, as they
have become more conventional in the commercial context, may indeed be enforceable.
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 13 7

Librarians also must deal with licenses for web-accessed databases and journals, for
which they must sign a license agreement with a publisher or distributor before being able
to access the resource at all. With this in mind, it is always advisable to inquire about the
terms of the applicable licensing agreement before ordering a product. Many publishers are
willing to send the library an advance copy of the license agreement; the library can thus
review the license to determine whether the library’s intended or expected use is indeed
an allowable one. Some publishers, unfortunately, do not even mention the existence of a
licensing agreement in their catalogs and brochures, and the contract is simply sent after
the order is placed. It thus remains possible for a product to be received and the invoice paid
before the library even gets the contract and sees the conditions imposed on its usage of the
product—a most unhappy situation.

License Negotiation

The rights the library may have to search, copy, and use the information contained in a
licensed resource are, as a matter of contract law, strictly those set forth in the license
agreement. Therefore, librarians entering into licensing agreements must face four major
challenges:

• Understanding the content of the agreement

• Determining the wording in the agreement that is required for their library
or institution
• Pinpointing those areas of the agreement that require negotiation
• Identifying who should negotiate and ultimately sign the agreement

When licensing content from an international publisher, it is also important for the library
to consider not only how treaties bind those in the country in which the library is located,
but also the extent, if any, to which copyright protection may be provided by the laws of the
country where the publisher is headquartered.
Acquisitions librarians who are negotiating licenses typically encounter one of two ba-
sic licensing concepts:

• Contracts for online services or access licenses (e.g., LexisNexis), usually

manifested by a specific written contract signed by at least the licensee,
that is, the library.
• Contracts governing the use of a licensor’s software on the licensee’s
equipment or network (essentially software licenses). Agreement of the
parties to the terms of such a contract usually is not evidenced by a signed
contract at all, but rather by a broken shrink-wrap package or a click-
through “OK” initiated by the licensee installing the software, without
which click the software cannot be installed.

Online services or access licenses involve significant ongoing obligations that are not typi-
cally involved with software licenses, such as the licensor’s obligations to provide access to
the service, or the licensee’s continuing obligation to pay for services as received. Software
licenses are not always viewed by librarians as being distinct from the ownership of the
works involved, but this distinction is important because they are not really the same. With a
13 8 / CH AP T ER 9

license, the right to use the information is typically all you get. Further complicating matters
is the fact that the license agreements used by different vendors vary widely and are neither
standardized nor all that predictable, so it is important to read each license carefully. Always
consider the following points:

• How does the vendor define “site” and “user”? For example, a site could be
undesirably limited to a particular computer, building, or campus. A user
could be a registered borrower at a public library, a faculty or staff member
or a student for an academic library or school media center, an on-site user,
anyone who comes into the library, or anyone who accesses the library via
the Internet.
• Can off-site users obtain access to the electronic resource?
• If a library has multiple branches or has units or access nodes located on
several campuses, does the license cover only the main location, or are all of
the locations appropriately provided for?
• Can users print, download, or copy from the resource? If so, is there a
limit to the number of copies they can make? Some licenses may specify
the number of copies or number of pages that may be copied, and if so, the
library will be responsible for communicating these restrictions to its users.
• Is the library allowed to make copies of the electronic resource, or portions
thereof, for interlibrary loan purposes?
• Will the library have permanent rights to the information that is licensed
in case a licensed database is subsequently canceled or removed by the
publisher? Does the library have the right to archive the material?
• Does the vendor’s software contain electronic “self-help” or a “time bomb”
or similar provision that, after a certain period of time, allows the vendor
unilaterally to shut down the library’s use of an application or resource,
either remotely or automatically, on a given date or upon the occurrence of
a given event?
• Is the library purchasing material that is already in the public domain?
Expensive bundles of electronic resources often include public domain
material as a large portion of the licensed product.
• Does the license limit the library’s ability to enhance the information, so
long as content integrity is maintained, in order to make the resource more
easily usable by its patrons (such as by adding annotations or links to other
holdings)?
• What happens if there are unauthorized uses of the resource? A license
agreement should not hold the licensee liable for unauthorized uses so long
as the licensee has implemented reasonable and appropriate measures to
notify its users of restrictions. If such uses occur, the licensor should be
required to give the licensee notice of any suspected license violations and
allow a reasonable time for the licensee to look into the matter and take
corrective actions if appropriate.
• Does the license agreement hold the licensee harmless from any actions based on
a claim that the use of the resource in accordance with the license infringes any
patent, copyright, trademark, or trade secret of any third party?
• How may the library terminate the license? The contract should provide
termination rights that are appropriate for each party.
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 13 9

Most important of all, the person reviewing the proposed license for the library should
never assume anything. Get it in writing. Always make sure that everything which the
library needs is indeed covered specifically in the license.
Unfortunately, the acquisition of electronic products means that someone in the li-
brary needs to be prepared to conduct preliminary negotiations with the licensor or vendor.
Obviously, the role of negotiator can be taken up by many different people, for example:

• Library director
• Assistant director
• Acquisitions librarian
• Systems librarian
• Counsel for the library, university, or business

Some libraries find the use of a team approach or combination of people helpful, and they
don’t designate a single individual to be responsible for all license negotiations. Often a des-
ignated individual from the library will work with the vendor to negotiate needed language
and then refer the contract to the organization’s attorney for final wording and approval.
In any event, it is important for everyone involved to learn the legal jargon of licensing
and know what the required language may be for their library or institution. The library
should also develop and follow baseline standards for what is acceptable in its licensing
contracts. The librarian or other person designated for preliminary license negotiations

Tips for a Successful Licensing Agreement

1. Avoid oral agreements. While not required in every situation, written agreements are
best. The written license will contain the items and conditions of use of the licensed con-
tent. It is the document that you, and those who follow you in your position, will consult
for interpretational purposes.
2. Understand the requirements that are placed on the library. The obligations that the
license demands of your library are important. If you see a problematic clause, but the
other party tells you not to worry because it will never be enforced, get that clause re-
moved. Make sure you can live up to the obligations in the agreement.
3. Cover all issues. Do not avoid inserting any relevant issues into a provision of the agree-
ment just because you think they may scare off the other party. It is best to get every-
thing on the table and in the agreement at the beginning in order to avoid disputes in
the future.
4. Avoid legal jargon when you can. Simple non-legalistic language that you understand
is the best approach. You want the wording to be clear to the two parties signing the
agreement and to anyone who may need to interpret and apply the agreement later.
Define ambiguous or new technical words.
5. Use consistent words and terms. Do not use “content” in one clause, “material” in anoth-
er, and then “publication” in a third.
6. Be creative, patient, and flexible.
7. Know when to walk away.
140 / CH AP T ER 9

should be prepared to reject offers and terminate negotiations with vendors if no reason-
able solution is possible. Vendors or products that don’t offer licensing contracts which can
be made satisfactory for a particular library’s clientele may simply not be worth the cost of
the license. After all, what good is an electronic resource if you cannot effectively use it for
your intended purpose?
It is best not to abdicate responsibility to legal counsel for deciding whether to sign a
particular license. The attorney will understand the legal ramifications and be able to ex-
plain them to you, but the attorney will not necessarily understand the ramifications of the
license restrictions from a library user’s point of view. Librarians must stay involved in the
process to ensure that licenses for electronic materials contain only those provisions that
the library and its users can live with.
In general, it appears that licensing agreements are becoming a bit more favorable for
library users—as librarians become more familiar with and adept at negotiating, and as pub-
lishers and vendors become more familiar with typical library needs and feel more comfort-
able with removing or modifying restrictions in their agreements in order to accommodate
those needs. At first, either the library market was deemed not to be a major market for
particular electronic products, or vendors simply did not understand how to write a license
for the library market. These initial problems are fortunately becoming obsolete as more
and more electronic resource vendors cater to and accommodate themselves to the library
market.
All rights and permissions need to be completely described in a document provided by
the publisher or vendor for each electronic product. Some publishers require subscribers
to officially and formally sign a license. Other publishers simply provide a document that
describes the conditions and terms governing the use of the resource. Where document ex-
ecution is required, it is necessary to ensure that the individual who signs the contract has
the authority to commit the organization to it. Few large organizations will allow a collec-
tion development or acquisitions librarian to sign an official contract. Although electronic
aggregators cannot sign contracts on your behalf, many will collect them and provide them
for your review. They can also frequently assist you if it is necessary to negotiate terms to
satisfy the requirements of your institution or governmental agency. It is vitally important
for you to read and understand the requirements for each product, even when the agree-
ment is a shrink-wrap or click-through license on a product downloaded from the Web.

Best Practices

A number of organizations have put together useful standards for libraries’ licensing agree-
ments for electronic resources. These should be reviewed for appropriateness for each
particular library’s situation. These organizations and the standards they have developed
include the following:

• Association of Research Libraries: “Licensing Electronic Resources:

Strategic and Practical Considerations for Signing Electronic Information
Delivery Agreements” (http://arl.cni.org/scomm/licensing/licbooklet.html).
This contains major considerations and good approaches to licensing
electronic resources.
• Columbia University Libraries: “Electronic Resource Coordinator Draft
License Agreement Checklist” (www.columbia.edu/cu/libraries/inside/
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 1 41

ner/license-checklist.html). This contains a checklist of seventeen items

that cover some of the most important rights and provisions to look for in a
licensing agreement.
• European Bureau of Library, Information and Documentation Associations:
“EBLIDA Position Papers and Statements: Intellectual Property Rights”
(www.eblida.org/). Although this website is focused on European law,
there are helpful links and information on licensing in general, including
consortia.
• Licensing Models website: “Model Standard Licenses for Use by
Publishers, Librarians and Subscription Agents for Electronic Resources”
(www.licensingmodels.com). This provides standard licenses designed
for the acquisition of electronic journals and other electronic resources.
Four separate licenses are provided in various formats for single academic
institutions, academic consortia, public libraries, and corporate and other
special libraries. Commentary is provided for each of the four licenses.
• New England Law Library Consortium: “NELLCO Decision Criteria
Worksheet for Electronic Acquisitions” (www.nellco.org/general/criteria
.htm). This sets out a 31-question checklist geared toward law libraries, but
the ideas and concepts behind the questions can easily be used and adapted
by other types of libraries. This checklist covers much more than simply
licensing issues.
• University of Texas System: “Software and Database License Agreement
Checklist” (www.utsystem.edu/OGC/intellectualproperty/dbckfrm1.htm).
This covers eight major areas of concern and guides librarians through a
typical analysis of a licensing contract.
• Yale University: “Licensing Digital Information: A Resource for Librarians”
(www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/index.shtml). This presents a collection
of materials that will provide librarians with a better understanding of the
issues raised by licensing agreements in the digital age.

DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT

Digital rights management remains a technological area very much in its infancy, with a
multitude of issues that still need to be resolved. As librarians, we tend to focus on the prob-
lems DRM poses for libraries, but to be fair, it should be noted that it is currently a source
of confusion and complexity for publishers as well.
What exactly constitutes a digital rights management system? DRM includes a range
of technologies that give rights owners varying degrees of control over how digital content
and services may be used. Generally, DRM technologies enable copyright holders to protect
their electronically accessible material from unauthorized use through software or hard-
ware, and to determine under what circumstances users can access the digital content. DRM
inherently deals with contracts—a license is a kind of contract. Beyond controlling simple
access to digital materials, DRM can also control specific operations on the content, such
as the ability to print, copy, or save it, and it can also limit the number of times a particular
operation can be performed, such as allowing a document to be viewed for a maximum of,
for example, four times. Most DRM systems also persistently protect materials, meaning
that the content is never in an unencrypted state, whether during storage, distribution, or
142 / CH AP T ER 9

use. (See figure 9.1 for a diagram of a sample DRM system.) An end user must have a key, a
permit, or a license before accessing the DRM-controlled material.
DRM is most often associated with the management and protection of publishers’ elec-
tronic assets, including e-books, e-journals, e-music, electronic databases, and digital films
and videos. However, it should be remembered that DRM technologies may also be utilized
by companies or organizations that need to protect their internal documents from unau-
thorized users.

Library and Content/Database Provider

Library User

CONTENT
WEB

Content License
CLIENT Safekeeping Phrasing

Secure Container
with Content
and License Content
Distribution

Content Use Content

Preparation
Authorization
- Watermarking
- Compression
- Enrichment
- Wrapping
Booking

VENDOR/
BROKER SECURE
CONTAINER
Payment

CONTENT,
USER DATA ,
Customer METADATA , and
Accounts LICENSE
REPOSITORY

DRM Platform

FIGURE 9.1 Sample digital rights management process

 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 143

DRM can be viewed as a new business model that utilizes the almost unlimited poten-
tial of the Web, or it can be viewed as a restriction on fair use and even upon free speech.
Some DRM opponents go so far as to state that the acronym really stands for “digital restric-
tion management.” Although DRM systems are usually viewed as enforcing or protecting
copyrights, DRM can easily go farther—it is just as easy for a DRM system to prevent access
to a public domain work as it is to block access to a work protected by copyright. DRM can
also be and is often used to compel users to view materials, such as commercials (or an FBI
warning) on a DVD that they might wish to avoid. Whether you view DRM as “good” or
“evil” depends greatly on your position as either a user or producer of digital information
and on the particular implementation of DRM technologies.
DRM technologies impose controls on content that correspond to contractual or li-
cense terms, regardless of whether or not these license terms conform to the copyright
law provisions regarding fair use. A library can enter into a contract that limits the rights
formerly guaranteed under copyright law (U.S. Code, Title 17, Section 108(f )(4)). Unlike the
situation with traditional print publications, however, there is no going beyond what the
vendor sets as the restrictions for use without further negotiations with the licensor. In the
past, libraries have relied heavily on the fair use aspects of the copyright laws that allow for
the liberal use of copyrighted materials for educational purposes, research, and personal
use in order to deliver services to their patrons. Fair use activities do not require the au-
thorization of the rights holder, so libraries did not need to seek permission for such use.
By contrast, libraries must ensure that any DRM systems which control the use of licensed
materials do not eliminate the public, educational, and library user rights that the copyright
laws allow for purchased materials.
Privacy and the protection of data are also issues to be considered with DRM. Digital
rights management systems by their very nature allow the tracking of usage by individuals.
Within the European Union, such tracking is lawful as long as the user is informed and
gives informed consent to the tracking. In the United States, many libraries operate under
state-mandated privacy laws that may forbid such tracking. At their simplest, DRM systems
impose restrictions on what individuals can do with materials that are bought or licensed
from a vendor or rights holder. At the next level of control, DRM systems can report back
to the vendor or rights holder on the activities of users. Such reporting could be part of
a pay-per-view system, or it could report back to the rights holder all attempts to make
unauthorized copies or unauthorized use. Often there are third parties who monitor and
collect information about the use of the items. This activity is usually not well disclosed,
since knowledge of these data-collecting activities requires reading the fine print in privacy
statements.
DRM technologies can be used in a variety of business models for the distribution of
content, including paid downloads, subscriptions, pay-per-view (or pay-per-listen), usage
metering, peer-to-peer distribution, and selling rights. It is important for librarians to be
alert to the proper balance between DRM uses and users’ rights, since the technology is still
developing.

Characteristics of DRM Systems

Currently, there are a number of DRM architectural approaches that allow copyright hold-
ers to control the use of their copyrighted works. These systems may make use of a number
of forms of proprietary rendering software such as Adobe Acrobat (PDF) or all or part of
144 / CH AP T ER 9

the Real Networks Media Suite or the Content Scrambling System for DVDs, or many oth-
ers. There is no one system that predominates in the marketplace at this point since the
technology is still evolving, but it is important to note that interoperability between these
different technologies remains almost nonexistent, a situation that has serious implications
for libraries and individual consumers. Whatever approach is used, DRM systems apply
rules to content that effectively impose constraints on the use and distribution of electronic
materials. The DRM system thereby serves to enforce the license between a content pro-
vider and the consumer.
The basic functions of a DRM system are

• controlling the access to copyrighted works and possibly other information

products;
• restricting the unauthorized copying of those works;
• identifying the relevant copyright holders and possibly the conditions of
use; and
• protecting the integrity of the identification information.

In short, DRM includes everything that someone does with content in order to trade or
make use of it. The components of a DRM system can include all or some of the following:

• Secure containers that make the content inaccessible to unauthorized users

• Rights expression, which describes who is authorized to use or access the
content
• A content identification and description system to identify content and to
associate descriptive metadata with it
• The identification of people and organizations that are intended to interact
with the content
• Algorithms to authenticate people or organizations that desire to interact
with the content
• Technologies to persistently associate the identifiers and other information
with the content (watermarks, fingerprints, etc.)
• Mechanisms to report events such as the purchase of a piece of content
(pay-per-view)
• Payment systems

Some or all of these components work together to provide a trusted environment for the
secure handling of digital content between the contracting or licensing parties.
The process of using a document from a DRM-controlled source involves the following
steps (see figure 9.1 and the sidebar “DRM Terms” on page 145):

• The user requests a resource from a remote source through a file transfer or
through streaming technologies.
• Encryption of files in an individualized form for the user’s environment.
• The user attempts to take some action (such as making a copy), and
the rendering application determines whether the request requires
authorization.
• If necessary, the attributes of the user’s request are sent to a license server
by a DRM client component.
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 145

• The license server determines the applicable policies or rules based on the
submitted request attributes.
• If the use is not already licensed, a financial transaction may occur.
• A license package is assembled and securely transferred to the client.
• The DRM client authenticates the received policies or rules, decrypts the
content, and issues an authorization for viewing or printing, or whatever
action was requested.
• Only then is content rendered or otherwise provided for use as requested
by the end user.

DRM in Libraries

With e-books and journals that are available in electronic form, a number of databases that
libraries are now routinely licensing have embedded DRM systems that can be configured
to library options based on the licensing fee that the library pays. For example, figure 9.2 is
a screen capture of a FirstSearch result when the article is owned by the local library.

DRM Terms
Authorization is the process of determining whether or not the requested use of
information or content is allowed under the licensing agreement.
Clients are the components of the DRM system that reside on the library’s side, such
as the rendering application and the user’s identification mechanism.
Encryption is the use of algorithms that restrict the access, analysis, and
manipulation of digital materials in their native form without proper access
authorization.
Licensing phrasing is the process of determining the conditions under which the
content providers offer their materials. These conditions may be standardized or
defined individually for each client or group of users.
Watermarking involves embedding a signal directly into the content; an example
of one variety of DRM systems is provided in figure 9.1. DRM systems may be
more simplified than this one, but most of the potential attributes of a DRM
system are represented in the figure. The signal is imperceptible to humans but
can be detected by a computer. The signal represents the license associated
with the content. In addition to watermarking, copyright holders can also create
digital identifiers for copies of their works by “fingerprinting” a digital version.
Fingerprinting converts the content of the work into a unique digital identification
mark by applying an algorithm to selected features of that work.
Wrapping is the process whereby the license and the encrypted content itself are
bundled in an additional mechanism, the result of which is a secure container
that prevents unauthorized access throughout the life of the content.
146 / CH AP T ER 9

FIGURE 9.2 OCLC FirstSearch DRM, periodical owned by local library

The user can find the article through the FirstSearch database, but once this particu-
lar article is selected, the DRM system sends the user back to the local library where it is
owned, with options for searching the local catalog. In this case, the library has licensed the
right for users to receive full-text e-mail delivery only in the case where the material is not
already owned by the library.
Figure 9.3 is a screen capture of the delivery option for an article that is not owned by
the same library. The DRM system determines when searchers are authorized to receive
full text and when they are not, based on the holdings of the library that has licensed the
database services.
All is not lost for librarians in the brave new world of DRM systems. While fair use,
as provided for in U.S. copyright law and traditionally taken advantage of by libraries in
carrying out their core role as disseminators of information, has increasingly been eroded
in the digital environment, most librarians believe strongly that traditional fair use rights
must be maintained with regard to electronic resources as with print publications, and they
are working to ensure that the license agreements they sign respect this fundamental right.
Meanwhile, however, electronic publishers and other holders of copyright on materials that
are available electronically see a significant distinction. They base the distinction on the po-
tential for the essentially free transferability of limitless numbers of perfect electronic cop-
ies, unrestricted by the traditional print environment factors of copy quality degradation
and the physical time and space restraints that manual copying typically impose. Striking a
balance between these competing interests is difficult, but librarians have to recognize that,
increasingly, our purchase of and reliance upon electronic resources is moving us away from
traditional, familiar copyright considerations and its fair use and first use concepts into the
unfamiliar world of licensing and contract law.
The DRM approach differs from traditional copyright management in that it is proac-
tive rather than reactive, allowing the creators and providers of digital content to control
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 147

FIGURE 9.3 Sample InfoTrack DRM document delivery option for periodical
not owned by local library

access to and use of their products. DRM technologies restrict unauthorized use on the
front end rather than only after an infringement, whereas a copyright holder can respond
only with a lawsuit. It is this up-front nature of DRM that must concern librarians and us-
ers, since it involves a determination of fair use that is ultimately governed by algorithms
rather than by a particular circumstance or use. For DRM technologies to be successful
in the long run, the DRM industry will have to find a way to balance compensation to the
rights holders with the rights of end users to access and make fair use of digital information.

DONATIONS: LEGAL AND TAX ISSUES

Libraries are often the beneficiaries of gifts of books, documents, papers, and even elec-
tronic archives made by individuals, families, and corporations. These gifts, which usually
arrive at the library en masse upon a person’s death or upon the closing down of a profes-
sional practice, can contain relatively rare and out-of-print resources that can be of consid-
erable worth to the library. Public libraries that need multiple copies of popular works can
benefit as well from such donations in order to replace worn-out or lost copies or simply to
supplement a meager acquisitions budget. There is always much chaff with the wheat, how-
ever, and a discussion of how to evaluate these materials for the development of a library’s
148 / CH AP T ER 9

collection has been provided earlier in this book. The legal issues discussed here are related
to the provenance and tax deductibility of the value of the items given.

Provenance

First, consider the items’ provenance, that is, where came from. For example, how confident
are you that the donor is truly the rightful owner of the materials being donated? If those
materials are not the property of the donor, it presents a serious problem, since the library
can acquire no rights from a person who is merely in unlawful possession. The old saw about
possession being “nine-tenths” of the law has applicability in some circumstances, but not
to the question of legality of ownership. For most family libraries or collections that are pro-
posed for donation, there is no problem—the works given are typically of a type ordinarily
obtained at a bookstore or by mail order.
But when rare or potentially valuable items are involved, some investigation is always
appropriate. Does the donor have adequate proof of where the valuable item came from or
what was paid for it? If it is represented as having been found in Grandma’s attic after all
these years, how likely does that seem in the circumstances? Checking with known holders
of the same work, such as state archive departments or libraries that typically hold such
items, may be useful in this regard.
Likewise, when a large collection arrives with items numbering in the thousands, you
should check the bona fides of what is being represented to you. Did another library actually
close? And if it did, is this the person that the closing library actually authorized to dispose
of the items, and so on?
The main legal point to keep in mind is that gift acquisitions always have to be viewed
with an appropriately skeptical eye—always look the gift horse in the mouth.

Tax Deductions

The U.S. Internal Revenue Code (and the tax codes of most states that impose a personal or
corporate income tax) provides for deductions from taxable income for the value of gifts of
books, journals, and other similar materials made by individuals, estates, trusts, and cor-
porations to the libraries of qualifying organizations, which are generally educational, gov-
ernmental, or charitable entities. Similar deductions are allowed to estates with regard to
inheritance, estate, and other death taxes. These deductions are not unlimited in amount,
and they vary depending on various factors based on the nature or level of income, and so
on, of the contributor. These factors are applicable to the individual donor, but are not of
much concern to the library recipient.
The factors that are important from the recipient’s point of view are (a) the qualifica-
tion of the recipient institution under the tax codes as an entity to which deductible gifts
may be made, and (b) the duties of the recipient regarding the valuation and acknowledg-
ment of receipt of the gift so that the taxing authorities will give the donor a deduction for
the gift.
Concerning recipient qualification, it is important to note that it is not necessary for
a library to be, or be part of, a qualifying institution to receive a gift; the gift must sim-
ply be potentially tax deductible. Generally speaking, qualifying entities include govern-
mental units, such as cities or counties, tax-exempt corporations that operate educational
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 149

institutions, such as most private universities and schools, and public schools, colleges, and
universities, and in each case their subsidiary units or subdivisions. A nongovernmental
entity, in order to be eligible for tax-deductible contributions, may have to apply to the In-
ternal Revenue Service for a determination of its status. If it does so, and if the application
is approved, the institution will receive a letter from the IRS confirming its status (often
referred to as a 501(c)(3) letter, the name being derived from the applicable section of the
Internal Revenue Code for most tax-exempt entities). Potential donors may wish to see a
copy of this letter, and it is a good idea to have one in your desk drawer that you can pull
out for the occasion.
If the library does not qualify for deductible donations (and to make sure of this, check
with your institution’s legal counsel), then it is certainly appropriate to advise potential
donors of that fact before a gift is completed. For some, this fact will be irrelevant; that is,
when the donor wants to make the gift anyway regardless of its tax deductibility, but in
most situations it will be an important consideration.
In the event your institution qualifies, and the proposed gift is one the library wishes
to receive or accept, then there are important duties to be performed. Gifts such as books,
manuscripts, and papers are referred to in the law as “in-kind” gifts to distinguish them
from cash gifts. Large-value in-kind gifts (i.e., books and journals with an appraised value of
more than $5,000, or smaller gifts that are part of a series of gifts of books and journals made
by a single donor in a single tax year and having an aggregate value of more than $5,000)
are required to be treated specially. The majority of gifts in kind made to most libraries are
likely to be valued for tax purposes at less than $5,000, and here the rules are simpler; the
gifts are normally deductible by the donor at the full and fair market value of the items con-
tributed unless they are put to an unrelated use by the donor organization, meaning use in a
manner that is “unrelated to the purpose or function constituting the basis of the charitable
organization’s exemption under section 501” (26 Code of Federal Regulations 1.170A-4(b)
(3)). Acquiring the gift for the purpose of selling it would be an example of an unrelated use.
No deduction is allowed for federal tax purposes for a contribution of $250 or more
unless the gift is contemporaneously acknowledged in writing by the recipient entity. The
acknowledgment must generally describe the items received and state whether the organi-
zation provided the donor anything in return for the gift and, if so, a good-faith estimate
of the value of the benefits provided must be submitted. Most of the time, book donors
will not receive anything in return other than something of insignificant value, but if the
amounts are large and, for example, a big party is thrown for the donor, the value of the
meal and so on might best be listed (the donor has to subtract whatever this amounts to
from the deduction).
For gifts valued over $5,000, the rules get more complicated. Generally, a taxpayer is
required to get a written appraisal of the property donated that supports at least the de-
duction taken. The library should avoid making any representations as to such value; the
responsibility for obtaining an appraisal is the donor’s, and the library should not undertake
to provide it.
More troublesome are requirements recently imposed by the Internal Revenue Service
on recipients such as libraries to report the sale or disposition of any part of a large gift if
the sale or disposition occurs within three years of the date of the gift. These reporting re-
quirements are intended to better enforce the rule on unrelated use described above. The
government seems to fear that taxpayers may be offloading vast quantities of more or less
unusable items onto qualifying organizations that have no use for them; in other words, the
purpose of the charitable deduction is not really being carried out through such gifts.
15 0 / CH AP T ER 9

With the small in-kind donations (less the $5,000) there are few problems. But the
larger gifts present significant record-keeping problems that many libraries will not want to
have to face (failure to make the required reports can subject a library to a fine of as much
as $10,000). Even the largest libraries have had to adjust their gift-receiving policies. The
“Gifts” web page of the University of California Library (www.lib.berkeley.Gifts/gifts.html)
notes:

The Library’s intention in accepting gifts is that they be added to its holdings if need-
ed. Thus every effort is made to accept as gifts only items appropriate for addition to
Library collections. Owing to the extent of the Library’s holdings, it is normally the
case that many gift volumes will not be added to the Library’s collections; yet it is never
possible to predict which, nor is Library staff able to maintain records of a detail suf-
ficient to report to donors after the fact which volumes have been retained and which
have not. In determining the appropriate amount to claim as a charitable contribution
for a gift-in-kind on their federal tax return, donors and their accountants may wish to
consult Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations, including the following sections:
1.170A-1(c)(1), 1.170A-4(b)(1), 1.170A-4(b)(2), 1.170A-4(b)(3), 1.170A-4(b)(3)(i), 1.170A-4(b)
(3)(ii), 1.6050L-1(a)(2)(i).

While such statements, and the lengthy citation of mind-numbingly complex Treasury reg-
ulations, undoubtedly have a tendency to discourage large in-kind gifts, the adoption of
a substantially similar policy by most libraries in regard to large charitable donations is
probably advisable.

DIVERSITY ISSUES

Often when we hear the word diversity we think only of racial diversity, and although this is
an important issue, diversity as a concept also encompasses gender, ethnicity, sexual orien-
tation, age, and special needs issues. Ignoring these matters can lead to problems with your
users and potential legal actions.
An important concern in providing for the needs of our country’s growing multi-
cultural communities is the need to adopt a vision of collection development that is ap-
propriate to the community to be served. Multicultural communities require materials
in the language(s) in which the residents are most comfortable (regardless of the appro-
priateness of the goal of English competency), and these communities also benefit from
biographies representing persons of various racial and ethnic backgrounds, picture books
featuring characters that reflect the many different minorities, and resources that en-
courage young adults to research and take pride in their cultures. Diversity in collection
development is also important for promoting public awareness and knowledge of other
cultures even when the particular community that the library serves is not all that di-
verse (Carlton 1993).
Fundamental philosophical issues also must be considered as libraries reach out to their
multicultural communities. There must be a commitment on the part of library administra-
tors and librarians to expand their own cultural awareness, which can often be fostered by
hirings that result in more diverse staff. For librarians to better serve diverse communities,
they must clearly understand who the library serves and what the needs of those users are.
To be most effective, the resulting vision must be known, recognized, and supported by all
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 151

employees, from top management all the way down to the library pages (Carlton 1993). In
a 1992 article, Quezada emphasized the importance of making all of a library’s mainstream
activities accessible to often-underserved populations, rather than just offering a few token
programs aimed at minority users. Working with a trainer or facilitator who specializes in
cultural diversity can help all library employees to examine their own beliefs and become
better aware of and learn to appreciate the beneficial aspects of other cultures. It should
be a library’s mission to ensure that library services are available to the entire community,
especially those who have been traditionally underserved (Quezada 1992).

Alternative Literature

Publications that represent a minority viewpoint are often referred to as alternative lit-
erature. These sorts of items are generally published by small, independent presses. Care
should be taken in reviewing items from these presses, since they are sometimes managed
by groups with a definite left-wing, right-wing, or radical political persuasion. The publi-
cations of these presses should not, however, be ignored even though librarians may judge
them to be biased and not presenting a balanced position. They may be the only publica-
tions available to present these views in a positive light, and so they may be the only way to
collect materials representative of all sides of an issue.

Gender and Sexual Orientation Issues

Gender and sexual orientation issues are the source of many present-day tensions between
libraries and their users.
One example is the dilemma of gay men’s book clubs in Wisconsin:

Because of the absence of dialogue, a tense relationship appears to exist between Wis-
consin’s gay men’s book discussion groups and their local public libraries. Public library
directors express interest in accommodating these groups if approached, but face bud-
get restrictions and local communities that may oppose these gatherings: gay men’s
book clubs prefer meeting in private homes and other openly gay-friendly environ-
ments largely because of conservatism of cultural institutions in their collective mem-
ories. (Pruitt 2010, 121)

While a library may say that all are welcome, it may have to prove this in some way before
diverse groups will begin to feel welcome in that institution.

AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ISSUES

It has been said that one in five Americans has some condition that qualifies as a disability
under the Americans with Disabilities Act. But the guidelines and standards that apply to
libraries to meet the needs of the disabled are often unclear and difficult to achieve. While
the majority of these guidelines affect primarily the service activities of the library, a num-
ber apply to the management of the collection as well. It is on these that we will concentrate
in this section.
1 52 / CH AP T ER 9

Legal Issues

The United States, along with eighty-one other nations, has signed the United Nations Con-
vention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The purpose of this convention is “to
promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and funda-
mental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inher-
ent dignity” (United Nations 2008, screen 1). Consistent with this convention, the United
States adopted the Americans with Disabilities Act during the presidency and at the urging
of George H. W. Bush. While this act’s obvious manifestations have been many, such as curb
cuts, elevator access to all floors of public buildings, building code changes to accommodate
wheelchairs, a proliferation of ramps, wider doors, and so on, its effects on library collec-
tions have been more subtle, but no less real.

Marrakesh Treaty
On June 28, 2018, the United States Senate ratified The Marrakesh Treaty to
Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who are Blind, Visually Impaired,
or Otherwise Print Disabled. Then on October 9, 2018, the president signed the
implementation act as passed by the Senate. The Marrakesh Treaty, which was signed
by the United States on October 2, 2013, was concluded under the auspices of the
World Intellectual Property Organization to facilitate access to printed works for
persons with print disabilities and addresses the significant global shortage, often
referred to as a “book famine,” of print materials in accessible formats such as Braille,
large print, and specialized audio files (ALA Press Release 2018). In early October
2018 the European Union ratified the treaty bringing the number of countries covered
by the Treaty to 70 (WIPO Press Release 2018).
While the United States and many other Western countries produce significant
numbers of accessible format copies for the American and other Western blind
communities, the ability to share copies across borders will be valuable for the
visually impaired Americans who read and learn in languages other than English and/
or who need specialized works, such as scholarly texts for graduate work in American
universities. The Marrakesh Treaty provides that national copyright protections should
not be allowed to impede the creation and distribution of such accessible format
copies, and encourages the exchange of such copies internationally. (IFLA, 2018)
Enabling legislation makes modest adjustments to and will expand and clarify
an existing exception in U.S. copyright law for the creation and distribution of
accessible format copies for the exclusive use of blind and other print-disabled
persons, and will permit the exchange across borders of accessible format copies.
The Marrakesh Treaty is intended to provide assurances to authors and publishers
that their protected works will not be distributed to anyone other than the intended
beneficiaries, and that cross-border worldwide sharing of accessible format copies
of works will be limited and not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of
copyright holders (IFLA 2018).
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 15 3

Collection Development for Special Needs

The services needed by the visually impaired must be taken into account in libraries:

Visually impaired people have the same information needs as sighted people. Just as
sighted people might read a newspaper, listen to a CD or download electronic infor-
mation from the Internet, visually impaired people also want access to relevant infor-
mation in their chosen accessible format. Developing an efficient library service for
print-disabled people is extremely important, because there are significantly fewer
books available commercially in accessible formats compared to what is published in
print for the general public. The need to build collections in alternative formats and
make them available for readers who are unable to browse shelves makes it necessary
to develop special services. (Kavanagh and Skold 2005, 1)

Handman (2002) describes building video collections for the hearing-impaired and the
visually impaired in multitype libraries. Part 3 of his book deals specifically with their con-
cerns and other special user needs. He also has chapters dealing with cultural diversity that
are important basic resources.
The variety of hardware and software needed to fully serve the blind and physically
handicapped can create a financial strain for most libraries. Through a national network
of cooperating libraries, the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Hand-
icapped (NLS) provides a free library program of Braille and audio materials that are cir-
culated to eligible borrowers in the United States by postage-free mail. The NLS is part of
the Library of Congress. Most libraries need to avail themselves of these NLS services and
assistance.
The NLS website has a copy of their collection-building plan, which is a good place to
begin to learn about services to special needs users. Their policy states the goals of the NLS:

The NLS mission includes two goals: to develop and maintain an inventory of Braille
and recorded materials that will meet the reading preferences and information needs
of a highly diverse clientele; and to develop coordinated library service for all persons
eligible for this service. (www.loc.gov/nls/aboutcolls.html)

The NLS serves users directly and also assists and coordinates services with a network of
libraries, with users having access to a regional or sub-regional library.
The NLS collection development policy delineates the kinds of materials that the NLS
is required to provide:

NLS patrons should have access to the same types of books and information available
to the general public through public libraries.

The recreation and information needs of the aged, the young, professional people, and
other specific groups should be reflected proportionally in the collections in relation to
the overall readership served.

The collections should offer standard classic and informational titles, along with works
of popular and recreational interest.
15 4 / CH AP T ER 9

Selection of any given book is not to be interpreted as an endorsement of the views

expressed therein. Books selected are reproduced in their entirety and remain available
even if they are offensive or unacceptable to some readers. NLS supports intellectual
freedom and subscribes to the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights
and Freedom to Read Statement.

The collection development policy of the NLS is much like the ones discussed in chapter 3,
but with a special focus on the kinds of materials that the blind and physically handicapped
need, along with the equipment to use those resources. It should serve as a baseline for any
library.

ACTIVITIES

Organize your class into groups of three or four students to consider the following scenarios.

1. You purchase a top-selling book at a local bookstore. After reading it, you
give it to another student in your class. After she reads it, she arranges to
sell it via the Web. Have either of you broken any intellectual property
laws? Why or why not?
2. Your principal comes to the media center and requests that you (the media
specialist) duplicate a DVD that he has borrowed from the library because
he thinks it would be useful in the sixth-grade social studies classes. The
program was originally shown on PBS, so he tells you it is okay to copy it for
educational use. If you follow his instructions, have either of you broken the
copyright law? If yes, was it the media specialist, the principal, or both?
3. You are a collection development librarian in a university. A widow shows
up with her late husband’s law library in the back of her minivan and
hands you some receipts indicating that, over the years, he paid well over
$50,000 for the volumes. Some of these books are old but in quite good
condition. The sets appear to be current and complete, with no missing
volumes. Your library’s university has been considering establishing a law
school for some time, but the state legislature has been reluctant to provide
funds, noting the existence of another state-supported law school and the
heavy library requirements that the American Bar Association imposes
for law school accreditation. The widow asks whether you agree with her
that the books have likely only increased in value since their purchase, and
she requests that as a condition of her gift, the library name its entire law
book collection for her husband. Should you accept the gift? What other
information might you need?
4. A mother with a two-year-old child walks into your library and encounters
a children’s book display that includes titles such as Heather Has Two
Mommies and Daddy’s Roommate. The mother immediately becomes irate
and demands that the display be taken down because she does not want her
child exposed to gay literature. Assume that your supervisor is not around.
How do you handle the situation?
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 15 5

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Discuss ways that an academic library, a public library, or a school media

center may provide some services to special needs users.
2. Discuss the referral procedures for services that a special needs user cannot
get from your library.
3. Discuss the use and importance of a collection development policy when
dealing with donations to the library.

REFERENCES

American Library Association. 2018. “ALA Celebrates Senate Ratification of Marrakesh Treaty and
Adoption of Implementation Act.” www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2018/06/ala-celebrates-senate
-ratification-marrakesh-treaty-and-adoption.
Carlton, Debbie Yumiko. 1993. Public Libraries and Cultural Diversity. ERIC Digest. ED358871.
Handman, Gary P. 2002. Video Collection Development in Multi-type Libraries: A Handbook. Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
IFLA. 2018. “The Treaty of Marrakesh.” https://www.ifla.org/node/10916.
Kavanagh, Rosemary, and Beatrice Christensen Skold, eds. 2005. Libraries for the Blind in the Information
Age: Guidelines for Development. IFLA Professional Reports, no. 86. The Hague: International
Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.
Pruitt, John. 2010. “Gay Men’s Book Club versus Wisconsin’s Public Libraries: Political Perceptions in the
Absence of Dialogue.” Library Quarterly 80 (April): 121–41.
Quezada, Shelley, ed. 1992. “Mainstreaming Library Services to Multicultural Populations: The Evolving
Tapestry.” Wilson Library Bulletin 66 (February): 28–44, 120–21.
Schlosser, Melanie. 2006. “Fair Use in the Digital Environment: A Research Guide.” Reference and User
Services Quarterly 46 (fall): 11–17.
Sony Corp. of America vs. Universal City Studios, 464 U.S. 417 (1984).
United Nations. 2008. “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.” www.un.org/disabilities/
defaultasp?navid=12&pid=150.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2005. “School Enrollments—Social and Economic Characteristics of Students, October
2003.” Current Population Reports P20–554. www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p20–554.pdf.
World Intellectual Property Organization. 2018. “European Union joins WIPO’s Marrakesh Treaty, Greatly
Expanding Coverage.” www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2018/article_0008.html.

SELECTED READINGS

Agosta, Denise E. 2007. “Building a Multicultural School Library: Issues and Challenges.” Teacher Librarian
34, no. 3: 27–31.
Albright, Megan. 2006. “The Public Library’s Responsibilities to LGBT Communities: Recognizing,
Representing, and Serving.” Public Libraries 45, no. 5: 52–56.
Alexander, Linda B., and Sarah D. Miselis. 2007. “Barriers to GLBTQ Collection Development and
Strategies for Overcoming Them.” Young Adult Library Services 5, no. 3: 43–49.
Algenio, Emilie, and Alexis Thompson-Young. 2005. “Licensing E-Books: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.”
Journal of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4: 113–28.
15 6 / CH AP T ER 9

Alire, Camila A., and Jacqueline Ayala. 2007. Serving Latino Communities. 2nd ed. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Angst, Thomas. 2001. “American Libraries and Agencies of Culture.” American Studies 42, no. 3: 5–22.
Armstrong, Tracey. 2005. “Copyright Clearance Center: Providing Compliance Solutions for Content
Users.” Journal of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4: 55–64.
Bloomquist, Shannon. 2005. “Autism Resources for Public Libraries: Issues, Challenges, and Recommended
Resources.” Indiana Libraries 24, no. 3: 23–31. https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/1404.
Bluh, Pamela, and Cindy Hepfer, eds. 2006. Managing Electronic Resources: Contemporary Problems and
Issues. Chicago: Association for Library Collections and Technical Services.
Bosch, Stephen. 2005. “Using Model Licenses on Library Collections.” Journal of Library Administration 42,
nos. 3/4: 65–81.
Burke, Susan K. 2008. “Removal of Gay-Themed Materials from Public Libraries: Public Opinion Trends.”
Public Library Quarterly 27, no. 3: 247–64.
Chou, Min, and Oliver Zhou. 2005. “The Impact of Licenses on Library Collections.” Acquisitions Librarian
17, nos. 33/34: 7–23.
Christou, Corilee, and Gail Dykstra. 2002. “Through a ‘Content Looking Glass’—Another Way of Looking at
Library Licensing of Electronic Content.” Against the Grain 14 (November): 18–22.
Cuban, Sondra. 2007. Serving New Immigrant Communities in the Library. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Darby, Mary Ann, and Miki Pryne. 2002. Hearing All the Voices: Multicultural Books for Adolescence.
Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
Durrant, Fiona. 2006. Negotiating Licenses for Digital Resources. London: Facet.
East, Kathy, and Rebecca L. Thomas. 2007. Across Areas: A Guide to Multicultural Literature for Children.
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Eschenfelder, Kristin R. 2008. “Every Library’s Nightmare? Digital Rights Management, Use Restrictions,
and Licensed Scholarly Digital Resources.” College & Research Libraries 69 (May): 205–23.
Fons, Theodore A., and Timothy D. Jewell. 2007. “Envisioning the Future of ERM Systems.” Serials Review
52, nos. 1/2: 151–66.
Gillespie, Tarleton. 2007. Wired Shut: Copyright and the Shape of Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Gilton, Donna L. 2007. Multicultural and Ethnic Children’s Literature in the United States. Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow.
Gould, Thomas H. P., Tomas A. Lipinski, and Elizabeth A. Buchanan. 2005. “Copyright Policies and the
Deciphering of Fair Use in the Creation of Reserves at University Libraries.” Journal of Academic
Librarianship 31 (May): 182–97.
Harris, Lesley Ellen. 2002. Licensing Digital Content: A Practical Guide for Librarians. Chicago: American
Library Association.
Hill, Nanci Milone. 2007. “Out and About: Serving the GLBT Population @ Your Library.” Public Libraries
46, no. 4: 18–24.
Hoffmann, Gretchen McCord. 2005. Copyright in Cyberspace 2. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Jaeger, Paul T. 2008. “User-Centered Policy Evaluations of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act: Evaluating
E-Government Websites for Accessibility.” Journal of Disability Policy Studies 19, no. 1: 24–33.
Kramer, Elsa F. 2007. “Digital Rights Management: Pitfalls and Possibilities for People with Disabilities.”
Journal of Electronic Publishing 10 (winter). www.journalofelectronicpublishing.org/.
Kranich, Nancy. 2000. “A Question of Balance: The Role of Libraries in Providing Alternatives to
Mainstream Media.” Collection Building 19, no. 3: 85–90.
Pike, George H. 2007. “First Sale Doctrine Put to the Test.” Information Today 24 (October): 17, 19.
Robertson, Deborah A. 2005. Cultural Programming for Libraries: Linking Libraries, Communities and
Culture. Chicago: American Library Association.
 LE G AL I S SU E S I N C O LLE C TIO N DE V E LOPM E N T / 15 7

Simpson, Stacy H. 2006. “Why Have a Comprehensive and Representative Collection?: GLBT Material
Selection and Services in the Public Library.” Progressive Librarian no. 27 (summer): 44–51.
Stemper, Jim, and Susan Barribeau. 2006. “Perpetual Access to Electronic Journals: A Survey of One
Academic Research Library’s Licenses.” Library Resources and Technical Services 50 (March): 91–109.
Vandenbark, R. Todd. 2010. “Tending a Wild Garden: Library Web Design for Persons with Disabilities.”
Information Technology and Libraries 29 (March): 23–29.
Van Tassel, Joan. 2006. Digital Rights Management: Protecting and Monetizing Content. Amsterdam: Focal.
 CHAPTER 10

Professional Ethics
and Intellectual Freedom

OVERVIEW

In this chapter we will look at ethical issues that concern collection development and man-
agement librarians, and we will examine intellectual freedom issues specifically as they
relate to library collections. Professional values are important because they affect our deci-
sion-making and priorities in our jobs. These concepts are considered and studied in many
different courses in library and information science education, but here we are primarily
concerned with how they relate to library collections.
Because intellectual freedom is one of the cornerstones of our professional values and
guides many of the decisions that we make as professionals, professional ethics must always
guide our actions as professional librarians.

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

The first thing that we must consider is just exactly what we mean by professional ethics.
Wilkinson and Lewis (2003) state that the terms ethics, morality, and values all involve
human behavior, but each of these terms has different interpretations, and they are
sometimes confused with each other. Zipkowitz (1996, 2) defines ethics as “the moral
principles of right and wrong, good and bad, to which we as a profession have subscribed
as a covenant between us as professionals and our clients, peers and society.” Although
values in particular play heavily into library work of all types, this section focuses on
ethics as it relates to collection development and acquisitions librarians. In the second
section of this chapter we will deal with intellectual freedom, which is one of the core
values of librarianship.
Professional ethics provide a guideline for everyday library activities. Anytime your job
relates to money and access issues, you are likely to run into situations where professional
ethics comes into play. Administrators, for instance, may put pressure on librarians not to
weed outdated materials because the administrator wants to keep up the number of titles in
the collection for accreditation reasons, or perhaps to retain membership in a particular li-
brary organization, such as the Association of Research Libraries or other groups. In library
and information science education, ethics is often part of each course rather than a separate
class. In collection development and acquisitions, behavior with vendors is often the main
ethical concern. Almost all of the LIS professional organizations have adopted codes of eth-
ics as they relate to their specific area of the discipline.

/ 159 /
16 0 / CH AP T ER 10

Codes of Professional Ethics

Ethical behavior is the result of an internal or personal code and an external context
provided by institutional and professional principles. A personal code of ethics may
develop out of civic and religious convictions. People do what makes them feel good
about themselves and avoid what makes them feel bad. They are also influenced by the
frame of reference for behavior developed by the groups of which they are members. In
other words, behavior can be a consequence of how one feels others around him or her
perceive this behavior. People understand and react to what happens according to the
particular frame of reference they are using for ethical behavior. (Johnson 2009, 52–53)

Many LIS professional associations have approved and published codes of ethics for their
groups, although a variety of names are used for the same concept. The sidebar below sets
forth the professional guidelines of the American Society for Information Science & Tech-
nology (ASIS&T), which serve as that organization’s ethical standard. These guidelines per-
tain to information professionals’ behavior with clients or employees, the profession, and
society.
The ASIS&T guidelines cover many aspects of the profession as a whole, but the Asso-
ciation for Library Collections and Technical Services (ALCTS), a division of the American
Library Association, has approved a statement of principles for acquisitions librarians that
are most pertinent in regard to collection development (see sidebar, pages 161–62). Because
of the very nature of acquisitions, interactions with a vendor can become problematic if the
librarian just accepts too many free dinners at conferences and can therefore begin to feel
(or be perceived to feel) some obligation to prefer the vendor’s products. Acquisitions librar-
ians are often able to choose vendors on their own, which leaves them open to persuasion by
vendors. For a beginning acquisitions librarian, it is very important to remember to accept
nothing that makes her feel obligated to a vendor. If you can go out for dinner or lunch with
a vendor and still say “no” to the product if it is not right for the library, go ahead, since you
may learn something of value for later. But if you are the type of individual who may feel
guilty saying “no” to a friend, it is often best to avoid those kinds of situations. Some librar-
ies insist that their librarians accept nothing from a vendor in order to be sure that nothing
unethical may occur. The statement by the ALCTS specifically establishes ethical behaviors
for acquisitions librarians (see sidebar, pages 161–62).
There is a two-way street here. Although it is the responsibility of librarians to nego-
tiate the best deals and discounts for their libraries, it is important to avoid, for instance,
misleading a vendor on the potential dollar amounts of your purchases in order to obtain a
larger discount, and to avoid other similar sharp negotiating tactics. Vendors have to make
a profit, so misleading them into situations where you know, and they don’t, that they will
inevitably be unable to make a profit is simply ethically wrong.
Bushing (1993, 48) lists four standards for ethical behavior: “honesty, respect for peo-
ple, professional integrity, and good business practices.” In a concise form, these standards
represent much of what is included in the ALCTS statement below.
A more recent factor that has influenced the development and use of ethical guidelines
for acquisitions librarians involves the licensing agreements that have become so prevalent
with online materials. These agreements often contain clauses that could affect ethical con-
cerns involving such matters as patron privacy and confidentiality. These legal and ethical
issues have become entangling and increasingly complex. Acquisitions librarians have to be
aware of these kinds of potential pitfalls (Wilkinson and Lewis 2003, 235).
 PR O FE S SIO N AL E TH I C S AN D I N TE LLE C T UAL FR E E DOM / 1 61

As previously noted, the American Library Association has developed a code of ethics
for librarians (see the sidebar on page 164), and the ALCTS developed a supplement to the
ALA Code of Ethics that deals particularly with collection development and acquisitions
(see the sidebar on page 165).
Having a code of ethics is one of the hallmarks of any profession worthy to consider
itself as such. It is important, therefore, to periodically review those portions of the code
of ethics that are most closely tied to the work that you do. These codes are an excellent
reminder of the practices that we should all follow as professional librarians.

ASIS&T Professional Guidelines

Dedicated to the Memory of Diana Woodward

ASIS&T recognizes the plurality of uses and users of information technologies,

services, systems and products as well as the diversity of goals or objectives,
sometimes conflicting, among producers, vendors, mediators, and users of
information systems.
ASIS&T urges its members to be ever aware of the social, economic, cultural, and
political impacts of their actions or inaction.
ASIS&T members have obligations to employers, clients, and system users, to
the profession, and to society, to use judgement and discretion in making choices,
providing equitable service, and in defending the rights of open inquiry.

Responsibilities to Employers/Clients/System Users

• To act faithfully for their employers or clients in professional matters.

• To uphold each user’s, provider’s, or employer’s right to privacy and
confidentiality and to respect whatever proprietary rights belong to them,
by limiting access to, providing proper security for and ensuring proper
disposal of data about clients, patrons or users.
• To treat all persons fairly.

Responsibility to the Profession

To truthfully represent themselves and the information systems which they utilize or
which they represent, by:

• not knowingly making false statements or providing erroneous or mis-

leading information
• informing their employers, clients or sponsors of any circumstances that
create a conflict of interest
• not using their position beyond their authorized limits or by not using
their credentials to misrepresent themselves
• following and promoting standards of conduct in accord with the best
current practices

[ CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE ]

162 / CH AP T ER 10

[ CONTINUED ]

• undertaking their research conscientiously, in gathering, tabulating or

interpreting data; in following proper approval procedures for subjects;
and in producing or disseminating their research results
• pursuing ongoing professional development and encouraging and assist-
ing colleagues and others to do the same
• adhering to principles of due process and equality of opportunity.

Responsibility to Society

To improve the information systems with which they work or which they represent, to
the best of their means and abilities by

• providing the most reliable and accurate information and acknowledging

the credibility of the sources as known or unknown
• resisting all forms of censorship, inappropriate selection and acquisitions
policies, and biases in information selection, provision and dissemination
• making known any biases, errors and inaccuracies found to exist and
striving to correct those which can be remedied.

To promote open and equal access to information, within the scope permitted by their
organizations or work, and to resist procedures that promote unlawful discriminatory
practices in access to and provision of information, by

• seeking to extend public awareness and appreciation of information

availability and provision as well as the role of information professionals
in providing such information
• freely reporting, publishing or disseminating information subject to legal
and proprietary restraints of producers, vendors and employers, and the
best interests of their employers or clients.

Information professionals shall engage in principled conduct whether on their own

behalf or at the request of employers, colleagues, clients, agencies or the profession.

Adopted May 30, 1992

© American Society for Information Science & Technology 1992. Used by permission.

An interesting application of ethical considerations in a particular context involves mu-

seums and libraries that collect and make available the materials and artifacts of indigenous
peoples. Although this may seem a narrow concern that will not likely affect most beginning
librarians, for those of you who are eventually employed in museums or libraries that hold
such objects, it is important to realize the increasing need to consider the feelings and opin-
ions of native people when making such materials available to the public (Reyes-Escudero
and Cox 2017). Several centuries of our often-unfortunate history of insensitivity to the
works and artifacts of native peoples are only beginning to be rewritten. Much more work
needs to be done in this area (Bowers, Crowe, and Keeran 2017).
A specific ethical concern of librarianship is intellectual freedom and issues of cen-
sorship.
 PR O FE S SIO N AL E TH I C S AN D I N TE LLE C T UAL FR E E DOM / 16 3

INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM AND CENSORSHIP

Here we look at intellectual freedom issues as a fundamental value of librarianship affect-

ing collection development and management. For our purposes we focus on the collection,
although the subject of intellectual freedom encompasses much more than this.
Robert Hauptman (1988, 66) defines censorship as “the active suppression of books,
journals, newspapers, theater pieces, lectures, discussions, radio and television programs,
films, art works, etc.—either partially or in the entirety—that are deemed objectionable on
moral, political, military, or other grounds.”
Branin provides a short history of intellectual freedom and the library profession:

Our library profession’s stand on intellectual freedom has not been consistent over the
years, and the interpretation of intellectual freedom concepts has always been difficult

ALCTS Statement on Principles and Standards of

Acquisitions Practice
In all acquisitions transactions, a librarian:

1. gives first consideration to the objectives and policies of his or her insti-
tution;
2. strives to obtain the maximum ultimate value of each dollar of expenditure;
3. grants all competing vendors equal consideration insofar as the estab-
lished policies of his or her library permit, and regards each transaction on
its own merits;
4. subscribes to and works for honesty, truth, and fairness in buying and sell-
ing, and denounces all forms and manifestations of bribery;
5. declines personal gifts and gratuities;
6. uses only by consent original ideas and designs devised by one vendor for
competitive purchasing purposes;
7. accords a prompt and courteous reception insofar as conditions permit to
all who call on legitimate business missions;
8. fosters and promotes fair, ethical, and legal trade practices;
9. avoids sharp practice;
10. strives consistently for knowledge of the publishing and bookselling indus-
try;
11. strives to establish practical and efficient methods for the conduct of his/
her office;
12. counsels and assists fellow acquisitions librarians in the performance of
their duties, whenever occasion permits.

Developed by the ALCTS Acquisitions Section Ethics Task Force;

endorsed by the ALCTS Acquisitions Section and adopted by the ALCTS Board of Directors,
Midwinter Meeting, February 7, 1994.
16 4 / CH AP T ER 10

Code of Ethics of the American Library Association

As members of the American Library Association, we recognize the importance of
codifying and making known to the profession and to the general public the ethical
principles that guide the work of librarians, other professionals providing information
services, library trustees and library staffs.
Ethical dilemmas occur when values are in conflict. The American Library
Association Code of Ethics states the values to which we are committed, and
embodies the ethical responsibilities of the profession in this changing information
environment.
We significantly influence or control the selection, organization, preservation, and
dissemination of information. In a political system grounded in an informed citizenry,
we are members of a profession explicitly committed to intellectual freedom and the
freedom of access to information. We have a special obligation to ensure the free flow
of information and ideas to present and future generations.
The principles of this Code are expressed in broad statements to guide ethical
decision-making. These statements provide a framework; they cannot and do not
dictate conduct to cover particular situations.

I. We provide the highest level of service to all library users through ap-
propriate and usefully organized resources; equitable service policies;
equitable access; and accurate, unbiased, and courteous responses to
all requests.
II. We uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to
censor library resources.
III. We protect each library user’s right to privacy and confidentiality with
respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, bor-
rowed, acquired, or transmitted.
IV. We respect intellectual property rights and advocate balance between
the interests of information users and rights holders.
V. We treat co-workers and other colleagues with respect, fairness, and
good faith, and advocate conditions of employment that safeguard the
rights and welfare of all employees of our institutions.
VI. We do not advance private interests at the expense of library users, col-
leagues, or our employing institutions.
VII. We distinguish between our personal convictions and professional duties
and do not allow our personal beliefs to interfere with fair representation
of the aims of our institutions or the provision of access to their informa-
tion resources.
VIII. We strive for excellence in the profession by maintaining and enhancing
our own knowledge and skills, by encouraging the professional develop-
ment of coworkers, and by fostering the aspirations of potential members
of the profession.

Adopted January 22, 2008, by the ALA Council.

 PR O FE S SIO N AL E TH I C S AN D I N TE LLE C T UAL FR E E DOM / 16 5

and controversial. In fact, until the 1930s in this country, many librarians believed that
censorship was one of their professional duties. For example, in 1908, the American
Library Association (ALA) President Arthur Bostwick made the following remark in his
inaugural address at the ALA Annual Conference: “‘Some are born great; some achieve
greatness, some have greatness thrust upon them.’ It is in this way that the librarian has
been a censor of literature. . . . Books that distinctly commend what is wrong, that teach
how to sin and tell how pleasant sin is, sometimes with and sometimes without the
added sauce of impropriety, are increasingly popular, tempting the author to imitate
them, and publisher to produce, and the bookseller to exploit. Thank Heaven they do
not tempt the librarian.” (Branin 1997, 148−49)

By the late 1930s, the ALA position was beginning to change. The attempted censorship of
John Steinbeck’s novel The Grapes of Wrath eventually resulted in the ALA adopting the
Library Bill of Rights in 1948 (see the sidebar on page 166). It took almost ten years to
be officially approved, but this document has become one of the most cherished tenets of
librarianship.

Guidelines for ALCTS Members to Supplement the

American Library Association Code of Ethics, 1994
The following guidelines are to assist ALCTS members in the interpretation and
application of the ALA Code of Ethics as it applies to issues of concern to ALCTS.
Within the context of the institution’s missions and programs and the needs of
the user populations served by the library, an ALCTS member:

1. strives to develop a collection of materials within collection policies and

priorities;
2. strives to provide broad and unbiased access to information;
3. strives to preserve and conserve the materials in the library in accordance
with established priorities and programs;
4. develops resource sharing programs to extend and enhance the informa-
tion sources available to library users;
5. promotes the development and application of standards and professional
guidelines;
6. establishes a secure and safe environment for staff and users;
7. fosters and promotes fair, ethical and legal trade and business practices;
8. maintains equitable treatment and confidentiality in competitive relations
and manuscript and grant reviews;
9. supports and abides by any contractual agreements made by the library or
its home institution in regard to the provision of or access to information
resources, acquisition of services, and financial arrangements.

Developed by the ALCTS Task Force on Professional Ethics;

adopted by the ALCTS Board of Directors, Midwinter Meeting, February 7, 1994.
16 6 / CH AP T ER 10

Types of Libraries and Efforts to Censor

Attempts at censorship can all too often occur at any type of library. We typically think
only of schools and public libraries when we talk about censorship, but when you search
the literature, you will quickly find that no type of library is immune to the challenges of
local public preference or even self-censorship by librarians. When dealing with children’s
materials, censorship has always been particularly controversial. In 1967, the word age was
added to the fifth statement in the Library Bill of Rights: “A person’s right to use a library
should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.” The ALA
position is that librarians do not censor what a child can read; only his or her parents can
do that. As can be imagined, this position was and remains controversial to many portions
of the public.
Scales (2009) discusses various scenarios where school media specialists need to defend
library media center selections and the rights of students to have access to such materials.
Jones (2009) should be reviewed for an excellent portrayal of the issues involved in
intellectual freedom and other ethical situations in an academic library. Often students
ask why a statement of intellectual freedom and a challenge procedure are necessary in an
academic library. Their first impression is that in a higher education institution, of course,

Library Bill of Rights

The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information
and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services.

I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest,
information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library
serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, back-
ground, or views of those contributing to their creation.
II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of
view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed
or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.
III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsi-
bility to provide information and enlightenment.
IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with
resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas.
V. A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because
of origin, age, background, or views.
VI. Libraries that make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the
public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable
basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups re-
questing their use.

Adopted June 19, 1939, by the ALA Council; amended October 14, 1944; June 18, 1948;
February 2, 1961; June 27, 1967; January 23, 1980; inclusion of “age” reaffirmed January 23, 1996.
 PR O FE S SIO N AL E TH I C S AN D I N TE LLE C T UAL FR E E DOM / 167

everyone believes in and practices intellectual freedom. Jones does an excellent job of pre-
senting the real situation to her readers.
The FBI’s notorious Library Awareness Program (LAP) is an example of attempted gov-
ernmental intervention in academic libraries. With the LAP, the FBI attempted in essence
to enlist librarians to check the library records of people under investigation, claiming that
they were not investigating controversial authors, but only the people who wanted to read
them. Although this may appear to be a privacy and confidentiality issue only, it may also
involve a form of self-censorship. If the FBI had been able to continue this program, library
selectors might have become wary of buying works by controversial authors, and especially
works on terrorism or other issues that librarians might perceive to be of interest to the
FBI. As part of the LAP, librarians were also asked to track photocopying and database us-
age (Robins 1993, 376–78), and the FBI even informed the National Commission on Library
and Information Science that the Soviets considered librarians to be excellent spy material,
partly because librarians could deposit disinformation in their libraries (Robins 1993, 393).
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the federal government took more
than a million documents off the shelves of the National Archives and removed many doc-
uments, maps, photographs, and other similar resources from government websites (Bass
and Herschaft 2007). U.S. Government Depository libraries were told to remove certain
documents from their shelves for the same reason. Depository libraries received a letter
dated October 12, 2002, that told them to destroy all copies of the CD-ROM Source Area
Characteristics of Large Public Surface-Water Supplies in the Coterminous United States: An
Information Resource for Source-Water Assessment, 1999 (Asher 2010). This and similar prob-
lematic items caused a great deal of discussion among librarians on the balance between
censorship and security.
Public libraries, of course, have for a long time and all too frequently been involved in
challenges to and attempted censorship of all kinds of materials by members of the public
that the libraries serve. While children’s materials are frequently challenged, adult litera-
ture is also attacked, even today.
A somewhat humorous, but nevertheless misguided, action by a public librarian was
famously reported as a news item in the December 1971 issue of School Library Journal:

Maurice Sendak might faint, but a staff member of Caldwell Parish Library [Louisiana],
knowing that the patrons of the community might object to the illustrations in In the
Night Kitchen, solved the problem by diapering the little boy with white tempura paint.
Other librarians might wish to do the same. (Marcovitz and Zimmer 2006, 51−52)

This recalls the famous actions of several Renaissance popes to cover the private parts of
statuary and paintings by the great masters contained in the Vatican collections! Self-cen-
sorship by librarians can most often occur in the selection process, but this is an example of
library materials mutilation that amounts to censorship.

SELF-CENSORSHIP

Self-censorship may occur at both the subconscious and conscious levels. For most librari-
ans, the biggest challenge does not arise when users challenge a title, but rather in consid-
ering the self-censorship that may be involved in the process of selection. It is all too easy
to decide that a book is not worthy of the collection because it is too racy or not factual,
16 8 / CH AP T ER 10

because it doesn’t fit our personal view of the subject, or perhaps because it might even get
us into trouble with users. Thus, we decide that the book does not really fit our collection
development policy in order to meet what are perceived to be local community standards
(think of the erotic romance novel Fifty Shades of Gray). Decisions such as these don’t have
to be conscious ones; it is the unconscious decisions that can turn out to be the most trou-
blesome ones.
As noted above, self-censorship may occur at both the subconscious and conscious
levels. It could occur on a conscious level if the selector is aware of any policy which mon-
itors and investigates library materials and library users who read them. An example of
such a policy was the Library Awareness Program, discussed above, which the FBI tried
to implement and which was intended to require librarians to divulge the library records
of people under investigation and the perhaps controversial works that they read. If this
program had been successfully implemented, it would naturally have led to self-censor-
ship by selectors because they would have avoided topics such as terrorism and other
issues which might interest the FBI, so as not to put library users in a dangerous or com-
promising situation.
A story reported in the School Library Journal is illustrative of the problem. When Barry
Lyga finished writing his second young adult novel, he expected that there would be trouble
based on other censorship cases involving young adult books which he was aware of. Lyga’s
book Boy Toy (2007) was a story about a twelve-year-old who has sex with a beautiful teach-
er twice his age, and Lyga expected it to spark all possible kinds of controversy. But after the
book was published, no great hue and cry was raised by the parents or conservative groups
because, as it turned out, kids were simply not getting access to the book. At first, this didn’t
make much sense to Lyga. Boy Toy was getting rave reviews from professional journals, and
the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and USA Today loved it. So did the bloggers who
gave Boy Toy the Cybil Award for best young adult fiction. Yet its sales figures were lower
than Lyga’s first novel, The Astonishing Adventures of Fanboy and Goth Girl (2006). Soon
Lyga started hearing stories about librarians who appreciated the book but refused to rec-
ommend or buy it, for fear of complaints. He even received an e-mail from a high school
media specialist in Maryland who said she loved Boy Toy so much that she had read it three
times—but she ultimately decided that it did not belong in her library’s collection. What
had occurred was a case of silent, but very insidious censorship, where nobody challenged
the book vocally or in print, but instead they were just quietly making sure that it was not
added to library collections. This was not a coordinated campaign, but rather a large num-
ber of librarians individually deciding that they really shouldn’t buy this book because they
felt it might not be “safe” enough for their collections (Whelan 2009, 27). Since this type
of self-censorship does not create news stories or sound bites, it can just slip by under the
radar, so to speak.
When librarians are in situations where challenges to library materials are frequent,
they may sometimes resort to “silent censorship” in the book selection process, and find
it easier to just not purchase certain books that might be challenged. This practice results
from fear (for example, “If I lose a challenge, will it damage my career?”) and can be even
more harmful than users’ attempt to remove a book, since a book challenge often opens
a discourse about the book and its themes. If the book never makes it to the shelves, dis-
cussion about its content never happens, and its themes are preemptively struck from the
minds of children and/or adults (Hustin 2003, 242).
Self-censorship on a subconscious level is an easy trap to fall into. Librarians who have
strong individual opinions concerning common ethical issues such as divorce, birth control,
 PR O FE S SIO N AL E TH I C S AN D I N TE LLE C T UAL FR E E DOM / 169

abortion, and so on may end up avoiding materials about these issues without consciously
doing so, because it is ingrained in their personality to essentially shun these topics. It is
best to keep the library’s mission in mind whenever librarians are involved in the selection
process in order to make sure they are selecting the best materials for the library and its
users and are not just reflecting their own personal opinions. The only time that librarians
should not select certain materials is when the library has intentionally created a policy (as
part of its collection development policy) not to collect materials on certain subjects.
But sometimes on an unconscious level we may let certain “facts” cloak the selection
actions that we take. For example, a librarian may quite honestly believe that there really
isn’t a large enough GLBT population in the area to justify spending money from an already
tight budget on these types of materials. Or the librarian determines that GLBT materials
simply don’t circulate enough to justify the expense. Or the librarian can’t find any GLBT
books or other materials that meet the standards of quality that have been set for the collec-
tion. These circumstances may indicate that the librarian is simply making a hard business
decision, but if the librarian knows that there is some vocal opposition to these kinds of
materials in the local community, isn’t it actually unconscious censorship (Downey 2013,
105–6)?

Steps to Avoid Self-Censorship

Having a strong statement in your collection development policy about the kinds of mate-
rials that will be selected will help you make the hard decisions to select materials that fall
on the opposite side of locally popular viewpoints, and which may thus result in a challenge.
If you were in an area where there had been an Islamic terrorist attack of some kind, would
you purchase without thinking a book containing a very positive outlook on the Muslim
faith? Would your collection development policy’s statement that the library purchases
materials on all sides of an issue help you make the decision and defend that decision if
challenged? An example of such a statement is:

Resources representing different viewpoints on controversial issues will be acquired or

made available, including those that may have unpopular or unorthodox positions. The
library recognizes the importance of having a variety of viewpoints available, realizing
that a resource, which may offend one person, may be considered meaningful to an-
other. (quoted in Oltmann 2016, 26)

This statement is concise and addresses the issue well. A policy statement like this can
be brought to the fore when a challenge to an acquisition is made. Most library users
when viewing this statement would tend to see the value of such a policy even if they are
opposed to a particular item. This kind of statement can be used to much better effect
than simply referring or quoting in an appendix a variety of ALA policies dealing with
intellectual freedom.
Moody offers some questions for librarians to ask themselves when selecting materials,
in order to try to avoid self-censorship:

What are my own biases? Do they impact on my selections?

What is my reasoning for including or excluding particular titles from the
collection?
170 / CH AP T ER 10

Do I understand to the best of my ability the complexities of the community

in which my library functions (diversity, economics, industries, education
levels, languages spoken)?
Am I striving to maintain a balance of views in the collection on contentious
issues within the collection?
Am I using a variety of selection tools that will offer up alternative and
independent publishers as well as the large commercial or academic
publishers?
Do I know the independent and alternative publishers within my community,
and do I have a vendor relationship with them?
Do I have a collection development policy that provides a sound footing for my
selection practices? (Moody 2004, 180)

Selection Tools and Bias or Unconscious Self-Censorship

Moody’s study also looked at which selection tools librarians used to choose materials to
acquire, as a partial explanation for bias in a collection. Library vendor catalogs were used
by 92 percent of the librarians responding to her survey; professional review journals were
used by 75 percent of respondents; Internet reviews were used by 65 percent; direct contact
with independent publishers was used by 65 percent, and alternative press reviews were
used by 60 percent (Moody 2004, 179). Obviously, if the tools used when selecting materials
for your library only review the mainstream publishers, there is a strong probability that
mostly mainstream viewpoints will be represented in your collection. Again, if you never go
beyond Booklist, Kirkus Reviews, Library Journal, Publishers’ Weekly, and the like, this doesn’t
mean that you are necessarily practicing self-censorship, but you will likely be picking from
the “safer” titles.

SUMMARY

Librarians have a professional obligation to be proactive, equitable, and thoughtful in their

selections. We also have a responsibility to put our own prejudices and fears aside as we go
about our work with open minds. This is not always easy. It takes courage and self-reflec-
tion. It means asking ourselves the tough questions and being honest with our answers.
Censorship takes many forms. But when we practice self-censorship, we not only harm our
users, we harm our profession. The diversity of our communities is part of what makes
librarianship so exciting and meaningful.
Professional associations have a role to play in assisting librarians to obtain further
understanding and skills in this area; for example, by facilitating reflection on personal
attitudes towards controversial issues, and providing continuing education in objective de-
cision-making processes for collection development.
The ALA Office of Intellectual Freedom provides printed materials such as the In-
tellectual Freedom Manual, and it also provides personal guidance to librarians who are
facing a censorship challenge. No librarian should navigate this situation alone, since the
ALA and often state library associations have offices or committees dedicated to intellec-
tual freedom. These offices have been known to enter lawsuits where intellectual freedom
is at stake.
 PR O FE S SIO N AL E TH I C S AN D I N TE LLE C T UAL FR E E DOM / 171

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Discuss the differences among the terms ethics, morality, and values as they relate
to librarianship and specifically to collection development and acquisitions.
2. Discuss the differences between public and private schools as they relate to
intellectual freedom issues.
3. Discuss the concerns of censorship and self-censorship when selecting library
materials.
4. What ethical concerns should you consider when a publisher asks you for an
endorsement of a product—for example, a set of reference books or a database—
that will be included in their advertisements for that product?
5. Your vendor representative comes to your library periodically to review your
orders and make you aware of new products that may be of interest to your library
users. This time he asks you out to lunch on his tab to continue the discussion.
What factors should you consider before answering one way or the other?

ACTIVITY

Choose a work from the ALA’s List of Banned Books. Divide the class into two or more
teams. Each team takes one side of a censorship challenge. Each side should spend about
thirty minutes preparing their case. Then each side should present their arguments for or
against withdrawing the book from the library collection. If you have at least four teams,
the members of the other two teams can serve as judge and jury. Discuss which team made
the most compelling argument for their side of the issue.

REFERENCES

American Library Association. 1994. ALA Code of Ethics Supplement (ALCTS): Guidelines for ALCTS Members
to Supplement the American Library Association Code of Ethics, 1964. Chicago: American Library
Association. www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/alcts/resources/alaethics.cfm.
——— . 1995/2008. “American Library Association Code of Ethics.” www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/
statementspols/codeofethics/codeethics.cfm.
——— . 1996. “Library Bill of Rights.” http://staging.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/
statementsif/librarybillrights.cfm.
Asher, Gena. 2010. “Government Documents Removal: Censorship or Security.” www.slis.indiana.edu/
news/story.php?story_id=411.
Association for Library Collections and Technical Services. 1994. “Statement on Principles and Standards
of Acquisitions Practice.” American Library Association. www.pla.org/ala/mgrps/divs/alcts/
resources/collect/acq/acqethics.cfm.
Bass, Frank, and Randy Herschaft. 2007. “1 Million Archived Pages Removed Post-9/11.” USA Today, March
13. www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007–03–13-archives_N.htm.
Bowers, Jennifer, Katherine Crowe, and Peggy Keeran. 2017. “‘If You Want the History of a White Man,
You Go to the Library’: Critiquing Our Legacy, Addressing Our Library Collection Gaps.” Collection
Management 42, nos. 3-4: 159–79.
Branin, Joseph J. 1997. “Collection Management and Intellectual Freedom.” In Collection Management for
the 1990s, edited by Joseph J. Branin, 148–95. Chicago: American Library Association.
172 / CH AP T ER 10

Bushing, Mary C. 1993. “Acquisition Ethics: The Evolution of Models for Hard Times.” Library Acquisitions:
Theory and Practice 17: 47–52.
Downey, Jennifer. 2013. “Self-Censorship in Selection of LGBT-Themed Materials.” Reference & User
Services Quarterly 53 (winter): 104–7.
Freedman, Lauren, and Holly Johnson. 2000–2001. “Who’s Protecting Whom? ‘I Hadn’t Meant to Tell You
This,’ a Case Point in Confronting Self-Censorship in the Choice of Young Adult Literature.” Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literature 44: 356–69.
Hauptman, Robert. 1988. Ethical Challenges in Librarianship. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx.
Hustin, Kristin. 2003. “‘Silent Censorship’: The School Library and the Insidious Book Selection Censor.”
UMKC Law Review 72, no. 1: 241–55.
Johnson, Peggy. 2009. Fundamentals of Collection Development and Management. 2nd ed. Chicago: American
Library Association.
Jones, Barbara M. 2009. Protecting Intellectual Freedom in Your Academic Library. Chicago: American Library
Association.
Marcovitz, Hal, and Kyle Zimmer. 2006. Maurice Sendak. New York: Chelsea House.
Moody, Kim. 2004. “Censorship by Queensland Public Librarians: Philosophy and Practice.” Aplis 17
(December): 168–85.
Oltmann, S. M. 2016. “Public Librarians’ Views on Collection Development and Censorship.” Collection
Management 41, no. 1: 23–44.
Reyes-Escudero, Veronica, and J. Wendell Cox. 2017. “Survey, Understanding, and Ethical Stewardship of
Indigenous Collections: A Case Study.” Collection Management 42, no. 3-4: 130–38.
Robins, Natalie. 1993. Alien Ink: The FBI’s War on Freedom of Expression. New York: William Morrow.
Scales, Pat R. 2009. Protecting Intellectual Freedom in Your School Library: Scenarios from the Front Lines.
Chicago: American Library Association.
Whelan, Debra Lau. 2009. “A Dirty Little Secret: Self-Censorship Is Rampant and Lethal.” School Library
Journal (February): 27–30.
Wilkinson, Frances C., and Linda K. Lewis. 2003. The Complete Guide to Acquisitions Management.
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Zipkowitz, Fay. 1996. Professional Ethics in Librarianship: A Real Life Casebook. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.

SELECTED READINGS

American Library Association. 2010. Intellectual Freedom Manual. 8th ed. Chicago: American Library
Association.
Association for Library Services to Children. 2000. Intellectual Freedom for Children: The Censor Is Coming.
Chicago: American Library Association.
Chmara, Theresa. 2009. Privacy and Confidentiality Issues: A Guide for Libraries and Their Lawyers. Chicago:
American Library Association.
Dole, Wanda V., Jitka M. Hurych, and Wallace C. Koehler. 2000. “Values for Librarians in the Information
Age: An Expanded Examination.” Library Management 21: 285–97.
Doyle, Tony. 2002. “Selection versus Censorship in Libraries.” Collection Management 27, no. 1: 15–25.
Gibson, Jeffrey. 2007. “Championing Intellectual Freedom: A School Administrator’s Guide.” Knowledge
Quest 36, no. 2: 46–48.
Gorman, Michael. 2000. Our Enduring Values. Chicago: American Library Association.
Intner, Sheila S. 2004. “Dollars and Sense: Censorship versus Selection, One More Time.” Technicalities 24,
no. 3: 1, 7.
LaRue, James. 2007. New Inquisition: Understanding and Managing Intellectual Freedom Challenges.
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Martin, Ann M. 2007. “Preparing for a Challenge.” Knowledge Quest 36, no. 2: 54–56.
 CHAPTER 11

Preservation

OVERVIEW

Preservation was traditionally seen as the job of just those few large research libraries main-
taining archival collections, and within those institutions it was the business of only a few
select specialist staff members. But preservation should be seen as an important aspect of
collection development in any library. The materials which you collect are not very useful
if they are not preserved and made available. Today, more and more librarians are waking
up to the fact that even quite small libraries may and often do possess unique materials that
deserve long-term preservation, even if the items only pertain to people or events in their
local area. The growth of electronic materials in libraries is also affecting how librarians
must view their preservation activities. In this chapter, we will take a look at some of the
important issues of preservation in all types of libraries.
Preservation may be described as involving all those library activities that are aimed at
preventing, retarding, or stopping the deterioration of materials, so that their intellectual
content may be saved for future users. Even simple mending can be considered a type of
preservation, since the intent is to make the material usable for an extended time. Regluing
loose pages, fixing book hinges that have loosened due to use, and other minor repairs may
be cost-effective for a library; of course, if the damages have gone beyond minor ones, pur-
chasing a new copy (if available) may be the better route.
Preservation has also been succinctly called an act of “responsible custody” (Barr 1946,
218). For many years, this has meant physical safekeeping of the books and papers that are
so vulnerable to the ravages of moisture, time, and, yes, human hands, breath, and sweat.
Preservation issues therefore quite appropriately rise to the top of many librarians’ think-
ing, and perhaps even more strongly when electronic journals are considered. In the rush to
convert to electronic products and media, the traditional role of every library in preserving
and archiving information for its particular community of users should not be forgotten.
Libraries’ users have generally depended on their librarians to perform not only the pure
collection development functions of selecting, purchasing, organizing, and making available
currently needed resources, but also, as an inherent corollary to these actions, the saving
and preserving of information media that may have lasting value.
In the past, libraries were mainly concerned with taking steps to preserve the physical
artifact (or a photocopied or microfilmed facsimile of it) that contained the information,
such as a printed book or journal. Traditional library preservation strategies have there-
fore long been established for physical objects; unfortunately, these strategies do not always
transfer neatly to the preservation of a digital object.
The preservation of digital materials presents an increasingly important issue for re-
search, development, and discussion, with the general perception being that the preservation

/ 173 /
1 74 / CH AP T ER 11

of digital objects can actually be more problematic than that of print or other formats. As
more and more materials are available only in digital format with no hard copy to be pre-
served, digital preservation becomes an imperative for librarians if future users of such
materials are to be able to access them.

PRESERVATION OF BOOKS AND OTHER

PHYSICAL OBJECTS

A major problem with the physical media in most of today’s research collections is brit-
tle books, that is, books whose pages tear if folded only once or twice or that simply fall
apart when removed from the shelves. Brittle pages result from the use of acidic paper; that
is, paper made without removal or neutralization of the lignin that is naturally found in
wood pulp. Such paper became popular after about 1840, when much of the papermaking
industry moved from the use of linen and cotton rags to wood pulp. To make the new pulp
product more attractive, acid was introduced, mainly as a part of the whitening process.
The effect, while initially satisfying, is nevertheless insidious because it often may remain
hidden for some years. In addition, the toxic glues, dyes, and other materials used in the
binding process can contribute to the deterioration of printed materials.
Before 1900, techniques used to repair printed materials drew on traditional, time-con-
suming, and careful bookbinding practices. With the explosion in publishing during the
twentieth century, more and more materials needed repair sooner than expected; but with
the high cost of traditional proper repair, corners were cut with increasing frequency—slop-
py half-efforts involving consumer cellophane tape, grocery-store glues, and pastes.

Using Scotch brand cellophane tape, household glues and pastes, and flimsy, acidic
pamphlet binders accelerated deterioration. Benign neglect has been more effective in
preserving materials. Librarians have become more conscious of the consequences of
poor techniques and materials. Commercial suppliers now offer a variety of archivally
sound and reversible materials for cleaning, repairing, and storing materials. (Johnson
2009, 165)

Librarians need to take a cue from the initial lines of the Hippocratic oath—first, do no
harm.
Traditionally, the preservation of books and other physical objects has been an issue
of material conservation. Some of the most sophisticated techniques in book conservation
require specialized training and lab facilities, arcane and complex atmospheric regulation
equipment, and so on, but many effective actions can be performed in most libraries. Tech-
niques to repair book hinges, for example, require little more than glue and a knitting nee-
dle. Care needs to be exercised, of course: sometimes a little transparent tape carefully ap-
plied appears to meet the immediate need, but the tape’s long-term effect can be disastrous.
More effectively, nearly all libraries can still commercially rebind materials, which is an
important form of preservation and conservation.
Controlling temperature and humidity are also important in the preservation of phys-
ical objects. High temperatures and humidity can lead to mold infestations that can easily
spread throughout the collection. In very specialized collections of materials that were not
printed on acid-free paper, deacidification processes can be performed in-house or out-
sourced to a company that specializes in them.
 PR E SE R VATIO N / 175

In a library with good environmental and moisture controls, special collections may be
built on the concept of preserving materials. Restricted access allows librarians to better
control who uses materials and the conditions under which they are used. Libraries with
truly rare or unique materials may require gloves, and they will monitor who uses materials
and where they use them.
From a straightforward collection development standpoint, steps can be taken during
the acquisitions process which can help ensure that library materials enjoy longer life with-
out the need to resort to extraordinary and expensive measures later on. For instance, many
if not most items are now printed on acid-free paper, which greatly prolongs the life of
printed materials. To spot these, look for a small infinity sign on the title page or verso of
the title page; these items are guaranteed by the publisher to be acid-free. While some items
remain available in cheaper paper formats, the additional cost of a work that is acid-free is
usually negligible, and today most worthwhile items may be available only in an acid-free
paper format anyway. If two works on the same subject are otherwise equally appropriate
for acquisition, the paper should be considered a decisive factor. Additionally, it is simply
expedient to ensure that, of items available in multiple formats, those that are acquired
have the best possible bindings and covers, commensurate of course with considerations of
cost, availability, and budgetary constraints.
In addition to the types of preservation and conservation measures that are normally
practiced by most libraries, conservation in research libraries has become a matter of spe-
cial concentration and concern.

The field of research library conservation emerged and has evolved significantly during
the past fifty years. Professional organizations and training programs have been estab-
lished; new treatment techniques have been developed and promoted through confer-
ences, workshops, and publications; and increasingly, special and general collections
practitioners have collaborated on treatment solutions. Despite the significant chal-
lenges faced by research libraries in the twenty-first century as substantial resources
are allocated to electronic information discovery and delivery opportunities, research
libraries continue to collect print collections. (Baker and Dube 2010, 21)

A huge flood in Florence, Italy, in 1966 was something of a watershed in the preservation
arena, as efforts to save and repair the priceless written treasures of that most famous of
European Renaissance cities spurred significant study of the effectiveness of book and
paper conservation methods. The Florence experience thus marked the real beginning
of cooperation and collaboration on conservation issues among research libraries, which
has borne significant fruit. The details of these new methods and protocols are beyond the
scope of this book, but for those interested, they can form an important area for further
study.
Although conserving library materials in special collections has become integral to
preservation efforts in research libraries, modern books are also in need of conservation.
Unfortunately, one of the most felicitous developments in the democratic dispersion of
knowledge that has occurred in the last fifty years, that is, the move to open shelving in
most libraries, where the reader may come and browse without the need to request the
services of an intermediary with access to the library’s stacks, has resulted in a lack of
adequate protective supervision, with the upshot that newer, popular materials can some-
times be quickly reduced to worse condition than the older, rare materials to which access
is restricted. Unfortunately, this problem is broader than simply greater usage. The modern
176 / CH AP T ER 11

production methods now generally used in book publishing, which have resulted from in-
creasing mechanization, have rendered many new books inherently more fragile in terms
of wear and tear from ordinary usage than some older, better-constructed materials (Baker
and Dube 2010, 22).
In a 1963 symposium, Banks discussed how to care for large segments of a collection
that demonstrated a number of problems, and this resulted in a new approach and the need
for special skills. He coined the term collections conservator, which still seems quite appro-
priate these days. The role of a collections conservator is to institute and utilize conserva-
tion procedures in collections that don’t require the item-by-item special treatment that
may often be needed in a typical special collection (Baker and Dube 2010, 23).
Programs of study that examine all aspects of archives, special collections, preserva-
tion, and conservation are becoming increasingly common in library and information sci-
ence departments. For further information, the student may wish to review the selected
readings for this chapter.

PRESERVATION MICROFILMING

Before the electronic digitization of book pages came along, preservation by the photo-
graphic microfilming of materials that were rare, deteriorating, or easily subject to deterio-
ration, such as newspapers, appeared by the early 1970s to be the answer to most libraries’
preservation needs, especially following the development of the more random-access micro-
fiche storage method for photographed works. However, some materials proved to be too
deteriorated to withstand the photographing process. Nicholson Baker (2001), in his book
Double Fold, called the country’s attention to the unexpected consequences of preservation
microfilming in an extremely negative manner. He described the worst consequences of
the microfilming process used in connection with the U.S. Newspaper Project, where some
badly deteriorated or otherwise damaged newspapers were discarded after being micro-
filmed. These items were already damaged and were not further harmed during the micro-
filming, but they were apparently discarded on the presumption that the microfilm would
be the equivalent of or better than the old damaged original. This practice was stopped, but
not before many people began rejecting local microfilming due to this criticism.
Interestingly, microfilming projects continue, especially for newspapers, though the
usefulness of microfilm may ultimately be limited by the eventual unavailability of equip-
ment with which to read it. But it remains a commonly held medium.

DISASTER PLANS

Although the responsibility for a total disaster plan usually rests with the library adminis-
tration, the collection development head and staff should take an active role in drawing up
those parts of the plan that deal directly with the collection as a whole. This is especially
true now that most collections involve combinations of print, audiovisual, and electronic
resources. Natural disasters such as tornadoes, earthquakes, floods, and hurricanes can hit
with little or no warning, such as the highly publicized flood that inflicted major damage
on the University of Hawaii’s library in 2004. Plans have to be in place to be implemented
immediately once all people are safe and the building is declared safe to enter, so that as
much of the collection as possible can be saved or rehabilitated.
 PR E SE R VATIO N / 177

A number of key items are important in any disaster plan. First, unpleasant as it may
be, there must be a detailing of what is to be saved first, with collection development staff
serving in the role of triage decision-makers. Another important item for the plan is simply
a list of the names, phone numbers, and Internet addresses of vendors that can help in re-
supplying destroyed but high-priority items, provide the library with refrigerated trailers
for damaged print materials, and so on. The materials that are needed quickly for disaster
recovery should be both on-site in a disaster kit, closet, or other area known to staff, and
backed up or duplicated off-site. A simple but highly useful and practical template for devel-
oping an emergency response plan is available on the Web (Brown 2007).
For electronic materials, the advance creation of backups and their off-site storage in
case the library is damaged too badly to enter for a long period are relatively easy precau-
tions, but to be useful they must be kept current. While daily backups may be too much to
ask, at least multiple backups should be provided for. Unfortunately, unless systems and
backups are constantly checked, sometimes backups simply refuse to load. As much as pos-
sible, backups should be tested periodically to make sure they are not corrupted and that
personnel know how to use the system.

PRESERVATION OF DIGITAL OBJECTS

It was traditionally assumed that if a publication was printed on long-life, acid-free paper
and if reasonable environmental conditions for its storage were maintained, access to the
information could continue for an essentially indefinite period, or at least for quite a long
time. Publishing work was often well done—the oldest printed Gutenberg bibles in exis-
tence remain readable today. It is only relatively recently in library history, however, that
the format of materials has become problematic for the future preservation and use of the
information contained in those formats.

The recognition of digitization as a preservation strategy is a relatively new and

still-controversial concept within the cultural heritage community, which has general-
ly viewed digitization activities as a form of copying for easier and broader access. The
Association of Research Libraries officially adopted digitization as an acceptable pres-
ervation strategy in 2004, by recognizing the sheer impossibility of redoing digitization
work as technology evolves and acquiescing to the notion that technology capabilities
and standards are sufficiently mature for the task at hand. (Conway 2010, 64)

This recognition is good enough, but a potential problem must be kept in mind. Although
libraries have always needed to deselect or weed their collections of unneeded, out-of-date,
duplicate, or otherwise no longer useful books and serials, this process has almost always
been accomplished through conscious and careful decisions on the part of librarians. How-
ever, electronic products open up the unhappy specter of the unconscious and quite unin-
tentional discarding, in effect, of the information itself through the technological obsoles-
cence of the resource medium. For instance, if you purchase a serial on CD-ROM today, how
certain can you be that you will in fact be able to access the material appearing in its issues
in the year 2024, or for that matter even two years from now? If you purchase web access to
that serial, what happens if you drop the subscription next year, or if the company that pro-
vides access is bought out by another vendor that subsequently changes its access policies in
ways that are incompatible with your systems or policies, or that provides continued access
178 / CH AP T ER 11

only at significantly increased cost? If you decide to preserve a website, do you also have to
preserve all the links made from that page if it is to be truly useful? If so, where do you stop?
Electronic storage and digitization are wonderful things in many ways, but they require a
constant vigilance that hard-copy materials do not. The Dead Sea Scrolls, though admit-
tedly incomplete and requiring a significant degree of transliteration, remain as readable
today as they were thousands of years ago. But there are computer discs and magnetic tapes
from thirty years ago that languish for lack of equipment to read them, or because there are
few programmers still active today who recall the early computer languages in which they
were written. These are not only issues for research libraries; they are matters of concern
for every library which does not want to find that its backup archive requires the computer
equivalent of an eight-track tape player.
Not only electronic serials and e-books need to be preserved. Data CDs and DVDs are
important parts of the collection of many libraries. It is recommended that the physical
CD and DVD discs be archived at temperatures less than 68 degrees Fahrenheit and at a
relative humidity between 20 percent and 50 percent. When handled, they need to be held
by the outer edge or center hole with care not to scratch the disc (Byers 2003, vi). But who
really does this? The ubiquity of copying software makes cavalier handling of these items
perhaps less problematic, but again the need is for something to be done before disaster
strikes. Disaster includes damage to backup CDs and DVDs even when the main collection
is unaffected.
The various types of digital media that need to be archived and preserved for both cur-
rent and future use include the following:

• Digitally reformatted works that are scanned or digitized versions of

physical items
• Digital documents, and so on, that don’t have an analog or print counterpart
(i.e., they are born digital)
• Individual resources such as texts, still images, audio recordings, and so on
that are from a single individual source
• Collective resources such as websites, blogs, wikis, e-journals, and so on
• Data sets that consist of numerous individual pieces of scientific, computer,
and other cultural data that make up a comprehensive set of materials
• Communication records such as e-mails, instant messages, Tweets,
Facebook postings, and other similar online activities that comprise an
individual’s or group’s record of communication
• Metadata that assist in long-term storage and retrieval by being included
with the different digital media resources. Metadata record the different
features such as format, version, and what devices or software are needed
to access the saved information.

Possibly digital preservation’s most interesting recent development is the shift from large,
project-based imaging initiatives to the digitization of more everyday items and local collec-
tions. Earlier print preservation efforts evolved in a similar fashion. Initially these projects
centered upon the recognized great collections, but they eventually developed into efforts
to preserve deteriorating materials of all types as they were found. This trend to digitize all
deteriorating materials is not widespread, but given that libraries such as the University of
Michigan have begun to develop such projects, it is a virtual certainty that the approach will
become more widespread in the future.
 PR E SE R VATIO N / 179

Some note should be made of the phenomenon of the ease of electronic self-publishing,
which is usually associated only with “vanity” materials produced by individually affluent
authors. These have always constituted a tiny percentage of print materials, but recently
self-publishers have become mass producers of great chunks of information on the Web.
These born-digital materials are highly ephemeral, though, and are thus a problem for pres-
ervationists.
Let’s look at a few of the problems involved in preserving digital materials.

IS DIGITIZED INFORMATION PRESERVED (OR PRESERVABLE)?

Digital preservation involves both born-digital and digitized documents. Born-digital docu-
ments were created from their birth using some form of digital technology. The digital pres-
ervation of such materials is necessary to the maintenance of their authenticity, reliability,
and accessibility. Although sometimes the layperson may think of digital information as
being potentially preserved for eternity, it is becoming clear that at present this is certainly
not the case. Electronic formats keep changing and show no signs of settling down to a
standard “King’s English” that promises to endure. So unless the information contained in
older formats is constantly being transferred to newer media, it can quickly become lost.
For example, try locating today a 5¼-inch floppy drive (the predominant storage format for
most microcomputers a mere thirty years ago) in order to read documents stored on that
type of disc. This is already not an easy process. But for those, especially business and library
early adopters, who have data on the even older 8-inch disc format dominant in the 1970s,
accessing and moving the information contained on them to a current format remains, if it
is even achievable, both expensive and labor-intensive. As 3½-inch disc drives disappeared
from new computers to be replaced by CD-RW and flash card drives about twenty years ago,
and other smaller media and memory sticks and cards have come along, it seems certain
that any portable data storage will inevitably become inaccessible. Even as august a body
as the National Archives finds itself constantly searching for, or even attempting to build
from scratch, some older piece of technology or equipment so they can transfer information
from an obsolete format to a new one. It has become clear that the preservation of digital
information requires both the financial wherewithal and a firm commitment to migrating
data from one format to another in order to ensure that the data can continue to be read.
These same concerns also apply to print documents that have been selected for dig-
itization. Once in digital format, these documents join the merry-go-round of materials
needing to be kept up-to-date. But even when information is kept in a readable format,
you must also consider the physical durability of that format. At present the average life
span of magnetic tape appears to be considerably less than that of most books, even those
printed on acidic paper. Magnetic disc formats, while apparently somewhat better, have yet
to meet the test of time, even assuming their adequate protection from magnets, motors,
and electric detection equipment. For optical disc formats, such as CD-ROMs and DVDs,
the life expectancies are apparently considerably longer, but there is no consensus on just
how long. There appear to be variations depending on the type of disc—estimates vary all
the way from 10 to 100 years—but the life expectancies are still paltry when compared to
those of most printed materials.
In addition to hardware format challenges, the library must also be concerned about
the software used to generate the documents. In 1989 the latest in word-processing soft-
ware included such now-extinct programs as WordStar and XyWrite. Can we be positive
18 0 / CH AP T ER 11

that ten years from now we will have the software to read or convert a document produced
using one of today’s standard word-processing programs? It is clear that when we move
away from standard ASCII text to formatted, word-processed documents, we necessarily
become very dependent on the proper software to read the document, suggesting perhaps
the need for a standard for electronic archives.
Today, to preserve information, many archives have undertaken to convert their mate-
rials to a format that they hope will remain independent of software or platform. Such for-
mats today are usually pure ASCII texts, which are easy to save, but which lack the benefits
of fancy fonts, boldfaced and italicized text, justification, and so on. Although this approach
seems the best route, it is an expensive one without any guarantees. After all, what future
does ASCII have?
Another important consideration is that, unlike the case of print materials, where good
fortune and sheer passivity often play a crucial part in long-term preservation, there is no
salvation in just doing nothing; electronic materials will be preserved and usable in the
future only if positive action is taken now. In the past, many printed sources were saved
by serendipity, that is, they just happened to survive on someone’s bookshelf or in some
library’s storage area.
Some libraries are beginning to create what are called “dim archives” of print copies of
journals that they are primarily acquiring in electronic form. The idea is that materials in a
dim archive are stored remotely for retrieval when needed and are used only when the elec-
tronic version is no longer available. These materials are not fully processed, nor are they
arranged for public access. A few libraries have created “dark archives” in which materials
are stored for use as backups, but only in a worst-case scenario.
Another important issue is the sheer ephemeral nature of digital information. This
information may change or simply disappear before it can be captured and preserved. Print
archives contain the papers of individuals and authors that allow historians and literary
scholars to trace the development of a work through its many drafts. In the electronic age,
those drafts are likely not saved but simply overwritten by the latest version of the text.
The digitization strategy called LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe), which was
developed at Stanford University, is a model for creating multiple, geographically distant
archives of digital materials. It is an open source, peer-to-peer, decentralized digital preser-
vation infrastructure. LOCKSS is becoming increasingly accepted by publishers and librar-
ians. Whether it addresses all relevant issues may vary from library to library, and whether
it becomes a truly standard approach remains to be seen (see http://lockss.stanford.edu).
Other long-term storage options include the MetaArchive Cooperative, which is an
archiving structure that is dedicated to preservation and retrieval activities. A major con-
sideration for this and other maturing archiving solutions is that depositories must estab-
lish trust that these open archival information systems can and will keep up with develop-
ments in technology. One of the advantages of the MetaArchive Cooperative is that it holds
documents that are not openly shareable but are still vital for preservation. Oral histories,
digitized photographs, manuscripts, and other intellectual property are stored within this
system even though they are not currently shareable due to copyright limitations.
Similarly, CLOSED LOCKSS (CLOCKSS) is the dark archiving component of LOCKSS.
It allows scholarly journals and other publications and documents to be preserved for pos-
terity. Like the examples above, the materials in CLOCKSS are not available for sharing, but
are being kept in the digital archive for posterity.
Collection development librarians cannot ignore the electronic information preserva-
tion problem. Generally, libraries are seen as collecting items of lasting importance rather
 PR E SE R VATIO N / 181

than the ephemeral. To meet this expectation, libraries must be able to access permanent
archives of information that are available only in electronic form. In searching for a solu-
tion, librarians are justifiably reluctant to depend on commercial vendors, and they must
therefore make the necessary commitment to move with the technology so as not to be left
with something like the equivalent of a reel-to-reel audiotape archive.
How does collection development deal with this problem? A 1998 statement of the In-
ternational Coalition of Library Consortia (ICLC) argues that libraries, if they are to meet
their typical preservation and collection mandates, must be able to purchase or license in-
formation perpetually, not just temporarily, in order to retain control over the preservation
of the information contained in the media. This control necessarily includes the right to
make backup copies. The problem is exacerbated when information is accessed only re-
motely, and the ICLC also argues that a provider should not be used unless there is some
form of guarantee that the information will be perpetually available.

WHO SHOULD ARCHIVE AN ELECTRONIC RESOURCE?

There are several possible answers to the question of who should archive electronic
materials.

Publisher or Vendor/Aggregator

Although many publishers currently attempt to archive their electronic publications, most
of them make no commitment regarding the permanence of their archives. When it is no
longer commercially profitable to do so, it appears unlikely that publishers will continue to
make and maintain archives of their electronic materials. Librarians also worry that a pub-
lisher may go out of business or be sold to another company that decides that it is not in its
financial interests to continue the original archival arrangements. To make matters worse,
even fewer publishers have indicated a commitment to move their materials to current for-
mats as needed for their preservation. Collection development librarians in academic and
research libraries should, and typically do, strive to purchase materials with an eye to per-
manent retention, making preservation and archival issues extremely important to them;
the publisher’s safeguards likely will not be sufficient for a library’s needs in this regard.
Some good approaches do exist. One example of a vendor approach to preservation is
OCLC’s FirstSearch Electronic Collections Online, which offers to subscribers perpetual
access to its electronic resources. Another is JSTOR, which was established in 1995 as an
independent, not-for-profit organization to provide academic libraries with back runs of
important journals in electronic form. JSTOR has straightforward licenses with publishers
and subscribing institutions. By emphasizing back runs, JSTOR strives to avoid competing
with publishers, whose principal revenues come from current subscriptions.

The Library Itself

Traditionally, libraries have always done their own archiving, whether through binding
journal issues or microfilming. It is conceivable that, given the permission of the publisher,
libraries could archive many of their electronic materials as well. However, the library must
18 2 / CH AP T ER 11

then make the same commitment to keeping these materials in a current and usable format.
If done in every library, these activities would certainly be expensively duplicative. Librar-
ians would doubtless feel safest or most comfortable with this solution, but it is probably
not a cost-effective approach to a general problem, and it frankly does not seem to be the
method chosen by most libraries at this time. The one exception appears to be materials
produced locally, which many libraries do archive on the basis that they will likely be the
sole source for these items in the future. As noted above, a few libraries have begun creating
dim or dark archives of their journals, so that in a worst-case scenario, they will have access
to a print copy of the journal if the electronic one is no longer accessible.

Cooperative Arrangements

As libraries have done with shared online cataloging for years, a cooperative arrangement
can be worked out to preserve electronic resources, which seems to be a highly desirable
approach. One idea is that publishers could provide for a nonprofit organization that would
archive and convey materials as needed and make particular titles and volumes available
to libraries that held, or once held, a subscription. A number of efforts are under way along
these lines. For example, the Committee on Institutional Cooperation’s Electronic Journal
Collection is an effort by the major academic libraries in the United States both to archive
and to offer access to freely available electronic journals. An additional example of a consor-
tial approach by academic libraries is JSTOR, which archives electronic journals for a fee.
The Google Books Library Project is a good example of a cooperative arrangement to
preserve books by digitizing them. The problems with this project are not technical issues,
but rather ones of intellectual property (see chapter 9 for intellectual property concerns).
There are also a number of quality issues, as we might expect with people digitizing materi-
als all day long (see Duguid 2007).

WHO SHOULD BE CONCERNED WITH

PRESERVATION ISSUES?

When reviewing the library literature dealing with electronic resources, it is obvious that a
good many libraries have determined, whether consciously or by default, that the preserva-
tion of electronic-format materials may not get much attention. Apparently, preservation
issues are not on their checklists of points to consider when purchasing or licensing an
electronic resource. In some cases, it has been baldly stated that preservation issues are not
of concern to a particular library when selecting materials. But some libraries are obviously
very concerned with such issues, even if they don’t have answers for all of the preservation
issues that are necessarily raised.
We submit that this is an area where no library can consider itself an island. Some type
of cooperation is necessary if vendors and publishers are to make significant contributions
to ensuring continued access to electronic materials. If the library community is not con-
cerned, then the vendors and publishers obviously will not commit significant corporate
dollars to keep their materials available in perpetuity. Also, libraries may need to follow the
lead of those few cooperative efforts that have begun working actively toward the preser-
vation of electronic resources. Currently these efforts are mostly in the area of electronic
serials, but they can be expected to widen in the near future.
 PR E SE R VATIO N / 18 3

But some may say that this issue is only a matter of interest for research libraries.
Although research libraries are naturally most likely to be able and motivated to commit
resources to cooperative preservation efforts, it is really a matter of concern for all libraries.
Many smaller libraries currently rely on interlibrary loan for many specialized materials
from academic or research libraries. What if the library that you have always depended on
does not have hard-copy access to the material or, by the terms of a licensing agreement,
cannot even loan you the material, much less print or copy any of it for your use? Preser-
vation concerns involving electronic resources are properly the concern of all libraries, and
only by indicating that concern when you purchase or license materials can you help to
ensure that these materials will continue to be accessible.

Institutional Repositories for Access

and Preservation

In today’s world, ever-increasing quantities of resources are available in digital format, not
all of which are easily published in print format; for instance, multimedia elements may
not be conducive to publication in a book or journal. Extensive data sets may be associated
with journal articles that are not reproducible in a print format. For this information to
be available for people to obtain and use, it has to be located somewhere, and institutional
repositories are increasingly the answer to the question of the access and preservation of
these materials. Institutional repositories serve as digital warehouses for materials written
by the faculty of a particular institution, or by authors in a particular geographic area or
corporation, and so on. The institutional repository holds digital materials, while the dim
archive is a repository of print materials.
A given institutional repository does not necessarily have to be exclusively for the use
of members of that institution or for materials from only one institution. Consortial re-
positories exist for a number of independent institutions that collaborate and pool their
resources. In these cases, the various member libraries or other organizations can all input
and access all of the materials.
Although a repository can preserve, and make accessible, materials produced in an
institution or consortium, at the same time an individual repository forms a part of an
international system of distributed, interoperable repositories that are available through
the Web. Thus, the repositories provide a foundation for a new model of publishing that is
centered on the author rather than on the publisher.
For librarians who are interested in setting up an institutional repository, open source
software is currently available. The source code for DSpace (http://libraries.mit.edu/dspace-
mit/technology/download.html) is available for downloading as well as documentation and
FAQs. At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) the institutional repository is
subdivided into collections by departments or individuals. Smaller libraries need not con-
struct such an elaborate repository, but the software allows a range of options to customize
a digital repository that is right for your institution.
DSpace is also designed to support a federation of depositories of institutions that
adopt this system. The DSpace project at MIT has envisioned multiple solutions to the
issues surrounding access control, digital rights management, versioning, retrieval, facul-
ty receptivity, community feedback, and flexible publishing capabilities. DSpace has also
been designed to encourage author participation through ease of use and integration with
third-party software, allowing it to be coupled with other components.
18 4 / CH AP T ER 11

SUMMARY

The preservation concerns regarding electronic resources are far from being adequately
resolved. For the foreseeable future, concerns regarding the continued availability of the
present generation of electronic materials will remain, given the rapid rates of change in
both hardware and software. Access to licensed material involves both these issues and the
legal right of future access to material that was previously licensed. Collection development
librarians thus must do all they can to ensure that the licenses their libraries sign today are
not for limited access for a particular time period, but allow continued access in the future.
Without this, collection efforts can easily go for naught. If there is no protection against
losing access to material when vendors merge with larger companies or go out of business
entirely, the library will have wasted its funds and its patrons will not be well served.
Preservation efforts are improving in both the digital and print repository contexts.
Particularly within a consortium of libraries, the creation of dim archives of print materials
is especially appealing for journals that are available in both print and electronic copies. Li-
censing access to electronic journals with the provision of one print copy to the consortium
is more likely to ensure that there will be continuing access to the title.
To be secure in the knowledge of continued access in the future, cooperative arrange-
ments between vendors and libraries are probably required. It would be extremely naive to
assume that for-profit publishers will continue to maintain a resource when it is no longer
profitable simply because future users might need access to it. Cooperative arrangements
in the nonprofit sector are probably required to maintain perpetual access. Such arrange-
ments, of course, will require the cooperation of vendors and publishers to allow libraries or
special nonprofit organizations, such as JSTOR, to preserve access to materials.
The movement toward the creation of institutional repositories may actively involve
collection development librarians in the preservation and access of local materials that are
linked to similar resources in repositories around the globe.

The financial challenges of the processes involved in preserving electronic records into
perpetuity are significant. . . . It is necessary to develop financial management tools
that will support the decision-making processes in which archives and special collec-
tions engage when preserving electronic records. . . . Applying business concepts such
as cost-benefit analysis, decision-making models, and cost models, in combination with
archival precepts and collection management principles, to the challenges of preserv-
ing electronic records will assist large institutions such as archives and special collec-
tions in making decisions that will support their mission statement and act in the best
interests of their users, both present and future. (Sanett 2002, 388)

ACTIVITY

1. Divide the class into four groups based on type of library (school media
center, public, academic, and special). Each student should have brought
to the class at least one book or other analog work, whether in old, new,
damaged, or mint condition. (Or the instructor may wish to supply sample
materials of each type.) Each group should critique their materials based on
the type of library and answer the following questions:
 PR E SE R VATIO N / 185

° Is the material worth preserving?

• If not, weed.
° Can it be repaired and returned to the collection? Is rebinding
appropriate?
• If the answer to either of the above is yes, take the appropriate steps
to repair the material. If the answer is no, continue to the next bullet.

° Is it appropriate to add the material to a special collection either in the

library or through a cooperative arrangement?
° If the material is worth saving, but is not in adequate condition for the
special collection shelves, is digitizing or microfilming the material
appropriate? Discuss the factors that should be considered before
undertaking a conversion of the material.
° Taking the most interesting or challenging of your materials, prepare a
brief report concerning your decisions that will be shared with the entire
class.
2. Next, do a similar procedure for electronic items found on a website of
your choosing. What is worth preserving for the future? What can be safely
deleted after a given period of time? How do you best ensure its survival?

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Is digitization the answer to preserving printed materials? Discuss its

advantages and disadvantages.
2. Discuss the considerations (practical and legal) that must be taken into
account before beginning a digitization project.

REFERENCES

Baker, Nicholson. 2001. Double Fold: Libraries and the Assault on Paper. New York: Random House.
Baker, Whitney, and Liz Dube. 2010. “Identifying Standard Practices in Research Library Book
Conservation.” Library Resources and Technical Services 54 (January): 21–33.
Barr, Pelham. 1946. “Book Conservation and University Library Administration.” College & Research
Libraries 7 (July): 214–19.
Brown, Karen. 2007. “Worksheet for Outlining a Disaster Plan.” Northeast Document
Conservation Center. www.nedcc.org/resources/leaflets/3Emergency_Management/
04DisasterPlanWorksheet.php.
Byers, Fred R. 2003. Care and Handling of CDs and DVDs: A Guide for Librarians and Archivists.
Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology.
Conway, Paul. 2010. “Preservation in the Age of Google: Digitization, Digital Preservation and Dilemmas.”
Library Quarterly 80 (January): 61–79.
Duguid, Paul. 2007. “Inheritance and Loss? A Brief Survey of Google Books.” First Monday 12, no. 8.
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/issue/view/251.
18 6 / CH AP T ER 11

Johnson, Peggy. 2009. Fundamentals of Collection Development and Management. 2nd ed. Chicago: American
Library Association.
Sanett, Shelby. 2002. “Toward Developing a Framework of Cost Elements for Preserving Authentic
Electronic Records into Perpetuity.” College & Research Libraries 63 (September): 388–404.

SELECTED READINGS

Anderson, David. 2012. “Historical Reflections: The Future of the Past.” Communications of ACM 55 (May):
33–34.
Bolger, Laurie. 2003. “Disaster Planning.” Information Outlook 7 (July): 27–30.
Daigle, Bradley J. 2012. “The Digital Transformation of Special Collections.” Journal of Library
Administration 52, nos. 1-4: 244–64.
Leetaru, Kalev. 2008. “Mass Digitization: The Deeper Story of Google Books and the Open Content
Alliance.” First Monday 13 (October). www.firstmonday.org.
Library of Congress. 2010. “National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation.”
www.digitalpreservation.gov.
Merrill-Oldham, Jan, and Nancy Carlson Schrock. 2000. “The Conservation of General Collections.” In
Preservation Issues and Planning, edited by Paul N. Banks and Roberta Pilette. Chicago: American
Library Association.
Ravenwood, Clare, Adrienne Muir, and Graham Matthews. 2015. “Stakeholders in the Selection of Digital
Material for Preservation: Relationships, Responsibilities, and Influence.” Collection Management 40,
no. 2: 82–110.
Ray, Emily. 2006. “The Prague Library Floods of 2002: Crisis and Experimentation.” Libraries and the
Cultural Record 41 (summer): 381–91.
Stemper, Jim, and Susan Barribeau. 2006. “Perpetual Access to Electronic Journals: A Survey of One
Academic Research Library’s Licenses.” Library Resources and Technical Services 50, no. 2: 91–109.
Thomas, Sarah. 2002. “From Double Fold to Double Bind.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 28 (May):
104–8.
Verdesca, Anthony F., Jr. 2010. “On Sherpas and Shelving Books.” Journal of Access Services 7, no. 3: 191–94.
Whitaker, Beth M., and Lynne M. Thomas. 2009. Special Collections 2.0: New Technologies for Rare Books,
Manuscripts, and Archival Collections. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
 CHAPTER 12

The Future of
Collection Development
and Management

OVERVIEW

This might be called an awkward time for collection development librarians, who must
seemingly fall between two stools because they need a deep and thorough familiarity with
the full range of both print and electronic resources. This situation is not new, since it began
with the advent of digital publishing and even earlier with the graphical Web. By this point
in your study, though, it is fairly certain that you have developed many of your own ideas
about collection development and how it is evolving. In this final chapter we will examine
several views of the future of library collection development. Consider them as you would
any other prognostication—with more than a few grains of salt. But be assured of one thing:
the field will continue to change as library resources evolve and change.
In the preface to the first edition of her book Fundamentals of Collection Development
and Management in 2004, Peggy Johnson states:

Collection development and management are the meat and potatoes of libraries. If you
don’t have a collection, you don’t have a library. In the earliest libraries, people concen-
trated on building collections and locating materials to add, though the need for preser-
vation has been with us for the duration of libraries. Medieval monks often spent their
entire lives copying manuscripts to preserve them—and creating questions about the
mutability of content similar to those that trouble us today. (Johnson 2004, ix)

In the second edition, she adds, “The roles of collections librarians are expanding in new
and exciting ways. In many libraries of all types, collection development and management
are part of a suite of challenging responsibilities” (Johnson 2009, vii).
In just a few short years, the responsibilities of collection development librarians have
indeed changed a great deal in most libraries. Electronic resources are no longer novel, but
rather a standard part of the process of acquiring materials for library users. Electronic
databases, e-books, and e-serials are no longer considered flashy or fluff, but are, to use
Johnson’s metaphor, a significant part of the meat and potatoes of many collections.
Now let’s look at some other perspectives on the future of collection development and
the duties of collection development librarians.

/ 187 /
18 8 / CH AP T ER 12

VIEWS ON THE FUTURE OF COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT

At the ALA Midwinter conference in 2010, in a discussion group of the Association for
Library Collections and Technical Services, a group of librarians, mostly from academic
libraries, discussed their present and future roles in the collection development process.
They noted that Cassell (2008, 89) lists the major collection development roles as follows:

• working with vendors on customizing approval plans;

• developing, monitoring, and adjusting monograph approval plan profiles;
• monitoring e-book packages and selecting e-books;
• monitoring electronic resource packages;
• selection of all formats of materials not arrived at through approval plans;
• developing the most cost-effective ways to handle interlibrary loan requests
such as buying the books requested;
• more emphasis on assessing the collections;
• more outreach in publicizing collections; and
• developing guidelines for the selection of materials in all formats, such as
always buying materials in electronic form if available.

All agreed that these roles continue to be significant, but that there is an ebb and flow of
function going on, indicating that the assessment of collections and their usage are now or
may soon be the key roles, in contrast to a traditional acquisitions function.
Derek Law (2009), in an article about the future of information and information pro-
fessionals, lists a number of tools and themes that should form the foundation for the roles
of the library and the librarian:

• “Building e-research collections and contributing to a virtual research

environment of digitally created material”: This is already happening in
many research libraries, but the trend will trickle down to other types
of libraries over time. All libraries have some unique materials that they
can contribute to a virtual research environment. These materials might
include small, local newspapers, local publications such as pamphlets
and records, local histories, and so on. As time passes, digital creation
and retrieval of the materials may become a much larger function of the
collection development librarian than purchasing material for the library
collection.
• “Recognizing the importance of quality assurance, trust metrics, and
relevance ranking”: Since researchers depend on virtual materials for their
research, they need to be assured of the quality and integrity of digital
resources.
• “Managing institutional digitally created assets and making the content
available”: Instead of one large digital library, it is far more likely that the
digital content of the future will be decentralized, making each library the
custodian of its own materials, and it will thus need to be able to manage
materials locally and make them available on the Web.
• “Adding value to content”: One of the best ways to add value to content is
to provide the necessary metadata for effective and efficient retrieval of the
information stored in digital repositories.
 TH E FU T U R E O F C OLLE C TI O N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D MAN AG E M E N T / 18 9

• “Providing training in information fluency”: Training users in information

fluency appears to be a role that librarians will have for the foreseeable
future. Librarians can make all the material in the world available online,
but to be effective, they must also train their users to retrieve and, even
more importantly, to evaluate the materials found there.
• “Offering policy and standards advice”: A necessary degree of
standardization is important to the future retrieval of electronic materials.
Without standards and policies, relevant materials will not be located
(quoted material from Law 2009, 18).

Most of Law’s themes have at least an indirect bearing on the future role of collection devel-
opment librarians. The most telling difference from the past concerns more active involve-
ment in the actual creation and maintenance of locally produced digital materials. The
other difference has to do with quality assurance, much along the lines of the assessment
process discussed at the recent ALA Midwinter conference mentioned above. When librar-
ies purchase material from a reputable publisher, there is an element of assurance that the
material is accurate and thoroughly researched; this quality has traditionally been more
than implied, with good vendors almost always providing materials subject to approval, and
so on. Librarians in the future will likely not have the luxury of depending on review by an
established publisher for many digital materials produced locally, or anywhere else for that
matter. Librarians will need better ways of guiding users to the best-quality materials. Con-
sistent with this will be librarians’ growing role as teachers who train users in information
literacy and fluency. Young people will know how to use the hardware, often much better
than their elders certainly, but they will need to develop the discernment skills needed to
separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff, and the correct general rule from the merely
anecdotal incident.
Although it is popular at the current time to predict the death of print, there are in-
dications that users don’t always prefer digital formats, particularly where leisure reading
is concerned. Surveys indicate that e-journals are nearly always preferred, although users
do tend to print out the relevant articles that they find in them. The recent downturn in
e-book sales does suggest that e-books may not remain popular in the near future, at least
until improvements in format and hardware are accomplished. The early apparent enthusi-
asm for e-books may have been more curiosity-based rather than reflective of readers’ true
preferences (Gregory and Cox 2016).
However, this does not mean that e-books will disappear, because they are certainly
a better choice for some users. For instance, the ability to change the font size of the text
means that people with poor vision have the ability to make the text the size they need to
be able to read it. Users who travel a lot often prefer e-books because they find they can
load several e-books on their e-reader and avoid carrying around the weight of several print
books.
A study of the Boise State University Albertsons Library’s hiring of many new librari-
ans to replace retiring or resigning librarians (Kozel-Gains and Stoddart 2009) found that
these newer librarians, typically with less than three years of academic library experience,
were generally involved in meeting the opportunities and challenges of subject liaison re-
sponsibilities using innovative web-based tools, such as faculty-directed blogs, personalized
faculty research pages, and a wiki-based liaison manual. A review of these efforts confirms
that new technologies are only as good as the face-to-face communication and follow-up
that accompany their implementation (Kozel-Gains and Stoddart 2009).
19 0 / CH AP T ER 12

Without doubt, technology is changing the way libraries and information centers do
business. Some writers . . . suggest that the “virtual library” means the demise of collec-
tion development. However, those who understand the concept know that the issue of
selection and collection building will remain an important function in whatever envi-
ronment technology brings. (Evans and Saponaro 2005, 16)

On the future of library collections in our increasingly digital age, Disher states:

As we look to the future of libraries and collection development, one thing seems clear,
user demands for more convenience and quicker delivery show no signs of slowing. As
a result, demand for more electronic content will certainly continue to rise and col-
lection developers will be required to meet community expectations and provide the
newest content. What also seems certain [is] that mobile technology and computing
devices used by members of the library community will change rapidly, offering users
more and more enhancements and capabilities. They will turn to the library with new
electronic content demand expectations. (Disher 2014, 130–31)

In a study of collection development librarians and library directors in Washington state,

Boggs found that librarians were upbeat about the need for library collections, but those
collections will look differently from the ones of today:

We will need to balance the diverse needs of our customers and define the role of our
collections and how they meet the needs of the community, . . . We will also need to
look at the relationship of the different types of libraries to each other—school, public
and academic. We can’t continue to operate as separate entities, rather, we will need to
develop deeper collaboration. (Boggs 2016)

It is clear from the recent past and forecasts for the future that collection developers will
continue to deal with more formats and types of materials. In the history of libraries, col-
lections have undergone many changes in format, from stone tablets to papyrus scrolls,
to vellum codexes, to paper books and journals, and finally on to electronic resources.
Although no doubt each change of format caused consternation to librarians, the profession
has adapted and incorporated each new technology. As new ways to view content become
available, libraries must keep up with the times if they are to continue to be relevant to the
majority of users.

BY TYPE OF LIBRARY

Academic libraries have evolved from “models that emphasized faculty control to bookish
bibliographers to more service-oriented library liaisons to customer-based collection devel-
opment being at least a part of their acquisition model” (Sandler 2014). Sandler further
states that:

The current distinctions between ownership, subscription, and access transcend local
collection practices. The 19th- and 20th-century conventions of building thousands of
scholarly collections at arm’s length to scholars in remote locales will inevitably be re-
placed by central discovery and retrieval strategies. (Sandler 2014)
 TH E FU T U R E O F C OLLE C TI O N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D MAN AG E M E N T / 191

Almost all of the changes revolve around digital rather than print and access issues. Look-
ing into the future, it is possible to conceive of libraries joining together in creating digital
libraries that encompass the world’s literature.
Public libraries have evolved from those of the early eighteenth century, which were
social and circulating libraries that featured mostly fiction-oriented collections, to those
libraries of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, which focused most heavily on
self-education, and on to today’s more heavily tax-supported public institutions whose col-
lections provide both fiction and nonfiction and support for local education systems. Along
the way, the collection and its purposes have evolved from pure pleasure to an educational
mission (including continuing education), and then to a mixture of the two.
Tax-supported public libraries have themselves gone through two major theories of col-
lection development over the years. The first was a mission to provide materials that were
needed for cultural uplift and educational purposes. In the second half of the twentieth
century, the impetus was toward providing what patrons wanted to read rather than what
they should read. In many ways, libraries are currently finding a middle path that does both,
providing what the public wants to read in both fiction and nonfiction. This pattern is likely
to continue on into the future (McCook and Bossaller 2018, 24–27).
Schools have traditionally involved teachers in the selection of library materials, but
the emphasis now is on parent and student input as well as teacher and librarian input.
Thus, while the collections are very different, the philosophy behind building a school col-
lection is similar to that of an academic library.
Special libraries generally made the jump to the future as soon as journals became in-
creasingly electronic. As special libraries have generally built collections in collaboration
with their users, little in this regard has changed except for the movement from print to
electronic resources, with patron access now being the key issue for the special library.

SUMMARY

As stated earlier, collection development is presently split nearly down the middle between
print and electronic resources. Contrary to the perceptions of some, it will be a long time, if
ever, before hard-copy print vanishes as a popular medium for the transmission of knowl-
edge and information, but it is clearly becoming a less significant part of the acquisitions
process at many libraries. As with all areas of library work, continuing education, involve-
ment with professional associations, and reading the newly published library literature will
be important to maintaining your professional skills if you intend to become a good collec-
tion development librarian.
Collection development has always been and will surely remain the most exciting area
of library work. The responsibilities of the job and the formats of materials to be acquired
are changing, but collecting and providing access to the materials that users want and need,
while always a challenge, will nevertheless remain the most rewarding goal we as librarians
can accomplish.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. How do you see this digital age in which we live affecting the role of the
collection development librarian? How will the other responsibilities of
collection management figure into that role?
192 / CH AP T ER 12

2. Speculate on the more distant future.

° By 2040, do you think that collection development or management will

be the major duties of a collections librarian? By then, will we even need
collection development librarians?
° In academic libraries, will collection librarians be more or less involved
with faculty in the creation and making available of research or
collecting research?

REFERENCES

Boggs, Shari. 2016. “Data, Discernment, and Demand: How Library Collection Decision-Makers Are
Embracing the Future.” Alki 32, no. 3 (November): 6–7. www.wla.org/assets/Alki/alki_november2016
.pdf.
Cassell, Kay Ann. 2008. “Focus on Collection Development: A Report on ALA Midwinter 2008.” Collection
Building 27, no. 2: 89.
Disher, Wayne. 2014. Crash Course in Collection Development. 2nd ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries
Unlimited.
Evans, Edward G., and Margaret Zarnosky Saponaro. 2005. Developing Library and Information Center
Collections. 5th ed. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Gregory, Vicki L., and Kiersten Cox. 2016. “Must Printed Books Become a Thing of the Past in Academic
Libraries?” The International Journal of the Book 14, no. 4: 11–19.
Johnson, Peggy. 2004. Fundamentals of Collection Development and Management. Chicago: American Library
Association.
——— . 2009. Fundamentals of Collection Development and Management. 2nd ed. Chicago: American Library
Association.
Kozel-Gains, Melissa A., and Richard A. Stoddart. 2009. “Experiments and Experiences in Liaison
Activities: Lessons from New Librarians in Integrating Technology, Face-to-Face, and Follow-Up.”
Collection Management 34 (April-June): 130–42.
Law, Derek. 2009. “Waiting for the (Digital) Barbarians.” Information Outlook 13 (December): 15–18.
McCook, Kathleen de la Peña, and Jenny S. Bossaller. 2018. Introduction to Public Librarianship. 3rd ed.
Chicago: Neal-Schuman.
Sandler, Mark. 2014. “The Ghosts in the Stacks: Collection Development Past, Present, and Future in
Academic Research Libraries.” In Rethinking Collection Development and Management, edited by Becky
Albitz, Christine Avery, and Diane Zabel, 13–30. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.

SELECTED READINGS

Abrams, Stephen. 2014. “On the Horizon: What I Am Watching in 2015.” Information Outlook 18, no. 6:
26–28.
Anderson, Rick. 2015. “The Death of the Collection and the Necessity of Library-Publisher Collaboration.”
The Scholarly Kitchen (November 17). https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2015/11/17/the-death-of-
the-collection-and-the-necessity-of-library-publisher-collaboration-young-librarians-on-the-future
-of-libraries/.
Atkinson, Ross. 2006. “Six Key Challenges for the Future of Collection Development.” Library Resources and
Technical Services 50 (October): 244–51.
 TH E FU T U R E O F C OLLE C TI O N DE V E LOPM E N T AN D MAN AG E M E N T / 19 3

Karel, Thomas A. 2013. “Is There a Future for Collection Development Librarians?” Purdue University,
Purdue E-pubs. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1429&context=charleston.
Nonthacumjane, Pussadee. 2011. “Key Skills and Competences of a New Generation of LIS Professionals.”
IFLA Journal 37, no. 4: 280–88.
Powers, Audrey. 2007. “Reconfiguring Collection Development for the Future.” Charleston Conference
Proceedings, 24–33. http://works.bepress.com/audrey_powers/23.
Walters, Taylor O. 2007. “Reinventing the Library: How Repositories Are Causing Librarians to Rethink
Their Professional Roles.” Portal: Libraries and the Academy 7 (April): 213–25.
 B I B LIOG R APH Y

ACQUISITIONS

Abel, Richard. “The Origins of the Library Approval Plan.” Publishing Research Quarterly 11 (spring 1995):
46–56.
Alabaster, Carol. Developing an Outstanding Core Collection: A Guide for Libraries. Chicago: American
Library Association, 2002.
Amsley, Dawn. “Out-of-Print, Out of Mind? A Case Study of the Decision to Outsource Out-of-Print
Acquisitions.” Library Collections, Acquisitions & Technical Services 29, no. 4 (2005): 433–42.
Atkinson, Ross. “Acquisitions Librarian as Change Agent in the Transition to the Electronic Library.”
Library Resources & Technical Services 39 (January 1992): 7–20.
Born, Kathleen. “Strategies for Selecting Vendors and Evaluating Their Performance—From the Vendor’s
Perspective.” Journal of Library Administration 16, no. 3 (1992): 111–16.
Breitbach, William, and Joy E. Lambert. “Patron-Driven Ebook Acquisition.” Computers in Libraries 31, no.
6 (2011): 16–20.
Bridges, Karl, ed. Customer-Based Collection Development: An Overview. Chicago: American Library
Association, 2014.
Brush, Denise. “Circulation Analysis of an Engineering Monograph Approval Plan.” Collection Building 26,
no. 2 (2007): 59–62.
Bucknell, Terry. “The ‘Big Deal’ Approach to Acquiring E-Books: A Usage-Based Study.” Serials 23, no. 2
(2010): 126–34.
Bussey, Holly. “More Bang for Your Buck.” Information Outlook 11 (June 2007): 35–43.
Caminita, Christina. “E-Books and Patron-Driven Acquisitions in Academic Libraries.” In Customer-
Based Collection Development: An Overview, edited by Karl Bridges, 1–12. Chicago: American Library
Association, 2014.
Campbell, Jerry D. “Getting Comfortable with Change: A New Budget Model for Libraries in Transition.”
Library Trends 42 (winter 1994): 448–59.
Carrico, Steven, and Michelle Wright. “Patron-Driven Acquisitions and Collection Building Initiatives at
UF.” Florida Libraries 54 (spring 2011): 14–27.
Carrigan, Dennis P. “Improving Return on Investment: A Proposal for Allocating the Book Budget.” Journal
of Academic Librarianship 18 (November 1992): 292–97.
Dahl, Candice. “Primed for Patron-Driven Acquisitions: A Look at the Big Picture.” Journal of Electronic
Resources Librarianship 24, no. 2 (2012): 119–26.
Dali, Keren, and Juris Dilevko. “Beyond Approval Plans: Methods of Selection and Acquisition of Books in
Slavic and East European Languages in North American Libraries.” Library Collections, Acquisitions &
Technical Services 29, no. 3 (2005): 238–69.
Debachere, M. C. “Problems in Obtaining Grey Literature.” IFLA Journal 21 (May 1995): 94–98.
Diedrichs, C. P. “Rethinking and Transforming Acquisitions: The Acquisitions Librarian’s Perceptive.”
Library Resources & Technical Services 42, no. 2 (1998): 113–25.

/ 195 /
19 6 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Eaglen, Audrey. Buying Books: A How-to-Do-It Manual for Librarians. New York: Neal-Schuman, 2000.
Farrell, Katherine Treptow, and Janet E. Lute. “Document-Management Technology and Acquisitions
Workflow: A Case Study in Invoice Processing.” Information Technology and Libraries 24 (September
2005): 117–22.
Fenner, Audrey. “The Approval Plan: Selection Aid, Selection Substitute.” Acquisitions Librarian 16, nos.
31/32 (2004): 227–40.
Fischer, Karen S., Michael Wright, Kathleen Clatanoff, Hope Barton, and Edward Shreeves. “Give ’Em
What They Want: A One-Year Study of Unmediated Patron-Driven Acquisition of E-Books.” College &
Research Libraries 73 (September 2012): 469–92.
Fisher, William. “Access or Acquisition: The Impact and Implications of Electronic Publishing.” Library
Acquisitions: Practice & Theory 16 (1992): 155–60.
Fowler, David, and Janet Arcand. “Monographic Acquisitions Time and Cost Studies: The Next Generation.”
Library Resources & Technical Services 47 (July 2003): 109–24.
Furr, Patricia. “Electronic Acquisitions: How E-Commerce May Change the Way That Your Library Buys
Books.” Mississippi Libraries 70, no. 2 (summer 2006): 26–27.
Giambi, Dina M. “Library Approval Vendor Selection: What’s Best Practice.” Library Acquisitions: Theory
and Practice 22 (1998): 225–26.
Gozzi, Cynthia. “Acquisitions Management Information: Do Administrators Really Care?” Library
Administration & Management 9 (spring 1995): 85–87.
Harri, Wilbert. “Implementing Electronic Data Exchange in the Library Acquisitions Environment.”
Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory 18 (spring 1994): 115–17.
Heller, Anne. “Online Ordering: Making Its Mark.” Library Journal 124 (September 1, 1999): 153–58.
Hellriegel, Patricia, and Kaat Van Wonterghem. “Package Deals Unwrapped . . . or the Librarians Wrapped
Up? ‘Forced Acquisitions’ in the Digital Library.” Interlending & Document Supply 35, no. 2 (2007): 66–73.
Hiott, Judith, and Carla Beasley. “Electronic Collection Management: Completing the Cycle—Experiences
at Two Libraries.” Acquisitions Librarian 17, nos. 33/34 (2005): 159–78.
Holley, Robert P., and Kalyani Ankem. “The Effect of the Internet on the Out-of-Print Book Market:
Implications for Libraries.” Library Collections, Acquisitions & Technical Services 29, no. 2 (2005):
118–39.
Kent, P. “How to Evaluate Serial Suppliers.” Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory 18 (spring 1994): 83–87.
Kulp, C., and K. Rupp-Serrano. “Organizational Approaches to Electronic Resource Acquisition: Decision-
Making Models in Libraries.” Collection Management 30, no. 4 (2005): 3–19.
Lam, Helen. “Library Acquisitions Management: Methods to Enhance Vendor Assessment and Library
Performance.” Library Administration & Management 18 (summer 2004): 146–54.
Lugg, Rick, and Ruth Fischer. “Acquisitions’ Next Step.” Library Journal 130, no. 12 (July 2005): 30–32.
Machovec, George. “Consortia and the Future of the Big Deal Journal Packages.” Journal of Library
Administration 54, no. 7 (2014): 629–36.
Melcher, Daniel, with Margaret Saul. Melcher on Acquisition. Chicago: American Library Association, 1971.
Mueller, Susan. “Approval Plans and Faculty Selection: Are They Compatible?” Library Collections,
Acquisitions & Technical Services 29, no. 1 (2005): 61–70.
Murphy, Sarah Anne. “The Effects of Portfolio Purchasing on Scientific Subject Collections.” College &
Research Libraries 69 (July 2008): 332–40.
Nabe, Jonathan, Andrea Imre, and Sanjeet Mann. “Let the Patron Drive: Purchase on Demand E-Books.”
Serials Librarian 60, no. 1-4 (2011): 193–97.
Nardini, Robert F. “Approval Plans: Politics and Performance.” College & Research Libraries 54 (September
1993): 417–25.
O’Neill, Ann L. “How the Richard Abel Co., Inc., Changed the Way We Work.” Library Acquisitions: Practice
& Theory 17, no. 1 (1993): 41–46.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 197

Orkiszewski, Paul. “A Comparative Study of Amazon.com as a Library Book and Media Vendor.” Library
Resources & Technical Services 49 (summer 2005): 204–9.
Pickett, Carmelita, Simon Tabacaru, and Jeanne Harrell. “E-Approval Plans in Research Libraries.” College
& Research Libraries 75 (March 2014): 218–31. http://crl.acrl.org/content/75/2/218.full.pdf.
Quinn, Brian. “The Impact of Aggregator Packages on Collection Management.” Collection Management 25,
no. 3 (2001): 53–74.
Reynolds, Leslie J., Carmelita Pickett, Wyoma Vanduinkerken, Jane Smith, Jeanne Harrell, and Sandra
Tucker. “User-Driven Acquisitions: Allowing Patron Requests to Drive Collection Development in an
Academic Library.” Collection Management 35, nos. 3-4 (2010): 244–54.
Schaffner, Bradley L. “Electronic Resources: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing?” College & Research Libraries 62
(June 2001): 239–49.
Schmidt, Karen A., ed. Understanding the Business of Library Acquisitions. 2nd ed. Chicago: American
Library Association, 1999.
Schroeder, Rebecca. “When Patrons Call the Shots: Patron-Driven Acquisitions at Brigham Young
University.” Collection Building 31, no. 1 (2012): 11–14.
Stephenson, Carol, and Helen Sagi. “Paperless and Streamlined Book Ordering.” Feliciter 54, no. 3 (2008):
100–101.
Sullivan, Kathleen. “Lease Services as a Collection Development Strategy.” In Rethinking Collection
Development and Management, edited by Becky Albitz, Christine Avery, and Diane Zabel, 169–76. Santa
Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited, 2014.
Vickery, Bowles, and Linda Hazzan. “Balancing Patron Demand for All Formats.” Public Libraries 51
(January-February 2012). http://publiclibrariesonline.org/2013/04/balancing-patron-demand-for-all-
formats/.
Walters, William H. “E-Books in Academic Libraries: Challenges for Acquisition and Collection
Management.” Portal: Libraries and the Academy 13, no. 2 (2013): 187–211.
——— . “Patron-Driven Acquisition and the Educational Mission of the Academic Library.” Library Resources
and Technical Services 56, no. 3 (2012): 207.
Ward, Suzanne M. Guide to Implementing and Managing Patron-Driven Acquisitions. Chicago: American
Library Association, 2012.
Warzala, Martin. “The Evolution of Approval Services.” Library Trends 43 (winter 1994): 514–23.
Whitaker, Martha. “The Challenge of Acquisitions in the Digital Age.” Portal: Libraries and the Academy 8
(October 2008): 439–45.
Wilkinson, Frances C., and Linda K. Lewis. The Complete Guide to Acquisitions Management. Westport, CT:
Libraries Unlimited, 2003.

BUDGETING AND FINANCE

Allen, Frank R. “Materials Budgets in the Electronic Age: A Survey of Academic Libraries.” College &
Research Libraries 57 (March 1996): 133–43.
Anderson, Douglas. “Allocation of Costs for Electronic Products in Academic Library Consortia.” College &
Research Libraries 67 (March 2006): 123–35.
Bailey, Timothy P., Jeannette Barnes Lessels, and Rickey D. Best. “Using Universal Borrowing Data in the
Library Book Fund Allocation Process.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services 29, no. 1
(2005): 90–98.
Blecic, Deborah D., Stephen E. Wiberley, Jr., Joan B. Fiscella, Sara Bahnmaier-Blaszczak, and Rebecca
Lowery. “Deal or No-Deal? Evaluating Big Deals and Their Journals.” College & Research Libraries 74
(March 2013): 178–93.
19 8 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Canepi, Kitti. “Fund Allocation Formula Analysis: Determining Elements for Best Practice in Libraries.”
Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services 31, no. 1 (2007): 12–24.
Catalano, Amy J., and William T. Caniano. “Book Allocations in a University Library: An Evaluation of
Multiple Formulas.” Collection Management 38, no. 3 (2013): 192–212.
Clendenning, Lynda Fuller, J. Kay Martin, and Gail McKenzie. “Secrets for Managing Materials Budget
Allocations: A Brief Guide for Collections Managers.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical
Services 29, no. 1 (2005): 99–108.
Dunn, John A., Jr., and Murray S. Martin. “The Whole Cost of Libraries.” Library Trends 42 (winter 1994):
564–78.
Gerhard, Kristin H. “Pricing Models for Electronic Journals and Other Electronic Academic Materials: The
State of the Art.” Journal of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4 (2005): 1–25.
Gregory, Vicki L. “Development of Academic Library Budgets in Selected States with an Emphasis on the
Utilization of Formulas.” Journal of Library Administration 12, no. 1 (1990): 23–45.
Guarria, Charles I. “How Using an Allocation Formula Changed Funding Allocations at Long Island
University.” Collection Building 28, no. 2 (2009): 44–50.
Hahn, Karla L. “Tiered Pricing: Implications for Library Collections.” Portal: Libraries and the Academy 5,
no. 2 (2005): 151–63.
Holt, Glen E., and Leslie Edmonds Holt. Crash Course in Library Budgeting and Finance. Santa Barbara, CA:
Libraries Unlimited, 2016.
Lyons, Lucy Eleonore, and John Blosser. “An Analysis and Allocation System for Library Collections
Budgets: The Comprehensive Allocation Process (CAP).” Journal of Academic Librarianship 38
(September 2012): 294–310.
Martin, Murray S. Collection Development and Finance: A Guide to Strategic Library-Materials Budgeting.
Chicago: American Library Association, 1995.
Martin, Murray S., and Milton T. Wolf. Budgeting for Information Access: Managing the Resource Budget for
Absolute Access. Chicago: American Library Association, 1998.
Schmidt, Karen, Wendy Allen Shelburne, and David Steven Vess. “Approaches to Selection, Access, and
Collection Development in the Web World.” Library Resources & Technical Services 52 (July 2008): 184–91.
Smith, A. Arro, and Stephanie Langenkamp. “Indexed Collection Budget Allocations: A Tool for
Quantitative Collection Development Based on Circulation.” Public Libraries 46, no. 5 (2007): 50–54.
Tucker, Cory. “Benchmarking Usage Statistics in Collection Management Decisions for Serials.” Journal of
Electronic Resources Librarianship 21, no. 1 (2009): 158.
Walters, William. “A Fund Allocation Formula Based on Demand, Cost, and Supply.” Library Quarterly 78,
no. 3 (2008): 303–14.
——— . “A Regression-Based Approach to Library Fund Allocation.” Library Resources & Technical Services 51
(October 2007): 263–78.
Weston, Claudia V. “Breaking with the Past: Formula Allocation at Portland State University.” Serials
Librarian 45, no. 4 (2004): 43–53.
Wu, Eric FuLong, and Katherine M. Shelfer. “Materials Budget Allocation: A Formula Fitness Review.”
Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services 31, nos. 3/4 (2007): 171–83.

CENSORSHIP AND INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM

American Library Association. “Code of Ethics.” 2008. www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/

codeethics.
American Library Association, Office for Intellectual Freedom. Intellectual Freedom Manual. 9th ed.
Chicago: American Library Association, 2015.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 199

Association for Library Services to Children. Intellectual Freedom for Children: The Censor Is Coming.
Chicago: American Library Association, 2000.
Best, Richey. “Censorship or Selection? Academic Library Holdings of the Top Ten Most Challenged Books
of 2007.” Education Libraries 33, no. 2 (2010): 18–35.
Bukoff, Ronald N. “Censorship and the American College Library.” College & Research Libraries 56, no. 5
(1995): 395–407.
Burke, Susan K. “Social Tolerance and Racist Materials in Public Libraries.” Reference & User Services
Quarterly 49 (summer 2010): 369–79.
Buschman, J. “Librarians, Self-Censorship, and Information Technologies.” College & Research Libraries 55
(May 1994): 221–28.
Coley, Ken P. “Moving toward a Method to Test for Self-Censorship by School Library Media Specialists.”
School Library Media Research 5 (2002). www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/
aaslpubsandjournals/slr/v015/SLMR_TestforSelfCensorship_V5.pdf.
Cordell, Rosanne. “Intellectual Freedom in the Elementary School.” Indiana Libraries 19, no. 2 (2000):
29–31.
Downey, Jennifer. “Self-Censorship in Selection of LGBY-Themed Materials.” Reference & User Services
Quarterly 53 (winter 2013): 104–7.
Dresang, Eliza T. “Intellectual Freedom and Libraries: Complexity and Change in the Twenty-First-
Century Digital Environment.” Library Quarterly 76 (April 2006): 169–92.
Farrell, Sandie. “Sex: See Also ‘Hornet’s Nest.’” School Library Journal 43 (June 1997): 51.
Fine, Sara. “How the Mind of a Censor Works: The Psychology of Censorship.” School Library Journal 42
(January 1996): 23–27.
Freedman, Lauren, and Holly Johnson. “Who’s Protecting Whom? ‘I Hadn’t Meant to Tell You This,’ a Case
Point in Confronting Self-Censorship in the Choice of Young Adult Literature.” Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literature 44 (December 2000-January 2001): 356–69.
Gibson, Jeffrey. “Championing Intellectual Freedom: A School Administrator’s Guide.” Knowledge Quest 36,
no. 2 (2007): 46–48.
Hill, Rebecca. “The Problem of Self-Censorship.” School Library Monthly 28, no. 2 (November 2010): 9–12.
Hopkins, D. M. “A Conceptual Model of Factors Influencing the Outcome of Challenges to Library
Materials in Secondary School Settings.” Library Quarterly 63 (January 1993): 40–72.
Hustin, Kristin. “‘Silent Censorship’: The School Library and the Insidious Book Selection Censor.” UMKC
Law Review 72, no. 1 (2003): 241–55.
Ingolfsland, Dennis. “Books on the Historical Jesus as a Test Case for Selection Bias in American Academic
Libraries.” Journal of Religious & Theological Information 8 (2009): 1–12.
Intner, Sheila S. “Dollars and Sense: Censorship versus Selection, One More Time.” Technicalities 24, no. 3
(2004): 1, 7.
Jones, Barbara M. Protecting Intellectual Freedom in Your Academic Library. Chicago: American Library
Association, 2009.
LaRue, James. New Inquisition: Understanding and Managing Intellectual Freedom Challenges. Westport, CT:
Libraries Unlimited, 2007.
Martin, Ann M. “Preparing for a Challenge.” Knowledge Quest 36, no. 2 (2007): 54–56.
Mason, Marilyn Gell. “Sex, Kids, and the Public Library.” American Libraries 28 (June/July 1997): 104–6.
Moody, Kim. “Censorship by Queensland Public Librarians: Philosophy and Practice.” Aplis 17 (December
2004): 168–85.
Morgan, Candace D. “Intellectual Freedom and Libraries: An Overview and Update.” Indiana Libraries 19,
no. 2 (2000): 15–19.
Nye, Valerie, and Kathy Barco, eds. True Stories of Censorship Battles in America’s Libraries. Chicago:
American Library Association, 2012.
200 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Peck, Richard. “From Strawberry Statements to Censorship.” School Library Journal 43 (January 1997): 28–29.
Peck, Robert S., and Ann K. Symons. “Kids Have First Amendment Rights, Too.” American Libraries 28
(September 1997): 64–65.
Podrygula, S. “Censorship in an Academic Library.” College & Research Library News 55 (February 1994):
76–78.
Reichman, Henry. Censorship and Selection: Issues and Answers for Schools. Rev. ed. Chicago: American
Library Association, 1993.
Robins, Natalie. Alien Ink: The FBI’s War on Freedom of Expression. New York: William Morrow, 1993.
Scales, Pat R. Protecting Intellectual Freedom in Your School Library: Scenarios from the Front Lines. Chicago:
American Library Association, 2009.
Serebnick, Judith. “Book Reviews and the Selection of Potentially Controversial Books in Public Libraries.”
Library Quarterly 51, no. 4 (1981): 390–409.
Sloan, Stephen. “Regional Differences in Collecting Freethought Books in American Public Libraries: A
Case of Self-Censorship.” Library Quarterly 82 (April 2012): 183–205.
Whelan, Debra Lau. “A Dirty Little Secret: Self-Censorship Is Rampant and Lethal.” School Library Journal
(February 2009): 27–30.

COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT: PRACTICES AND POLICIES

Abel, Richard. “The Return of the Native.” American Libraries 29 (January 1998): 76–78.
Albitz, Becky, Christine Avery, and Diane Zabel, eds. Rethinking Collection Development and Management.
Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited, 2014.
Armstrong, William W. “The Creation of a German Language Children’s Literature Collection.” Collection
Building 22, no. 2 (2003): 60–67.
Atkins, Stephens. “Mining Automated Systems for Collection Management.” Library Administration &
Management 10 (winter 1996): 16–19.
Axtmann, Margaret Maes. “The Best of Times, the Worst of Times: Collection Development in the 21st
Century.” AALL Spectrum 6 (November 2001): 6–7.
Billings, Harold. “Library Collections and Distance Information: New Models of Collection Development
for the 21st Century.” Journal of Library Administration 24, nos. 1/2 (1996): 3–17.
Branin, Joseph, Frances Groen, and Suzanne Thorin. “The Changing Nature of Collection Management in
Research Libraries.” Library Resources & Technical Services 44 (January 2000): 23–32.
Brown, Vandella. “African-American Fiction: A Slamming Genre.” American Libraries 28 (November 1997):
48–50.
Bruggeman, Lora. “‘Zap! Whoosh! Kerplow!’ Build High-Quality Graphic Novel Collections with Impact.”
School Library Journal 43 (January 1997): 22–27.
Buckland, Michael. “What Will Collection Developers Do?” Information Technology and Libraries 14
(September 1995): 155–59.
Campbell, Sharon. “Guidelines for Writing Children’s Internet Policies.” American Libraries 29 (January
1998): 91–92.
Chu, F. T. “Librarian-Faculty Relations in Collection Development.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 23
(January 1997): 15–20.
Coleman, Jim. “The RLG Conspectus: A History of Its Development and Influence and a Prognosis for Its
Future.” Acquisitions Librarian 4, no. 7 (1992): 25–43.
DeFelice, Barbara, and Constance Rinaldo. “Crossing Subject Boundaries: Collection Management of
Environmental Studies in a Multi-Library System.” Library Resources & Technical Services 38 (October
1994): 333–41.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 201

Demas, Samuel, Peter McDonald, and Gregory Lawrence. “The Internet and Collection Development:
Mainstreaming Selection of Internet Resources.” Library Resources & Technical Services 39 (July 1995):
275–90.
Dick, Jeff T. “Bracing for Blu-ray.” Library Journal 134 (November 2009): 33–35.
Dittemore, Margaret R. “Changing Patterns of Faculty Participation in Collection Development.” Collection
Management 16 (1992): 79–89.
Erickson, Rodney. “Choice for Cooperative Collection Development.” Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory
16, no. 1 (1992): 43–49.
Evans, G. Edward, and Margaret Zarnosky Saponaro. Collection Management Basics. 6th ed. Santa Barbara,
CA: Libraries Unlimited, 2012.
Futas, Elizabeth. Collection Development Policies and Procedures. 3rd ed. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx, 1995.
Gardner, Richard K. Library Collections: Their Origins, Selection, and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1981.
Gherman, Paul M. “Collecting at the Edge—Transforming Scholarship.” Journal of Library Administration
42, no. 2 (2005): 23–34.
Hardesty, Larry, and Collette Mak. “Searching for the Holy Grail: A Core Collection for Undergraduate
Libraries.” Journal of Academic Libraries 19 (January 1994): 362–71.
Hazen, Dan C. “Collection Development Policies in the Information Age.” College & Research Libraries 56
(January 1995): 29–31.
Hoffman, Frank W., and Richard J. Wood. Library Collection Development Policies: Academic, Public, and
Special Libraries. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow, 2005.
Hoppe, D. “Paradise Lost? A Brief History of Alternative Media in Public Libraries.” Wilson Library Bulletin
68 (March 1994): 26–30.
Hughes, Margaret J. “Video Selection for the Public Library: Special Needs.” The Acquisitions Librarian no.
11 (1994): 3–17.
Johnson, Peggy. Fundamentals of Collection Development and Management. Chicago: American Library
Association, 2004.
——— . “Writing Collection Development Policies: Getting Started.” Technicalities 14 (October 1994): 2–5.
——— . “Writing Collection Development Policy Statements: Format, Context, Style.” Technicalities 14
(August 1994): 4–7.
Kachel, Debra E. “Looking Inward before Looking Outward: Preparing the School Library Media Center for
Cooperative Collection Development.” School Library Media Quarterly 23 (winter 1995): 101–13.
Kane, Laura Townsend. “Access vs. Ownership: Do We Have to Make a Choice?” College & Research
Libraries 58 (January 1997): 59–67.
Kelly, Julia Ann. “Collecting and Accessing ‘Free’ Internet Resources.” Journal of Library Administration 20,
no. 4 (1996): 99–110.
Koehn, Shona L., and Suliman Hawamdeh. “The Acquisition and Management of Electronic Resources: Can
We Justify the Cost?” Library Quarterly 80 (April 2010): 161–74.
Kreamer, Jean Thibodeaux. “Video and Libraries: Present Status and Future Trends.” The Acquisitions
Librarian no. 11 (1994): 19–28.
Laing, Kathleen. “Audiovisual Materials and Secondary Schools.” The Acquisitions Librarian no. 11 (1994): 97–110.
Law, Derek. “Waiting for the (Digital) Barbarians.” Information Outlook 13 (December 2009): 15–18.
Leach, Ronald G., and Judith E. Tribble. “Electronic Document Delivery: New Options for Libraries.”
Journal of Academic Librarianship 18 (January 1993): 359–64.
Lee, Hur-Li. “What Is a Collection?” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51 (October
2000): 1106–13.
Levine-Clark, Michael, and Margaret M. Jobe. “Collecting Law and Medical Titles for General Academic
Collections: What Use Statistics Can Tell Us.” Collection Building 28, no. 4 (2009): 140–45.
202 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Lougee, Wendy P. “Beyond Access: New Concepts, New Tensions for Collection Development in a Digital
Environment.” Collection Building 14, no. 3 (1995): 19–25.
Mangrum, Suzanne, and Mary Ellen Sloane. “Using Collection Development Policies in Electronic
Resource Management.” Collection Building 31, no. 3 (June 2012): 108–14.
Manoff, Marlene. “Academic Libraries and the Culture Wars: The Politics of Collection Development.”
Collection Management 16 (1992): 1–17.
Medina, Sue O. “The Evolution of Cooperative Collection Development in Alabama Academic Libraries.”
College & Research Libraries 53 (January 1992): 7–19.
Moore, Mary Y. “Washington State’s Cooperative Collection Development Project.” Journal of Interlibrary
Loan & Information Supply 2, no. 3 (1992): 33–38.
Murphy, Joyce Fellows. “Spoken Word Cassettes.” The Acquisitions Librarian no. 11 (1994): 49–64.
Neville, Robert, James Williamson III, and Carol C. Hunt. “Faculty-Library Teamwork in Book Ordering.”
College & Research Libraries 59 (November 1998): 524–33.
Newcomer, Nara L. “Back to Basics: International Collection Development on a Shoestring.” Collection
Building 28, no. 4 (2009): 164–69.
Oder, Norman. “AV Rising: Demand, Budgets, and Circulation Are ALL Up.” Library Journal 123 (November
15, 1998): 30–33.
——— . “Outsourcing Model—or Mistake? The Collection Development Controversy in Hawaii.” Library
Journal 122 (March 15, 1997): 28–31.
Piontek, Sherry, and Kristen Garlock. “Creating a World Wide Web Resource Collection.” Collection
Building 14, no. 3 (1995): 12–18.
Porter, G. Margaret. “Making the Interdisciplinary Multicultural: Collection Building for the New
Millennium.” In Continuity & Transformation: The Promise of Confluence, edited by Richard AmRhein,
417–22. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries, 1995.
Quinn, Brian. “Some Implications of the Canon Debate for Collection Development.” Collection Building 14,
no. 1 (1994): 1–10.
Schneider, Karen G. “The McLibrary Syndrome.” American Libraries 29 (January 1998): 66–67.
Scott, Sandara. “Cooperative Collection Development: A Resource Sharing Activity for Small Libraries.”
Colorado Libraries 18, no. 2 (1992): 27–28.
Selby, Courtney. “Honesty Is the Best Policy: Collection Policy Revisions in an Era of Change.” AALL
Spectrum 16 (February 2012): insert between pages 14 and 15: CRIV Sheet, pp. 6–7. Originally published
in Technical Services Law Librarian 36 (June 2011).
Sweetland, James H. “Adult Fiction in Medium-Sized U.S. Public Libraries: A Survey.” Library Resources &
Technical Services 38 (April 1994): 149–60.
Taylor, Rhonda Harris, and Nancy Larson Bluemel. “Pop-Up Books: An Introductory Guide.” Collection
Building 22, no. 1 (2003): 21–32.
Taylor, Robert S. “Value-Added Processes in the Information Cycle.” Journal of the American Society for
Information Science 33 (September 1982): 341–46.
Triche, C. “Video and Libraries: Video in the School.” Wilson Library Bulletin 67 (June 1993):
39–40.
Tucker, James Cory, and Matt Torrence. “Collection Development for New Librarians: Advice from the
Trenches.” Library Collections, Acquisitions and Technical Services 28, no. 4 (2004): 397–409.
Van Orden, Phyllis J. Selecting Books for the Elementary School Library Media Center. New York: Neal-
Schuman, 2000.
Veatch, James R. “Insourcing the Web.” American Libraries 30 (January 1999): 64–67.
Webb, John. “Managing Licensed Networked Electronic Resources in a University Library.” Information
Technology and Libraries 17 (December 1998): 198–206.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 203

COLLECTION EVALUATION

Adams, Brian, and Bob Noel. “Circulation Statistics in the Evaluation of Collection Development.”
Collection Building 27, no. 2 (2008): 71–73.
Agee, Jim. “Collection Evaluation: A Foundation for Collection Development.” Collection Building 24, no. 3
(2005): 92–95.
Alessi, Dana L. “Me and My Shadow: Vendors as the Third Hand in Collection Evaluation.” Journal of
Library Administration 17, no. 2 (1992): 47–57.
Bobal, Alison M., Margaret Mellinger, and Bonnie E. Avery. “Collection Assessment and New Academic
Programs.” Collection Management 33, no. 4 (2008): 288–301.
Bolton, Brooke A. “Women’s Studies Collections: A Checklist Evaluation.” Journal of Academic Librarianship
35 (May 2009): 221–26.
Brown, Jeanne M., and Eva D. Stowers. “Use of Data in Collecting Works: An Exploratory Survey.” Collection
Management 38, no. 2 (2013): 143–62.
Butkovich, Nancy J. “Use Studies: A Selective Review.” Library Resources & Technical Services 40 (October
1996): 359–68.
Chung, Hye-Kyung. “Evaluating Academic Journals Using Impact Factor and Local Citation Score.” Journal
of Academic Librarianship 33 (May 2007): 393–402.
Ciszek, Matthew P., and Courtney L. Young. “Diversity Collection Assessment in Large Academic Libraries.”
Collection Building 29, no. 4 (2010): 154–61.
Culbertson, Michael, and Michelle Wilde. “Collection Analysis to Enhance Funding for Research
Materials.” Collection Building 28, no. 1 (2009): 9–17.
Delaney-Lehman, Maureen J. “Assessing the Library Collection for Diversity.” Collection Management 20,
nos. 3/4 (1996): 29–37.
Demas, Samuel, and Mary K. Miller. “Rethinking Collection Management for the 21st Century.” Collection
Management 37, nos. 3/4 (2012): 168–87.
Dilevko, Juris, and Esther Atkinson. “Evaluating Academic Journals without Impact Factors for Collection
Management Decisions.” College & Research Libraries 63 (November 2002): 562–77.
Dilevko, Juris, and Keren Dali. “Improving Collection Development and Reference Services for
Interdisciplinary Fields through Analysis of Citation Patterns: An Example Using Tourism Studies.”
College & Research Libraries 65 (May 2004): 216–41.
Ferguson, Anthony W. “Collection Assessment and Acquisitions Budgets.” Journal of Library Administration
17, no. 2 (1992): 59–70.
Franklin, Brinley, and Terry Plum. “Assessing the Value and Impact of Digital Content.” Journal of Library
Administration 48, no. 1 (2008): 41–57.
Fundy, Gerri, and Alesia McManus. “Using a Decision Grid Process to Build Consensus in Electronic
Resources Cancellation Decisions.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 31 (November 2005): 533–38.
Haycock, Laurel A. “Citation Analysis of Education Dissertations for Collection Development.” Library
Resources & Technical Services 48 (April 2004): 102–6.
Henry, Elizabeth, Rachel Longstaff, and Doris Van Kampen. “Collection Analysis Outcomes in an Academic
Library.” Collection Building 27, no. 3 (2008): 113–17.
Hyodynmaa, Merja, Anita Ahlholm-Kannisto, and Hannele Nuriminen. “How to Evaluate Library
Collections: A Case Study of Collection Mapping.” Collection Building 29, no. 2 (2010): 43–49.
Kachel, Debra E. “Looking Inward before Looking Outward: Preparing the School Library Media Center for
Cooperative Collection Development.” School Library Media Quarterly 23 (winter 1995): 101–13.
Kohn, Karen. “Usage-Based Collection Evaluation with a Curricular Focus.” College & Research Libraries 74
(January 2013): 85–97.
204 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Larson, Jeannette. “CREW: A Weeding Manual for Modern Libraries.” Austin: Texas Public Library and
Archives Commission, 2008. https://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ld/pubs/crew/index.html.
Leiding, Reba. “Using Citation Checking of Undergraduate Honors Thesis Bibliographies to Evaluate
Library Collections.” College & Research Libraries 66 (September 2005): 417–29.
Linton, Janice, and Ada Ducas. “A New Tool for Collection Assessment: One Library’s Response to the Calls
to Action Issued by Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” Collection Management 42, no.
3–4 (2017): 256–79.
Martin, Jim, Hitosh Kamada, and Mary Feeney. “A Systematic Plan for Managing Physical Collections at
the University of Arizona Libraries.” Collection Management 38, no. 3 (2013): 226–42.
McAbee, Sonja L., and William L. Hubbard. “The Current Reality of National Book Publishing Output and
Its Effect on Collection Assessment.” Collection Management 28, no. 4 (2003): 67–78.
McClure, Jennifer Z. “Collection Assessment through WorldCat.” Collection Management 34 (April-June
2009): 79–93.
Moroni, Alene E. “Weeding in a Digital Age.” Library Journal 137, no. 15 (2012): 26–28.
Mosher, Paul. “Quality and Library Collections: New Directions in Research and Practice in Collection
Evaluation.” Advances in Librarianship 13 (1984): 214.
Nisonger, Thomas E. “Use of the Checklist Method for Content Evaluation of Full-Text Databases.” Library
Resources & Technical Services 52 (January 2008): 4–17.
Pancheshnikov, Yelena. “A Comparison of Literature Citations in Faculty Publications and Student Theses
as Indicators of Collection Use and a Background for Collection Management at a University Library.”
Journal of Academic Librarianship 33 (November 2007): 674–83.
Perrault, Anna H. “National Collecting Trends: Collection Analysis Methodology and Findings.” Library &
Information Science Research 21, no. 1 (1999): 47–67.
Roy, Lorienne. “Weeding.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science 54, supplement 17: 352–98.
New York: Marcel Dekker.
Samson, Sue, Sebastian Derry, and Holly Eggleston. “Networked Resources, Assessment and Collection
Development.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 30 (November 2004): 476–81.
Schaffner, Ann C., Marianne Burke, and Jutta Reed-Scott. “Automated Collection Analysis: The Boston
Library Consortium Experience.” Advances in Library Resource Sharing 3 (1992): 35–49.
Snyder, Cynthia Ehret. “Data-Driven Deselection: Multiple Point Data Using a Decision Support Tool in an
Academic Library.” Collection Management 39, no. 1 (2014): 17–31.
Soma, Amy K., and Lisa M. Sjoberg. “More Than Just Low-Hanging Fruit: A Collaborative Approach to
Weeding in Academic Libraries.” Collection Management 36 (January-March 2011): 17–28.
St. Clair, Gloriana. “Assessment: How and Why.” In Virtually Yours: Models for Managing Electronic
Resources and Services, edited by Peggy Johnson and Bonnie MacEwan, 58–70. Chicago: American
Library Association, 1999.
Teel, Linda M. “Applying the Basics to Improve the Collection.” Collection Building 27, no. 3 (2008): 96–103.
Tucker, James Cory. “Collection Assessment of Monograph Collections at the University of Nevada, Las
Vegas Libraries.” Collection Management 34, no. 3 (2009): 157–81.
Vallmitjana, Nuria, and L. G. Sebate. “Citation Analysis of Ph.D. Dissertations’ References as a Tool for
Collection Management in an Academic Chemistry Library.” College & Research Libraries 69 (January
2008): 72–81.
Way, Doug. “The Impact of Web-Scale Discovery on the Use of a Library Collection.” Serials Review 36
(December 2010): 214–20.
Wilde, Michelle, and Allison Level. “How to Drink from a Fire Hose without Drowning: Collection Assess-
ment in a Numbers-Driven Environment.” Collection Management 36 (October-December 2011): 217–36.
Wisneski, Richard. “Collection Development Assessment for New Collection Development Librarians.”
Collection Management 33, nos. 1/2 (2008): 143–59.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 205

COPYRIGHT AND LICENSING

Algenio, Emilie, and Alexis Thompson-Young. “Licensing E-Books: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.”
Journal of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4 (2005): 113–28.
Armstrong, Tracey. “Copyright Clearance Center: Providing Compliance Solutions for Content Users.”
Journal of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4 (2005): 55–64.
Berghel, Hal. “The Intimidation Factor: How a Surveillance State Can Affect What You Read in Professional
Journals.” Computer 46 (December 2013): 91–95.
Bosch, Stephen. “Using Model Licenses on Library Collections.” Journal of Library Administration 42, nos.
3/4 (2005): 65–81.
Branscomb, Anne Wells. Who Owns Information: From Privacy to Public Access. New York: Basic Books, 1994.
Chamberlain, Katherine A. “‘Lawfully Made Under this Title’: The Implications of Costco v. Omega and the
First Sale Doctrine on Library Lending.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 37 (July 2011): 291–306.
Chou, Min, and Oliver Zhou. “The Impact of Licenses on Library Collections.” Acquisitions Librarian 17,
nos. 33/34 (2005): 7–23.
Christou, Corilee, and Gail Dykstra. “Through a ‘Content Looking Glass’—Another Way of Looking at
Library Licensing of Electronic Content.” Against the Grain 14 (November 2002): 18–22.
Crews, Kenneth D. “Licensing for Information Resources: Creative Contracts and the Library Mission.” In
Virtually Yours: Models for Managing Electronic Resources and Services, edited by Peggy Johnson and
Bonnie MacEwan, 98–110. Chicago: American Library Association, 1999.
Doering, William, and Galadriel Chilton. “A Locally Created ERM: How and Why We Did It.” Computers in
Libraries 28 (September 2008): 6–48.
Durrant, Fiona. Negotiating Licenses for Digital Resources. London: Facet, 2006.
Enis, Matt. “Digital Firsts: The Debate over Digital First Sale Could Heat Up in 2014.” Library Journal 138
(December 2013): 46–49.
Eschenfelder, Kristin R. “Every Library’s Nightmare? Digital Rights Management, Use Restrictions, and
Licensed Scholarly Digital Resources.” College & Research Libraries 69 (May 2008): 205–23.
Eschenfelder, Kristin R., et al. “How Institutionalized Are Model License Use Terms? An Analysis of
E-Journal License Use Rights Clauses from 2000 to 2009.” College & Research Libraries 74 (July 2013):
326–53.
Fons, Theodore A., and Timothy D. Jewell. “Envisioning the Future of ERM Systems.” Serials Review 52, nos.
1/2 (2007): 151–66.
Fowler, David C. “Licensing: An Historical Perspective.” Journal of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4
(2005): 177–97.
Gasaway, Laura N. “Copyright in the Electronic Era.” Serials Librarian 24, nos. 3/4 (1994): 153–62.
Gasaway, Laura, and Sarah K. Wiant. Libraries and Copyright: A Guide to Copyright Law in the 1990s.
Washington, DC: Special Libraries Association, 1994.
Gillespie, Tarleton. Wired Shut: Copyright and the Shape of Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,
2007.
Gould, Thomas H. P., Tomas A. Lipinski, and Elizabeth A. Buchanan. “Copyright Policies and the
Deciphering of Fair Use in the Creation of Reserves at University Libraries.” Journal of Academic
Librarianship 31 (May 2005): 182–97.
Gregory, Vicki L. “Delivery of Information via the World Wide Web: A Look at Copyright and Intellectual
Property Issues.” Paper delivered at the ACRL National Conference in Nashville, April 1997.
www.ala.org/acrl/paperhtm/e40.html.
Gregory, Vicki L., and William Stanley Gregory. “Copyright on the Internet: What’s an Author to Do?” In
Electronic Publishing: Applications and Implications, edited by Elizabeth Logan and Myke Gluck, 131–41.
Medford, NJ: Information Today, 1997.
206 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Hansen, David R., William M. Cross, and Philip M. Edwards. “Copyright Policy and Practice in Electronic
Reserves among ARL Libraries.” College & Research Libraries 74 (January 2013): 69–84.
Harris, Lesley Ellen. Licensing Digital Content: A Practical Guide for Librarians. Chicago: American Library
Association, 2002.
Hoek, D. J. “Licenses and Acquisitions: The Case of Digital Downloads.” College & Research Libraries News 72
(March 2011): 155–57.
Hoffmann, Gretchen McCord. Copyright in Cyberspace 2. New York: Neal-Schuman, 2005.
Kramer, Elsa F. “Digital Rights Management: Pitfalls and Possibilities for People with Disabilities.” Journal
of Electronic Publishing 10 (winter 2007). www.journalofelectronicpublishing.org/.
Lehman, Bruce. “Royalties, Fair Use & Copyright in the Electronic Age.” Educom Review 30 (November-
December 1995): 30–35.
Mattson, Ingrid, and Linda-Jean Schneider. “Negotiating and Complying with Electronic Database License
Agreements: Why Understanding Your Users’ Expectations Can Make All the Difference.”
AALL Spectrum 17 (February 2013): 9–12.
McGinnis, Suzan D. “Selling Our Collective Souls: How License Agreements Are Controlling Collection
Management.” Journal of Library Administration 31, no. 2 (2000): 63–70.
Okerson, Ann. “The Current National Copyright Debate: Its Relationship to the Work of Collection
Managers.” Journal of Library Administration 20, no. 4 (1996): 71–84.
Pike, George H. “First Sale Doctrine Put to the Test.” Information Today 24 (October 2007): 17, 19.
Potter, William Gray. “Scholarly Publishing, Copyright, and the Future of Resource Sharing.” Journal of
Library Administration 21, nos. 1-2 (1995): 49–66.
Robinson, S. “Copyright or Wrong: The Public Performance Dilemma.” Wilson Library Bulletin 66 (April
1992): 76–77.
Rupp-Serrano, Karen, ed. Licensing in Libraries: Practical and Ethical Aspects. Binghamton, NY: Haworth,
2005.
Samuelson, Pamela. “Copyright’s Fair Use Doctrine and Digital Data.” Publishing Research Quarterly 11
(spring 1995): 27–39.
Schlosser, Melanie. “Fair Use in the Digital Environment: A Research Guide.” Reference & User Services
Quarterly 46 (fall 2006): 11–17.
Schockmel, Richard B. “The Premise of Copyright, Assaults on Fair Use, and Royalty Use Fees.” Journal of
Academic Librarianship 22 (January 1996): 15–25.
Stemper, Jim, and Susan Barribeau. “Perpetual Access to Electronic Journals: A Survey of One Academic
Research Library’s Licenses.” Library Resources & Technical Services 50 (spring 2006): 91–109.
Strong, William S. The Copyright Book: A Practical Guide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992.
Sutherlan, L. “Copyright and Licensing in the Electronic Environment.” Serials Librarian 23, nos. 3/4
(1993): 143–47.
Valauskas, Edward J. “Copyright: Know Your Electronic Rights!” Library Journal 117, no. 13 (1992): 40–43.
Van Tassel, Joan. Digital Rights Management: Protecting and Monetizing Content. Amsterdam: Focal, 2006.
Webb, John. “Managing Licensed Networked Electronic Resources in a University Library.” Information
Technology and Libraries 17 (December 1998): 198–206.

DIVERSITY AND ADA ISSUES

Agosta, Denise E. “Building a Multicultural School Library: Issues and Challenges.” Teacher Librarian 34,
no. 3 (2007): 27–31.
Albright, Megan. “The Public Library’s Responsibilities to LGBT Communities: Recognizing, Representing,
and Serving.” Public Libraries 45, no. 5 (2006): 52–56.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 207

Alexander, Linda B., and Sarah D. Miselis. “Barriers to GLBTQ Collection Development and Strategies for
Overcoming Them.” Young Adult Library Services 5, no. 3 (2007): 43–49.
Alire, Camila A., and Jacqueline Ayala. Serving Latino Communities. 2nd ed. New York: Neal-Schuman,
2007.
Angst, Thomas. “American Libraries and Agencies of Culture.” American Studies 42, no. 3 (2001): 5–22.
Bloomquist, Shannon. “Autism Resources for Public Libraries: Issues, Challenges, and Recommended
Resources.” Indiana Libraries 24, no. 3 (2005): 23–31. Also available: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/
handle/1805/1404.
Burke, Susan K. “Removal of Gay-Themed Materials from Public Libraries: Public Opinion Trends.” Public
Library Quarterly 27, no. 3 (2008): 247–64.
Carlton, Debbie Yumiko. Public Libraries and Cultural Diversity. ERIC Digest. ED358871. May 1993.
Cuban, Sondra. Serving New Immigrant Communities in the Library. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2007.
Darby, Mary Ann, and Miki Pryne. Hearing All the Voices: Multicultural Books for Adolescence. Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow, 2002.
East, Kathy, and Rebecca L. Thomas. Across Areas: A Guide to Multicultural Literature for Children.
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2007.
Enis, Matt. “Accessibility Upgrade: Ebooks Are Slowly Becoming More Accessible, but Libraries Can Help
Speed the Pace.” Library Journal 138 (April 15, 2013): 31–33.
Gilton, Donna L. Multicultural and Ethnic Children’s Literature in the United States. Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow, 2007.
Handman, Gary P. Video Collection Development in Multi-Type Libraries: A Handbook. Westport, CT:
Greenwood, 2002.
Hill, Nanci Milone. “Out and About: Serving the GLBT Population @ Your Library.” Public Libraries 46, no.
4 (2007): 18–24.
Kavanagh, Rosemary, and Beatrice Christensen Skold, eds. Libraries for the Blind in the Information Age:
Guidelines for Development. IFLA Professional Reports, no. 86. The Hague: International Federation of
Library Associations and Institutions, 2005.
Kranich, Nancy. “A Question of Balance: The Role of Libraries in Providing Alternatives to Mainstream
Media.” Collection Building 19, no. 3 (2000): 85–90.
Pruitt, John. “Gay Men’s Book Club versus Wisconsin’s Public Libraries: Political Perceptions in the
Absence of Dialogue.” Library Quarterly 80 (April 2010): 121–41.
Quezada, Shelley, ed. “Mainstreaming Library Services to Multicultural Populations: The Evolving
Tapestry.” Wilson Library Bulletin 66 (February 1992): 28–44, 120–21.
Robertson, Deborah A. Cultural Programming for Libraries: Linking Libraries, Communities and Culture.
Chicago: American Library Association, 2005.
Simpson, Stacy H. “Why Have a Comprehensive and Representative Collection? GLBT Material Selection
and Services in the Public Library.” Progressive Librarian, no. 27 (summer 2006): 44–51.
Vandenbark, R. Todd. “Tending a Wild Garden: Library Web Design for Persons with Disabilities.”
Information Technology and Libraries 29 (March 2010): 23–29.
Weissinger, Thomas. “The Core Journal Concept in Black Studies.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 36
(March 2010): 119–24.

ETHICS AND LIS VALUES

Bowers, Jennifer, Katherine Crowe, and Peggy Keeran. “‘If You Want the History of a White Man, You Go to
the Library’: Critiquing Our Legacy, Addressing Our Library Collection Gaps.” Collection Management
42, nos. 3-4 (2017): 159–79.
208 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Bushing, Mary C. “Acquisition Ethics: The Evolution of Models for Hard Times.” Library Acquisitions:
Theory and Practice 17 (1993): 47–52.
Chmara, Theresa. Privacy and Confidentiality Issues: A Guide for Libraries and Their Lawyers. Chicago:
American Library Association, 2009.
Dole, Wanda V., Jitka M. Hurych, and Wallace C. Koehler. “Values for Librarians in the Information Age:
An Expanded Examination.” Library Management 21 (2000): 285–97.
Gorman, Michael. Our Enduring Values. Chicago: American Library Association, 2000.
Hauptman, Robert. Ethical Challenges in Librarianship. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx, 1988.
Reyes-Escudero, Veronica, and J. Wendell Cox. “Survey, Understanding, and Ethical Stewardship of
Indigenous Collections: A Case Study.” Collection Building 42, nos. 3-4 (2017): 130–38.
Severson, Richard W. The Principles of Information Ethics. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1997.
Zipkowitz, Fay. Professional Ethics in Librarianship: A Real Life Casebook. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 1996.

GIFTS AND EXCHANGE PROGRAMS

Ballestro, John, and Philip C. Howze. “When a Gift Is Not a Gift: Collection Assessment Using Cost-Benefit
Analysis.” Collection Management 30, no. 3 (2005): 49–66.
Bishop, Janet, Francis A. Smith, and Chris Sugnet. “Refocusing a Gift Program in an Academic Library.”
Library Collections, Acquisitions & Technical Services 34, no. 4 (2010): 115–22.
Bostic, Mary. “Gifts to Libraries: Coping Effectively.” Collection Management 14, nos. 3/4 (1991): 175–84.
Cassell, Kay Ann. Gifts for the Collection: Guidelines for the Library. The Hague: International Federation of
Library Associations and Institutions, 2008.
Chadwell, Faye A. “Good Gifts Stewardship.” Collection Management 35 (April-June 2010): 59–68.
Hill, Dale S. “Selling Withdrawn and Gift Books on eBay: Does It Make Sense?” Journal of Interlibrary Loan,
Document Delivery & Information Supply 14, no. 2 (2003): 37–40.
Kertesz, Christopher J. “The Unwanted Gift: When Saying ‘No Thanks’ Isn’t Enough.” American Libraries 32
(March 2001): 34–36.
Leonhardt, Thomas W. “The Gift and Exchange Function in ARL Libraries: Now and Tomorrow.” Library
Acquisitions: Practice and Theory 21 (1997): 141–49.
——— . “A Survey of Gifts and Exchange Activities in 85 Non-ARL Libraries.” Acquisitions Librarian 22
(1999): 51–58.
Massey, Tinker. “Management of Gift Materials in an Academic Library.” Collection Building 24, no. 3
(2005): 80–82.
Morrisey, Locke J. “Ethical Issues in Collection Development.” Journal of Library Administration 47, nos. 3/4
(2008): 163–71.
Roberts, Elizabeth Ann. Crash Course in Library Gift Programs: The Reluctant Curator’s Guide to Caring for
Archives, Books, and Artifacts in a Library Setting. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2008.

MARKETING AND OUTREACH

Angelis, Jane, and Joan M. Wood. “A New Look at Community Connections: Public Relations for Public
Libraries.” Illinois Libraries 81 (winter 1999): 23–24.
Burkhardt, Andy. “Social Media: A Guide for College and University Libraries.” College & Research Library
News 71 (January 2010): 10–12.
Doucett, Elizabeth. Creating Your Library Brand: Communicating Your Relevance and Value to Your Patrons.
Chicago: American Library Association, 2008.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 209

Fagan, Jody Condit. “Marketing the Virtual Library.” Computers in Libraries 29 (July/August 2009): 25–30.
Flowers, Helen F. Public Relations for School Library Media Programs: 500 Ways to Influence People and Win
Friends for Your School Library Media Center. New York: Neal-Schuman, 1998.
Fry, Amy. “Lessons of Good Customer Service.” Library Journal 134 (September 1, 2009): 33–34.
Kohl, Susan. Getting Attention: Leading Edge Lessons for Publicity and Marketing. Boston: Butterworth-
Heinemann, 2000.
Malenfant, Kara J. “Leading Change in the System of Scholarly Communication: A Case Study of Engaging
Liaison Librarians for Outreach to Faculty.” College & Research Libraries 71 (January 2010): 63–76.
Matthews, Brian, and Jon Bodnar. SPEC KIT 306. Association of Research Libraries, September 2008.
McCarthy, Madsen C. “The Importance of Marketing Digital Collections.” ALISS Quarterly 5, no. 1 (October
2009): 2–9.
Potter, Ned. The Library Marketing Toolkit. London: Facet, 2012.
Russo, Laurie. 2017. “Mastering Marketing.” Library Journal 142 (March 1): 46–48.
Schander, Deborah. “Market Your Library: How to Create a Library Marketing Committee.” AALL Spectrum
18 (April 2014): 5–6.
Singh, Rajesh. “Does Your Library Have an Attitude Problem towards ‘Marketing’? Revealing Inter-
Relationships between Marketing Attitudes and Behavior.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 35
(January 2009): 25–32.
Steinmacher, Michael. “Underlying Principles of Library Public Relations.” Kentucky Libraries 64 (winter
2000): 12–15.
Steman, Thomas, and Susan Motin. “History Day: Another Outreach Opportunity for Academic Libraries.”
College & Research Libraries News 71 (January 2010): 26–29.
Thorpe, Angie, and Heather Bowman. “Promoting Discovery: Creating an In-Depth Library Marketing
Campaign.” Journal of Library Administration 53, nos. 2-3 (2013): 100–121.
Wisniewski, Jeff, and Darlene Fichter. “Electronic Resources Won’t Sell Themselves: Marketing Tips.”
Online 31, no. 1 (January-February 2007): 54–57.

NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Arizona State Library, Archives & Public Libraries. “Community Needs Assessment.” [n.d.]
https://www.azlibrary.gov/libdev/continuing-education/cdt/community-needs.
Biblarz, Dora, Stephen Bosch, and Chris Sugnet, eds. Guide to Library User Needs Assessment for Integrated
Information Resource Management and Collection Development. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow, 2001.
Bishop, Kay. The Collection Program in Schools: Concepts, Practices, and Information Sources. 4th ed.
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2007.
Blake, Julie C., and Susan P. Schleper. “From Data to Decisions: Using Surveys and Statistics to Make
Collection Management Decisions.” Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services 28 (2004):
460–64.
Bost, Wendi, and Jamie Conklin. “Creating a One-Stop Shop: Using the Catalog to Market Collections and
Services.” Florida Libraries 49 (fall 2006): 5–7.
Duff, Wendy M., and Catherine A. Johnson. “A Virtual Expression of Need: An Analysis of E-Mail Reference
Questions.” American Archivist 64 (spring/summer 2001): 43–60.
Evans, Edward G. “Needs Analysis and Collection Development Policies for Culturally Diverse
Populations.” Collection Building 11, no. 4 (1992): 16–27.
Farmer, Lesley S. J. “Collection Development in Partnership with Youth: Uncovering Best Practices.”
Collection Management 26, no. 2 (2001): 67–78.
Gregory, Vicki L. Selecting and Managing Electronic Resources. Rev. ed. New York: Neal Schuman, 2007.
2 10 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Grover, Robert. “A Proposed Model for Diagnosing Information Needs.” School Library Media Quarterly 21
(winter 1993): 95–100.
Hahn, K. L., and L. A. Faulkner. “Evaluative Usage-Based Metrics for the Selection of E-Journals.” College &
Research Libraries 63 (September 2002): 215–27.
Ismail, Lizah. “What They Are Telling Us: Library Use and Needs of Traditional and Non-Traditional
Students in a Graduate Social Work Program.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 35 (November
2009): 555–64.
Karp, Rashelle S., ed. Powerful Public Relations: A How-to-Guide for Libraries. Chicago: American Library
Association, 2002.
Koontz, Christie, and Dean Jue. “Unlock Your Demographics.” Library Journal 129 (March 1, 2004): 32–33.
Kropp, Lisa G. “Know Your Neighborhood: A Community Needs Assessment Primer.” School Library
Journal, June 20, 2014. www.slj.com/2014/06/public-libraries/know-your-neighborhood-a
-community-needs-assessment-primer/.
Logan Heights Branch Library [San Diego, CA]. “Community Library Needs Assessment Components.”
www.sandiego.gov/public-library/pdf/logan_needs.pdf.
Matthews, Brian. Marketing Today’s Academic Library: A Bold New Approach to Communicating with Students.
Chicago: American Library Association, 2009.
Perley, Cathy M., Camilla A. Gentry, A. Sue Fleming, and Kristin M. Sen. “Conducting a User-Centered
Information Needs Assessment: The Via Christi Libraries’ Experience.” JMLA 95, no. 2 (April 2007):
172–81. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852625/.
Shirkey, Cindy. “Taking the Guesswork Out of Collection Development: Using Syllabi for a User-Centered
Collection Development Method.” Collection Management 36 (July-September 2011): 154–64.
Thorsen, Jeanne. “Community Studies: Raising the Roof and Other Recommendations.” Acquisitions
Librarian no. 20 (1998): 5–13.
Van House, Nancy A. “User Needs Assessment and Evaluation for the UC Berkeley Electronic
Environmental Library Project: A Preliminary Report.” www.csdl.tamu.edu/DL95/papers/vanhouse/
vanhouse.html.
Westbrook, Lynn, and Steven A. Tucker. “Understanding Faculty Information Needs.” Reference and User
Studies Quarterly 42 (winter 2002): 144–48.

NEW TECHNOLOGIES

ABC News. “Internet Phenomenon Provides Unique Insights into People’s Thoughts.” December 30, 2004.
Abram, Stephen. “Web 2.0—Huh?! Library 2.0, Librarian 2.0.” Information Outlook (December 1, 2005):
44–46.
Aharony, Noa. “Web 2.0 Use by Librarians.” Library & Information Science Research 31 (January 2009):
29–37.
Anderson, Chris. The “Long Tail:” Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More. New York: Hyperion,
2006.
Breeding, Marshall. “Web 2.0? Let’s Get to Web 1.0 First.” Computers in Libraries (May 1, 2006): 30–33.
Buczynski, James A. “Looking for Collection 2.0.” Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship 20, no. 2
(2008): 90–100.
Burkhanna, Kenneth J., Jamie Seeholzer, and Joseph Salem, Jr. “No Natives Here: A Focus Group Study of
Student Perceptions of Web 2.0 and the Academic Library.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 35
(November 2009): 523–32.
Casey, Michael E., and Laura C. Savastinuk. Library 2.0: A Guide to Participatory Library Service. Medford,
NJ: Information Today, 2007.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 2 11

Courtney, Nancy, ed. Library 2.0 and Beyond: Innovative Technologies and Tomorrow’s User. Westport, CT:
Libraries Unlimited, 2007.
Farkas, Meredith G. Social Software in Libraries: Building Collaboration, Communication, and Community
Online. Medford, NJ: Information Today, 2007.
Friedman, Thomas L. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century. Updated and expanded
edition. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2006.
Gregory, Vicki L., and Kiersten Cox. “Must Printed Books Become a Thing of the Past in Academic
Libraries?” The International Journal of the Book 14, no. 4 (2016): 11–19.
Inouye, Alan S. “What’s in Store for Ebooks?” American Libraries 47, no. 1/2 (January/February 2016):
42–47.
Kozel-Gains, Melissa A., and Richard A. Stoddart. “Experiments and Experiences in Liaison Activities:
Lessons from New Librarians in Integrating Technology, Face-to-Face, and Follow-Up.” Collection
Management 34 (April-June 2009): 130–42.
Lessig, Lawrence. The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World. New York: Random
House, 2001.
Lin, Andrew. The Wikipedia Revolution: How a Bunch of Nobodies Created the World’s Greatest Encyclopedia.
New York: Hyperion, 2009.
Miller, Paul. “Web 2.0: Building the New Library.” Ariadne 45 (October 30, 2005). www.ariadne.ac.uk/
issue45/miller/intro.html.
Mossberger, Karen, Caroline J. Tolbert, and Ramona S. McNeal. Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society,
and Participation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008.
O’Sullivan, Dan. Wikipedia: A New Community of Practice? Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2009.
Rheingold, Howard. Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books, 2002.
Scoble, Robert, and Shel Israel. Naked Conversations: How Blogs Are Changing the Way Businesses Talk with
Customers. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley, 2006.
Tapscott, Don. Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation Is Changing Your World. New York: McGraw-Hill,
2009.
Tapscott, Don, and Anthony D. Williams. Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. New
York: Penguin Group, 2006.
Tucker, James Cory, Jeremy Bullian, and Matthew C. Torrance. “Collaborate or Die! Collection
Development in Today’s Academic Library.” The Reference Librarian nos. 83/84 (2003): 219–36.
Way, Doug. “The Impact of Web-Scale Discovery on the Use of a Library Collection.” Serials Review 36
(December 2010): 214–20.

PRESERVATION

Anderson, David. “Historical Reflections: The Future of the Past.” Communications of the ACM 55 (May
2012): 33–34.
Arnold, Laurie, and Cheryl Gunselman. “Discovering Mourning Dove in the Papers of L. V. McWhorter.”
Collection Management 42, no. 3-4 (2017): 208–25.
Arthur, Michael A., and Lee Dotson. “Bringing Preservation to the Forefront: Preservation Initiatives at the
University of Central Florida.” Florida Libraries 52, no. 2 (2009): 16–18.
Baker, Whitney, and Liz Dube. “Identifying Standard Practices in Research Library Book Conservation.”
Library Resources & Technical Services 54 (January 2010): 21–33.
Byers, Fred R. Care and Handling of CDs and DVDs: A Guide for Librarians and Archivists. Washington,
DC: Copublished by the Council on Library and Information Resources and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, 2003.
2 12 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Caplan, Priscilla. “The Florida Digital Archive and DAITSS: A Model for Digital Preservation.” Library Hi-
Tech 28, no. 2 (2010): 224–34.
Child, Margaret S. “Preservation Issues for Collection Development Staff.” Wilson Library Bulletin 67
(1992): 20–21, 106.
Clements, David W. G. “Problems of Cooperative Microfilming.” Collection Management 15 (1992):
503–7.
Conway, Paul. “Preservation in the Age of Google: Digitization, Digital Preservation and Dilemmas.” Library
Quarterly 80 (January 2010): 61–79.
——— . “Selecting Microfilm for Digital Preservation: A Case Study from Project Open Book.” Library
Resources & Technical Services 40 (January 1996): 67–77.
Cunha, George M. “Disaster Planning and a Guide to Recovery Resources.” Library Technology Reports 28
(September/October 1992): 533–623.
Daigle, Bradley J. “The Digital Transformation of Special Collections.” Journal of Library Administration 52,
nos. 1–4 (2012): 244–64.
Dougherty, William C. “Can Digital Resources Truly Be Preserved?” Journal of Academic Librarianship 36
(September 2010): 445–48.
Duguid, Paul. “Inheritance and Loss? A Brief Survey of Google Books.” First Monday 12, no. 8 (2007).
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/issue/view/251.
Ferguson, Anthony W. “Preservation Decision-Making Basics: A University Library Collection Developer’s
Perspective.” The Acquisitions Librarian 2 (1989): 239–46.
Fitzsimmons, Joseph J. “A Realistic Look at the Future of Preservation.” Microform Review 21 (1992): 13–15.
Forster, Judith. Disaster Planning and Recovery: A How-to-Do-It Manual for Librarians and Archivists. New
York: Neal-Schuman, 1992.
Friedlander, Amy. “Digital Preservation Looks Forward.” Information Outlook 6 (September 2002): 12–18.
Gertz, Janet. “Selection for Preservation: A Digital Solution for Illustrated Texts.” Library Resources &
Technical Services 40 (January 1996): 78–83.
Given, Lisa M., and Lianne McTavish. “What’s Old Is New Again: The Reconvergence of Libraries, Archives,
and Museums.” Library Quarterly 80 (January 2010): 7–32.
Heidorn, P. Bryan. “The Emerging Role of Libraries in Data Curation and E-Science.” Journal of Library
Administration 51 (October-December 2011): 662–72.
Landon, George V. “Toward Digitizing All Forms of Documentation.” D-Lib Magazine 15, nos. 3/4 (2009).
www.dlib.org/dlib/march09/landon/031andon.html.
Lavender, Kenneth, and Scott Stockton. Book Repair. New York: Neal-Schuman, 1992.
Library of Congress. “National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation.”
www.digitalpreservation.gov.
Merrill-Oldham, Jan, and Nancy Carlson Schrock. “The Conservation of General Collections.” In
Preservation Issues and Planning, edited by Paul N. Banks and Roberta Pilette. Chicago: American
Library Association, 2000.
Morris, Patricia A. “Preservation Needs of Children’s Literature in Academic Libraries.” Portal: Libraries &
the Academy 10, no. 1 (2010): 95–110.
Oakley, Robert L. “Copyright and Preservation: An Overview.” The Bookmark 50 (winter 1992): 121–24.
Ravenwood, Clare, Adrienne Muir, and Graham Matthews. “Stakeholders in the Selection of Digital
Material for Preservation: Relationships, Responsibilities, and Influence.” Collection Management 40,
no. 2 (2015): 82–110.
Ray, Emily. “The Prague Library Floods of 2002: Crisis and Experimentation.” Libraries and the Cultural
Record 41 (summer 2006): 381–91.
Rinio, Tyson. “Collection Condition Assessment in a Midsized Academic Library.” Collection Building 41, no.
4 (2016): 193–208.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 2 13

——— . “Starting a Book Repair Program from Scratch: The Book Repair Program at the University of Alaska
Fairbanks, Rasmussen Library.” Technical Services Quarterly 32, no. 1 (2015): 1–13.
Sedinger, Thomas. “Preservation and Conservation in the School Library.” Book Report 10 (January/
February 1992): 34.
Stemper, Jim, and Susan Barribeau. “Perpetual Access to Electronic Journals: A Survey of One Academic
Research Library’s Licenses.” Library Resources & Technical Services 50, no. 2 (2006): 91–109.
Thomas, Sarah. “From Double Fold to Double Bind.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 28 (May 2002):
104–8.
Turpening, Patricia K. “Survey of Preservation Efforts in Law Libraries.” Law Library Journal 94, no. 3
(2002): 363–93.
Verdesca, Anthony F., Jr. “On Sherpas and Shelving Books.” Journal of Access Services 7, no. 3 (2010): 191–94.
Whitaker, Beth M., and Lynne M. Thomas. Special Collections 2.0: New Technologies for Rare Books,
Manuscripts, and Archival Collections. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited, 2009.

RESOURCE-SHARING AND COOPERATIVE COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT

Allen, Barbara McFadden. “Consortia and Collections: Achieving a Balance between Local Action and
Collaborative Interest.” Journal of Library Administration 28, no. 4 (1999): 85–90.
Atkinson, Ross. “Uses and Abuses of Cooperation in a Digital Age.” Collection Management 28, nos. 1/2
(2003): 1–20.
Bolduc, Andre P. “Collaborative Collection Development: A Canadian-Indonesian Initiative.” Collection
Building 29, no. 4 (2010): 124–30.
Burgett, James, John Haar, and Linda L. Phillips. Collaborative Collection Development: A Practical Guide for
Your Library. Chicago: American Library Association, 2004.
Chadwell, Faye A. “What’s Next for Collection Management and Managers? Successful Collaboration.”
Collection Management 34, no. 3 (2009): 151–56.
Chan, Gayle, and Anthony W. Ferguson. “Digital Library Consortia in the 21st Century: The Hong Kong
JULAC Case.” Collection Management 27, nos. 3/4 (2002): 13–27.
Connell, Ruth R. “Eight May Be Too Many: Getting a Toe-Hold on Cooperative Collection Building.”
Collection Management 33, nos. 1/2 (2008): 17–28.
Croft, Janet Brennan. “Interlibrary Loan and Licensing: Tools for Proactive Contract Management.” Journal
of Library Administration 42, nos. 3/4 (2005): 41–53.
Curl, Margo Warner. “Cooperative Collection Development in Consortiums of College Libraries: The
CONSORT Experience.” Against the Grain 14 (December 2002-January 2003): 52–54.
Curl, Margo Warner, and Michael Zeoli. “Developing a Consortial Shared Approved Plan for Monographs.”
Collection Building 23, no. 3 (2004): 122–28.
Dannelly, Gay N. “Remote Access through Consortial Agreements and Other Collection Initiatives:
OhioLink and the CIC.” Against the Grain 8 (November 1996): 24–26, 38.
Dowler, Lawrence. “The Research University’s Dilemma: Resource Sharing and Research in a
Transinstitutional Environment.” Journal of Library Administration 21, nos. 1-2 (1995): 5–26.
Eaton, Nancy L. “Resource Sharing: The Public University Library’s Imperative.” Journal of Library
Administration 21, nos. 1-2 (1995): 27–38.
Eccles, Karen. “Consortia Build Negotiating Strength.” Information Outlook 10 (December 2006): 31–37.
Ferguson, Anthony W. “Document Delivery in the Electronic Age: Collecting and Service Implications.”
Journal of Library Administration 20, no. 4 (1996): 85–98.
Gammon, Julie A., and Michael Zeoli. “Practical Cooperative Collecting for Consortia: Books-Not-Bought in
Ohio.” Collection Management 28, nos, 1/2 (2003): 77–105.
214 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Grycz, Czeslaw Jan. “Resource Sharing in the Systematic Context of Scholarly Communication.” Library
Trends 45 (winter 1997): 499–517.
Hazen, Dan. “Better Mousetraps in Turbulent Times? The Global Resources Network as a Vehicle for
Library Cooperation.” Journal of Library Administration 42, no. 2 (2005): 35–55.
Hoffert, Barbara. “The United Way: Will Public Libraries Follow Academics as They Take Collaborative
Collection Development One Step Further?” Library Journal 131 (May 1, 2006): 38–14.
Irwin, Ken. “Comparing Circulation Rates of Monographs and Anthologies of Literary Criticism:
Implications for Cooperative Collection Development.” Collection Management 33, nos. 1/2 (2008):
69–81.
Juergens, Bonnie, and Tim Prather. “The Resource Sharing Component of Access.” Journal of Library
Administration 20, no. 1 (1994): 77–93.
Kachel, Debra E. “Look Inward before Looking Outward: Preparing the School Library Media Center for
Cooperative Collection Development.” School Library Media Quarterly 23 (winter 1995): 101–13.
Kieft, Robert H., and Bernard F. Reilly. “Regional and National Cooperation on Legacy Print Collections.”
Collaborative Librarianship 1, no. 3 (2009): 106–8.
Kinner, Laura, and Alice Crosetto. “Balancing Act for the Future: How the Academic Library Engages in
Collection Development at the Local and Consortial Levels.” Journal of Library Administration 49
(May-June 2009): 419–37.
Lanier, Don, and Kathryn Carpenter. “Enhanced Services and Resource Sharing in Support of New
Academic Programs.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 20 (March 1994): 15–18.
Lenzini, Rebecca T. “Delivery of Documents and More: A View of Trends Affecting Libraries and
Publishers.” Journal of Library Administration 20, no. 4 (1996): 49–70.
Levine-Clark, Michael. “Whither ILL? Wither ILL: The Changing Nature of Resource Sharing for E-Books.”
Collaborative Librarianship 3, no. 2 (2011): 71–72. http://collaborativelibrarianship.org/index.html.
Lynch, Clifford A. “Building the Infrastructure of Resource Sharing: Union Catalogs, Distributed Search,
and Cross-Database Linkage.” Library Trends 45 (winter 1997): 448–61.
Lyndon, Frederick C. “Remote Access Issues: Pros and Cons.” Journal of Library Administration 20, no. 1
(1994): 19–36.
——— . “Will Electronic Information Finally Result in Real Resource Sharing?” Journal of Library
Administration 24, nos. 1/2 (1996): 47–72.
Machovec, George. “Library Consortia: The Big Picture.” Journal of Library Administration 53, nos. 2–3
(2013): 199–208.
Mosher, Paul H. “Real Access as the Paradigm of the Nineties.” Journal of Library Administration 21, nos. 1-2
(1995): 39–48.
Nous, Rebecca, and Matthew Roslund. “Public Library Collaborative Collection Development for Print
Resources.” Journal of the Library Administration & Management Section 5, no. 3 (2009): 5–14.
Perrault, Anna. “The Printed Book: Still in Need of CCD.” Collection Management 24, nos. 1/2 (2000):
119–36.
——— . “The Role of WorldCat in Resource Sharing.” Collection Management 28, nos. 1/2 (2003): 63–75.
Reilly, Bernard F., Jr. “Global Resources: How a Cooperative Collection Development Enterprise Keeps
Pace with a Rapidly Changing World.” Journal of Library Administration 52, nos. 1-4 (2012): 70–77.
Sandler, Mark. “Collection Development in the (Age) Day of Google.” Library Resources and Technical
Services 40 (October 2006): 239–43.
Sanville, Tom. “Do Economic Factors Really Matter in the Assessment and Retention of Electronic
Resources Licensed at the Library Consortium Level?” Collection Management 33, nos. 1/2 (2008):
1–16.
Shaughnessy, Thomas W. “Resource Sharing and the End of Innocence.” Journal of Library Administration
20, no. 1 (1994): 3–17.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 215

Shreeves, Edward. “Is There a Future for Cooperative Collection Development in the Digital Age?” Library
Trends 45 (winter 1997): 373–90.
Thomas, Sarah E. “Think Globally, Act Locally: Electronic Resources and Collection Development.” Journal
of Library Administration 36, no. 3 (2002): 93–107.
Tucker, James Cory, Jeremy Bullian, and Matthew C. Torrance. “Collaborate or Die! Collection
Development in Today’s Academic Library.” The Reference Librarian nos. 83/84 (2003): 219–36.
Turner, Christine N. “E-Resource Acquisitions in Academic Library Consortia.” Library Resources &
Technical Services 58 (January 2014): 33–48.
Woolls, Blanche. “Public Library-School Library Cooperation: A View from the Past with a Prediction for
the Future.” Journal of Youth Services in Libraries 14 (spring 2001): 8–10.
Yem, S. Fong, et al. “The Alliance Shared Purchase Plan: A New Experiment in Collaborative Collection
Development.” Technical Services Quarterly 27, no. 1 (2010): 17–38.

SELECTION

Agee, Jim, and Jacqueline Solis. “Spanish Language Books: A Review of Print and Online Resources.”
Collection Building 23, no. 2 (2004): 87–95.
Alabaster, Carol. Developing an Outstanding Core Collection: A Guide for Libraries. 2nd ed. Chicago: American
Library Association, 2010.
Aldrich, Alan W. “Judging Books by Their Covers: Managing the Tensions between Paperback and
Clothbound Purchases in Academic Libraries.” College & Research Libraries 70 (January 2009): 57–70.
Austenfeld, Annie Marie. “Building the College Library Collection to Support Curriculum Growth.”
Collection Building 34 (July-September 2009): 209–27.
Bielke-Rodenbiker, Jean. “Review Sources for Mysteries.” Collection Management 29, nos. 3/4 (2004): 53–71.
Bradley, Jana, Bruce Fulton, and Marlene Helm. “Self-Published Books: An Empirical ‘Snapshot.’” Library
Quarterly 82 (April 2012): 107–40.
Chase, Ashley Krenelka, and Elizabeth C. Barnes. “The Road Oft Traveled: Collection Analysis and
Development in a Modern Academic Law Library.” Collection Management 39, nos. 2-3 (2014): 196–210.
Chen, Shu-Hsien Lai. “Diversity in School Library Media Center Resources.” In Educational Media and
Technology Yearbook, vol. 27, edited by Mary Ann Fitzgerald, Michael Orey, and Robert Maribe Branch,
216–25. Englewood Cliffs, CO: Libraries Unlimited, 2002.
Clark, D. T. “Lending Kindle E-Book Readers: First Results from the Texas A&M University Project.”
Collection Building 28, no. 4 (2009): 146–49.
Coombs, Karen, “Digital Promise and Peril.” Netconnect (summer 2007): 24.
Copper, Tom. “Getting the Most from Donations.” Public Libraries 49, no. 2 (2010): 31–36.
Crawford, Gregory A., and Matthew Harris. “Best-Sellers in Academic Libraries.” College & Research
Libraries 62 (May 2001): 216–25.
Davis, Denise M. “E-Books: Collection Vortex or Black Hole?” Public Libraries 49, no. 4 (2010): 10–53.
Dilevko, Juris, and Lisa Gottlieb. “The Politics of Standard Selection Guides: The Case of Public Library
Catalog.” Library Quarterly 73 (July 2003): 289–337.
Donatich, John. “Why Books Still Matter.” Journal of Scholarly Publishing 40 (July 2009): 329–42.
Downey, Elizabeth M. “Graphic Novels in Curriculum and Instruction Collections.” Reference & User
Services Quarterly 49 (December 2009): 181–88.
Dunneback, Katie. “E-Books and Readers’ Advisory.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 50 (summer 2011):
325–29.
Esposito, Joseph J., Kizer Walker, and Terry Ehling. “PDA and the University Press.” Journal of Scholarly
Publishing 44, no. 3 (2013): 1–62.
2 16 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Fenner, Audrey, ed. Selecting Materials for Library Collections. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Information,
2004. Copublished as The Acquisitions Librarian nos. 31/32 (2004).
Ferris, Kady, and Tina Herman Buck. “An Ethos of Access: How a Small Academic Library Transformed Its
Collection Building Process.” Collection Management 39, nos. 2-3 (2014): 127–44.
Fischer, Karen S., Michael Wright, Kathleen Clatanoff, Hope Barton, and Edward Shreeves. “Give ‘Em
What They Want: A One-Year Study of Unmediated Patron-Driven Acquisition of E-Books.” College &
Research Libraries 73 (May 2012): 469–92. http://crl.acrl.org/content/73/5/469.full.pdf+html.
Gherman, Paul M. “Collecting at the Edge—Transforming Scholarship.” Journal of Library Administration
42, no. 2 (2005): 23–34.
Golomb, Liorah. “Collecting Poetry for the Academic Library: An Evaluation of Poetry Prizes as Selection
Tools.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 37 (May 2011): 207–14.
Greene, Robert J., and Charles D. Spornick. “Favorable and Unfavorable Book Reviews: A Quantitative
Study.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 21 (November 1995): 449–53.
Gregory, Cynthia L. “‘But I Want a Real Book’: An Investigation of Undergraduates’ Usage and Attitudes
toward Electronic Books.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 47 (spring 2008): 366–73.
Hadro, Josh. “What’s the Problem with Self-Publishing?” Library Journal 138 (April 15, 2013): 34–36.
Haung, Yun Kuei, Wen I. Yang, Tom M. Y. Lin, and Ting Yu Shih. “Judgment Criteria for the Authenticity of
Internet Book Reviews.” Library & Information Science Research 34 (April 2012): 150–56.
Heaney, Mary Jane. “Graphic Novels: A Sure Bet for Your Library.” Collection Building 26, no. 3 (2007): 72–76.
Hiebert, Jean T. “Beyond Mark and Park: Classification Mapping as a Collection Development Tool for
Psychiatry/Psychology.” Collection Management 34 (July-September 2009): 182–93.
Hoffert, Barbara. “Every Reader a Reviewer.” Library Journal 135 (September 1, 2010): 22–25.
——— . “Immigrant Nation: How Public Libraries Select Materials for a Growing Population Whose First
Language Is Not English.” Library Journal 133, no. 14 (September 1, 2008): 34–36.
——— . “Who’s Selecting Now?” Library Journal 132 (September 1, 2007): 40–43.
Hoseth, Amy, and Merinda McLure. “Perspectives on E-Books from Instructors and Students in the Social
Sciences.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 51, no. 3 (2012): 278–88.
Jobe, Margaret M., and Michael Levine-Clark. “Use and Non-Use of Choice-Reviewed Titles in
Undergraduate Libraries.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 34 (July 2008): 295–304.
Johnson, Liz, and Linda A. Brown. “Book Reviews by the Numbers.” Collection Management 33, nos. 1/2
(2008): 83–113.
Johnson, Peggy. “Selecting Electronic Resources: Developing a Local Decision-Making Matrix.” Cataloging &
Classification Quarterly 22, nos. 3/4 (1996): 9–24.
Jones, Douglas. “On-Demand Information Delivery: Integration of Patron-Driven Acquisitions into
a Comprehensive Information Delivery System.” Journal of Library Administration 51 (October-
December 2011): 764–76.
Korah, Abe, et al. “Off the Shelf: Trends in the Purchase and Use of Electronic Reference Books.” Journal of
Electronic Resources Librarianship 21, nos. 3/4 (2009): 263–78.
Kovacs, Diane. Building Electronic Library Collections: The Essential Guide to Selection Criteria. New York:
Neal-Schuman, 2000.
Levine-Clark, Michael, and Margaret M. Jobe. “Do Reviews Matter? An Analysis of Usage and Holdings of
Choice-Reviewed Titles within a Consortium.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 33 (December 2007):
639–46.
Lin, Tom M. Y., Pin Luarn, and Yun Kuei Huang. “Effect of Internet Book Reviews on Purchase Intention:
A Focus Group Study.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 31 (September 2005): 461–68.
Matz, Chris. “Collecting Comic Books for an Academic Library.” Collection Building 23, no. 2 (2004): 96–99.
Mulcahy, Kevin P. “Science Fiction Collections in ARL Academic Libraries.” College & Research Libraries 67
(January 2006): 15–34.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 21 7

Neal, Kathryn M. “Cultivating Diversity: The Donor Collection.” Collection Management 27, no. 2 (2002):
33–42.
Newcomer, Nara L. “Back to Basics: International Collection Development on a Shoestring.” Collection
Building 28, no. 4 (2009): 164–69.
Nixon, Judith M., and E. Stewart Saunders. “A Study of Circulation Statistics of Books on Demand: A
Decade of Patron-Driven Collection Development, Part 3.” Collection Management 35, nos. 3-4 (2010):
151–61.
O’English, Lorena, J. Gregory, and Elizabeth Blakesley Lindsay. “Graphic Novels in Academic
Libraries: From Maus to Manga and Beyond.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 32 (March
2006): 173–82.
Polanka, Sue. No Shelf Required: E-Books in Libraries. Chicago: American Library Association, 2011.
Pool, Gail. Faint Praise: The Plight of Book Reviewing in America. Columbia: University of Missouri Press,
2007.
Pratt, Gregory F., Patrick Flannery, and Cassandra L. D. Perkins. “Guidelines for Internet Resources
Selection.” College & Research Libraries News 57 (March 1996): 134–45.
Quinn, Brian. “Collection Development and the Psychology of Bias.” Library Journal 82 (July 2012):
277–304.
Rabine, Julie, and Linda A. Brown. “The Selection Connection: Creating an Internet Web Page for
Collection Development.” Library Resources & Technical Services 44 (January 2000): 44–49.
Randall, William M. “What Can the Foreigner Find to Read in the Public Library?” Library Quarterly 1
(1931): 79–88.
Rathe, Bette, and Lisa Blankenship. “Recreational Reading Collections in Academic Libraries.” Collection
Management 30, no. 2 (2005): 73–85.
Safley, Ellen. “Demand for E-Books in an Academic Library.” Journal of Library Administration 45, nos. 3/4
(2006): 445–57.
Schmidt, Karen, Wendy Allen Shelburne, and David Steven Vess. “Approaches to Selection, Access, and
Collection Development in the Web World.” Library Resources & Technical Services 52 (July 2008):
184–91.
Shen, J. “The E-Book Lifestyle: An Academic Library Perspective.” The Reference Librarian 52, nos. 1-2
(2010): 181–89.
Smith, Henrietta M. The Coretta Scott King Awards Book: 1970–1999. 3rd ed. Chicago: American Library
Association, 2004.
Strothmann, Molly, and Connie Van Fleet. “Books That Inspire, Books That Offend.” Reference & User
Services Quarterly 49 (winter 2009): 163–79.
Sullivan, Kathleen. “Beyond Cookie-Cutter Selection.” Library Journal 129 (June 15, 2004): 44–46.
Tappeiner, Elizabeth, and Catherine Lyons. “Selection Criteria for Academic Video Game Collections.”
Collection Building 27, no. 3 (2008): 121–25.
Thelwall, Mike, and Kayvan Kousha. “Goodreads: A Social Network Site for Book Readers.” Journal of the
Association for Information Science and Technology 68, no. 4 (2017): 972–83.
Van Orden, Phyllis J. Selecting Books for the Elementary School Library Media Center. New York: Neal-
Schuman, 2000.
Wagner, Cassie. “Graphic Novel Collections in Academic ARL Libraries.” College & Research Libraries 71
(January 2010): 42–48.
Walters, William H. “Patron-Driven Acquisition and the Educational Mission of the Academic Library.”
Library Resources & Technical Services 56 (July 2012): 199–213.
Williams, Virginia Kay, and Damen V. Peterson. “Graphic Novels in Libraries: Supporting Teacher
Education and Librarianship Programs.” Library Resources & Technical Services 53 (July 2009):
166–73.
2 18 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

SELF-PUBLISHING AND LIBRARIES

Balson, Ronald H. “Bestseller Success Stories That Started Out as Self-Published Books.” Huffington Post.
October 8, 2013. www.huffingtonpost.com/ronald-h-balson/bestseller-success-storie_b_4064574
.html.
Beagle, Donald. “From Walled Garden to Wilderness: Publishing in the Digital Age.” Against the Grain 25
(June 2013): 22–24.
Bowker. Self-Publishing in the United States, 2007–2012: Print and Ebook. New Providence, NJ: Bowker, 2014.
www.bowker.com/assets/downloads/products/bowker_self-publishing_report2013.pdf.
Bradley, Jana, Bruce Fulton, and Marlene Helm. “Self-Published Books: An Empirical ‘Snapshot.’” Library
Quarterly 82 (April 2012): 107–40.
Hadro, Josh. “What’s the Problem with Self-Publishing?” Library Journal 138 (April 15, 2013): 34–36.
Holley, Robert P. “Self-Publishing and Academic Libraries.” Proceedings of the ACRL National Conference
in Portland, Oregon, March 25–28, 2015, pp. 705–12. www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/
conferences/confsandpreconfs/2015/Holley.pdf.
——— , ed. Self-Publishing and Collection Development: Opportunities and Challenges for Libraries. West
Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 2015.
LaRue, James. “ONEBOOKAZ.” Library Journal 140 (May 15, 2015): 41.
——— . “SELF-e Comes to Cuyahoga.” Library Journal 140 (January 2015): 53.
Pecoskie, Jim, and Heather L. Hill. “Indie Media and Digital Community Collaborations in Public
Libraries.” Collection Building 33, no. 4 (2014): 127–31.
“What Every Indie Author Needs to Know about E-Books.” Publishers Weekly 261, no. 7 (2014): 52–54.

SERIALS

Alsmeyer, David. “Building the Digital Library at BT Labs.” Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory 21, no. 3
(1997): 381–85.
Bailey, Charles W., Jr. “The Coalition for Networked Information’s Acquisitions-on-Demand Model: An
Exploration and Critique.” Serials Review 18 (spring/summer 1992): 78–81.
——— . “Network-Based Electronic Serials.” Information Technology and Libraries 11 (March 1992): 29–35.
——— . “Open Access and Libraries.” Collection Management 32, nos. 3/4 (2007): 351–83.
Barnes, John H. “One Giant Step, One Small Step: Continuing the Migration to Electronic Journals.”
Library Trends 45 (winter 1997): 404–15.
Beall, Jeffrey. “‘Predatory’ Open-Access Scholarly Publishing.” The Charleston Advisor 10, no. 4 (2010): 10–17.
Black, Steve. “Impact of Full Text on Print Journal Use at a Liberal Arts College.” Library Resources &
Technical Services 49, no. 1 (2005): 19–26.
Bohannon, John. “Who’s Afraid of Peer Review?” Science 342, no. 6154 (2013): 6–65.
Borrelli, Steve, Betty Galbraith, and Eileen E. Brady. “The Impact of Electronic Journals on Use of Print in
Geology.” College & Research Libraries 70 (January 2009): 26–33.
Brooke, F. Dixon, Jr. “Subscription or Information Agency Services in the Electronic Era.” The Serials
Librarian 29, nos. 3/4 (1996): 57–65.
Butler, Brett. “Electronic Editions of Serials: The Virtual Library Model.” Serials Review 18 (spring/summer
1992): 102–6.
Carignan, Yvonne. “Who Wants Yesterday’s Papers?” Collection Management 31, nos. 1-2 (2005): 75–84.
Chiou-Sen, Dora Chen. Serials Management: A Practical Guide. Chicago: American Library Association,
1995.
Drake, Miriam A. “Institutional Repositories: Hidden Treasures.” Searcher 12 (May 2004): 41–45.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 219

——— . “Scholarly Communication in Turmoil.” Information Today 24 (February 2007): 1–19.

Feyereisen, Pierre, and Anne Spoiden. “Can Local Citation Analysis of Master’s and Doctoral Theses Help
Decision-Making about the Management of the Collection of Periodicals? A Case Study in Psychology
and Education Sciences.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 35 (November 2009): 514–22.
Ganesh, Tirupalavanam G. “Ejournals in Education: Just Generating Excitement or Living Up to the
Promise?” Education Libraries 26 (summer 2003): 5–15.
Guedon, Jean-Claude. “Mixing and Matching the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access—Take 2.” Serials
Review 34, no. 1 (2008): 41–51.
Hamaker, Charles A. “Re-Designing Serials Collections.” Journal of Library Administration 20, no. 1 (1994):
37–47.
Hawkins, Les. “Network-Accessed Scholarly Serials.” The Serials Librarian 29, nos. 3/4 (1996): 19–31.
Jasco, Peter. “Open Access Ready Reference Suites.” Online Information Review 10, no. 6 (2006): 737–43.
Johnson, Richard K. “Open Access: Unlocking the Value of Scientific Research.” Journal of Library
Administration 42, no. 2 (2004): 107–24.
Kopak, Rick. “Open Access and the Open Journal Systems: Making Sense All Over.” School Libraries
Worldwide 14, no. 2 (2008): 45–54.
Mancini, Alice Duhon. “Evaluating Commercial Document Suppliers: Improving Access to Current Journal
Literature.” College & Research Libraries 57 (March 1996): 123–31.
McCulloch, Emma. “Taking Stock of Open Access: Progress and Issues.” Library Review 55, no. 6 (2006):
337–43.
Moghaddam, Golnessa Galyani. “Scholarly Electronic Journal Publishing: A Study Comparing Commercial
and Nonprofit/University Publishers.” Serials Review 51, nos. 3/4 (2007): 165–83.
Murphy, Sarah Anne. “The Effects of Portfolio Purchasing on Scientific Subject Collections.” College &
Research Libraries 69 (July 2008): 332–40.
Nisonger, Thomas E. Management of Serials in Libraries. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, 1998.
Ovransky, Ivan. “Science Reporter Spoofs Hundreds of Open Access Journals with Fake Papers.” http://
retractionwatch.com/2013/10/03/science-reporter-spoofs-hundreds-of-journals-with-a-fake-paper/.
Plutchak, T. Scott. “What’s a Serial When You’re Running on Internet Time?” Serials Librarian 52, nos. 1/2
(2007): 79–90.
Prabha, Chandra. “Shifting from Print to Electronic Journals in ARL University Libraries.” Serials Review
33, no. 1 (2007): 4–13.
Schwartz, Charles A. “Restructuring Serials Management to Generate New Resources and Services—With
Commentaries on Restructurings at Three Institutions.” College & Research Libraries 59 (March 1998):
115–28.
Stern, D. “Open Access or Differential Pricing for Journals: The Road Best Traveled.” Online 29 (March
2005): 30–35.
Tenopir, Carol. “Should We Cancel Print?” Library Journal 124 (September 1, 1999): 138, 142.
Truth, Frank. “Pay Big to Publish Fast: Academic Journal Rackets.” Journal for Critical Education Policy
Studies 10, no. 2 (2012): 54–105.
Van Orsdel, Lee C., and Kathleen Born. “E-Journals Come of Age: Periodical Price Survey 1998.” Library
Journal 123 (April 15, 1998): 40–45.
——— . “Periodicals Pricing Survey 2008: Embracing Openness.” Library Journal 133 (April 15, 2008): 53–58.
Way, Doug. “The Impact of Web-Scale Discovery on the Use of a Library Collection.” Serials Review 36
(December 2010): 214–20.
Willinsky, John. The Access Principle: The Case for Open Access for Research and Scholarship. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press, 2006.
——— . “The Nine Flavors of Open Access Scholarly Publishing.” Journal of Postgraduate Medicine 49, no. 3
(2003): 263–67.
220 / BI BLIOG R APH Y

Xia, Jingfeng, Jennifer L. Harmon, Keven G. Connolly. Ryan M. Donnelly, Mary R. Anderson, and Heather
A. Howard. “Who Publishes in ‘Predatory’ Journals?” Journal of the Association for Information Science
and Technology 66, no. 7 (2015): 1406–17.
Yiotis, Kristin. “The Open Access Initiative: A New Paradigm for Scholarly Communication.” Information
Technology and Libraries 24 (summer 2005): 157–62.

WEEDING

Agee, Ann. “Faculty Responses to Deselection in Academic Libraries: A Psycholinguistic Analysis.” Collection
Management 42, no. 2 (2017): 59–75.
Banks, Julie. “Weeding Book Collections in the Age of the Internet.” Collection Building 21, no. 3 (2002): 113–19.
Bertland, Linda H. “Circulation Analysis as a Tool for Collection Development.” School Library Media
Quarterly 19 (winter 1991): 90–97.
Bracke, Marianne Stowell, and Jim Martin. “Developing Criteria for the Withdrawal of Print Content
Available Online.” Collection Building 24, no. 2 (2005): 61–64.
Bravender, Patricia, and Valeria Long. “Weeding an Outdated Collection in an Automated Retrieval
System.” Collection Management 36 (October–December 2011): 237–45.
Coughlin, Daniel M., Mark C. Campbell, and Bernard J. Jansen. “A Web Analytics Approach for Appraising
Electronic Resources in Academic Libraries.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and
Technology 67 (March 2016): 518–34.
Farber, Evan Ira. “Books NOT for College Libraries.” Library Journal 122 (August 1997): 44–45.
Handis, Michael W. “Practical Advice for Weeding in Small Academic Libraries.” Collection Building 36, no.
3 (2007): 84–87.
Lancaster, F. W. “Obsolescence, Weeding, and the Utilization of Space.” Wilson Library Bulletin 62 (May
1988): 47–49.
Larson, Jeannette. “CREW: A Weeding Manual for Modern Libraries.” Austin: Texas Public Library and
Archives Commission, 2008. www.tsl.state.tx.us/ld/pubs/crew.
Line, Maurice. “Changes in the Use of Literature with Time-Obsolescence Revisited.” Library Trends 41
(spring 1993): 665–83.
Manley, Will. “The Manley Arts: If I Called This Column ‘Weeding’ You Wouldn’t Read It.” Booklist (March
1, 1996): 1108.
——— . “S.F.P.L Blues.” American Libraries 27 (December 1996): 96.
McAlister, Alex D., and Allan Scherlen. “Weeding with Wisdom: Turning Deselection of Print Monographs
in Book-Reliant Disciplines.” Collection Management 42, no. 2 (2017): 76–91.
Metz, Paul, and Caryl Gray. “Public Relations and Library Weeding.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 31
(May 2005): 273–79.
Michael, Ann E. “It’s Not Too Late to Save the Stacks.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2016.
www.chronicle.com/Its-Not-Too-Late-to-Save-the/238106.
Nikkel, Terry, and Liane Beltway. “When Worlds Collide: Dismantling the Science Fiction and Fantasy
Collection at the University of New Brunswick, Saint John.” Collection Management 34 (July-
September 2009): 194–208.
Roy, Lorienne. “Weeding.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science 54, Supplement 17: 352–98.
New York: Marcel Dekker.
Singer, Carol A. “Weeding Gone Wild: Planning and Implementing a Review of the Reference Collection.”
Reference & User Services Quarterly 47 (spring 2008): 356–63.
Slote, Stanley J. Weeding Library Collections: Library Weeding Methods. 4th ed. Englewood, CO: Libraries
Unlimited, 1997.
 B I B LIO G R APH Y / 2 21

Smith, Rochelle, and Nancy J. Young. “Giving Pleasure Its Due: Collection Promotion and Readers’
Advisory in Academic Libraries.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 34 (November 2008): 520–26.
Wallace, Danny P. “The Young and the Ageless: Obsolescence in Public Library Collections.” Public Libraries
29 (March-April 1990): 102–5.
Waugh, Mike, Michelle Donlin, and Stephanie Braunstein. “Next-Generation Collection Management: A
Case Study for Quality Control and Weeding E-Books in an Academic Library.” Collection Management
40, no. 1 (2015): 17–26.
Young, Diane J. “Get to Effective Weeding.” Library Journal 134 (November 15, 2009): 36.
 APPE N DI X

List of Library Vendors

Publishers, Wholesalers, and Vendors

Last updated December 2017—Special thanks to Zoe Leonarczyk,

graduate assistant, University of South Florida, School of Information

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

100% Educational www.schoolvideos.com AUDIOVISUAL Curriculum-based
Video educational videos
Alexander Street http://alexanderstreet.com/ AUDIOVISUAL Publisher of curated,
discipline-focused, primary-
source collections, websites,
and streaming media for
learning and research for
libraries
Annenberg/CPB www.learner.org AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of educational
videos
audiobooks.com www.audiobooks.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of audio books
AWE Learning https://awelearning.com/ AUDIOVISUAL Digital learning tools for
preschool and elementary-
age children
Beyda & Associates www.beydaandassociates. AUDIOVISUAL Discount book and media
com distributor for educational
and entertaining DVDs, CDs,
and books
Books on Tape http://booksontape.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of audiobooks
for public, school, university,
and government libraries
Bullfrog Films www.bullfrogfilms.com AUDIOVISUAL Independently produced
environmental DVDs and
videos
Cambridge http://cambridge.films.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of educational
Educational videos
Crimson Multimedia www.crimsoninc.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of CD-ROMs,
Distribution, Inc. DVDs, video games, and
audiobooks

/ 223 /
2 24 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Discovery www.discoveryeducation AUDIOVISUAL Science-based videos for
Education .com K−8
Film Ideas, Inc. www.filmideas.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of videos for the
school and public library
Films for the http://ffh.films.com AUDIOVISUAL Creator and distributor of
Humanities and videos for the humanities
Sciences and sciences
GPN (Reading www.shopgpn.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of educational
Rainbow Videos) videos for elementary school
through college
Guidance www.guidanceassociates AUDIOVISUAL Curriculum-based
Associates .com educational videos for K−12
and corporate training
videos
Human Relations www.hrmvideo.com AUDIOVISUAL K−12 publishers of
Media educational products,
specializing in video-based
programs in subject areas
including health,
drug education, career
education, science, math,
and language arts
Landmark www.landmarkaudio.com AUDIOVISUAL Leaser and distributor of
Audiobooks audiobooks for libraries
Landmark Media www.landmarkmedia.com AUDIOVISUAL Educational videos for
schools
Library Video www.libraryvideo.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of educational
Company videos to schools and
libraries
Listen and Live www.listenandlive.com/ AUDIOVISUAL Independent audiobook
Audio index.php publishing company
Listening Library www.penguinrandom AUDIOVISUAL Publisher of audiobooks for
houseaudio.com/ children
kids-and-teens/
Live Oak Media www.liveoakmedia.com AUDIOVISUAL Producer of read-along
recordings for children’s
literature
Lyrasis www.lyrasis.org/Pages/ AUDIOVISUAL Partners with libraries,
Main.aspx archives, museums, and
other cultural heritage
organizations to build and
sustain collaboration and
digital content
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 2 25

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Meridian Education http://meridian.films.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of videos for the
Corporation health and service industries
Midwest Tape www.midwesttapes.com AUDIOVISUAL A full-service DVD and
music provider, doing
business exclusively with
public libraries
Nest Learning www.nestlearning.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of educational,
religious, and entertaining
materials
NICEM (National www.nicem.com AUDIOVISUAL Database of audiovisual
Information Center media
for Educational
Media)
Office Central de www.ocd.fr/ AUDIOVISUAL French distributor of
Documentation audiovisual materials of
(O.C.D.) music and videos
Phoenix Learning www.phoenixlearning AUDIOVISUAL Producer and distributor of
Group, Inc. group.com educational videos
Recorded Books www.recordedbooks.com AUDIOVISUAL Publisher of audiobooks

School Media www.smavideo.net/store/ AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of educational

Associates index.cfm videos for the school media
center
Shopware http://shopware.films.com AUDIOVISUAL Distributor of educational
videos for trade and
industrial skills
Tantor https://tantor.com/ AUDIOVISUAL Publisher of audiobooks
Weston Woods http://westonwoods AUDIOVISUAL Audiovisual adaptations of
.scholastic.com/products/ books for children
westonwoods/
Schmidt Periodicals www.biblio.com/bookstore/ BACK ISSUES Distributor of back issues of
GmbH / Periodicals schmidt-periodicals-gmbh scholarly journals and other
Service Company -bad-feilnbach serials

United States Book www.usbe.com BACK ISSUES Supplier of back issues

Exchange of scholarly journals and
magazines
Bound to Stay www.btsb.com BOOK BINDER Book binder for juvenile
Bound books
Everbind www.everbind.com BOOK BINDER Book rebinder
Perma-Bound www.perma-bound.com BOOK BINDER Book rebinder
Books
226 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Child Graphics www.childgraphics.com CHILDREN/ Art and library books,
YOUNG ADULT
Company reading posters, images, and
storybook art for schools
and children
Children’s Plus, Inc. www.childrensplusinc.com CHILDREN/ Book distributor of pre-
YOUNG ADULT
bound library books for
children
Crabtree Publishing www.crabtreebooks.com CHILDREN/ Nonfiction publisher of
YOUNG ADULT
Co. children’s books
Creative Company www.thecreativecompany.us CHILDREN/ Publisher of children’s school
YOUNG ADULT
and library books
Lee & Low Books https://www.leeandlow.com CHILDREN/ Publisher of multicultural
YOUNG ADULT
children’s literature
Norwood House www.norwoodhouse CHILDREN/ Publisher of books for the
YOUNG ADULT
Press press.com school and library market
Penworthy www.penworthy.com CHILDREN/ Distributor of pre-bound
YOUNG ADULT
Company children’s books for schools
and public libraries
Rainbow Book www.rainbowbook CHILDREN/ Distributor of fiction and
YOUNG ADULT
Company company.com nonfiction library books for
pre-K through 8th grade
Regent Book www.regentbook.com CHILDREN/ Distributor of best sellers in
YOUNG ADULT
Company juvenile books
Rourke Publishing http://rourkeeducational CHILDREN/ Publisher of bilingual, sports,
YOUNG ADULT
Group media.com science, social studies,
reference, and board books
for children

Scholastic Library http://scholasticlibrary CHILDREN/ Publisher and distributor

YOUNG ADULT
Publishing .digital.scholastic.com of children’s nonfiction and
reference books
Sebco Books, Inc. www.sebcobooks.com CHILDREN/ Distributor of books for
YOUNG ADULT
(Southeastern Book children
Company)
Usborne www.usborne.com CHILDREN/ International publisher
YOUNG ADULT
of illustrated fiction and
nonfiction books for children
Abdo Group www.abdopublishing.com EDUCATIONAL Four publishing companies
MATERIALS
in one; offers nonfiction
supplemental books for
children in grades K−8

Bearport Publishing www.bearport EDUCATIONAL Book distributor of K−8

MATERIALS
publishing.com nonfiction books
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 227

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Booksource www.booksource.com EDUCATIONAL Distributor of books and
MATERIALS
related materials to schools
and libraries
Cambridge www.cambridge.org EDUCATIONAL Publisher of academic books
MATERIALS
University Press and materials
Capstone www.capstonepub.com/ EDUCATIONAL Publisher of nonfiction
MATERIALS
library/ books for pre-K through 8th
grade
Charlesbridge www.charlesbridge.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of educational
MATERIALS
Publishing books for children
Chelsea House http://chelseahouse EDUCATIONAL Curriculum-based nonfiction
MATERIALS
.infobasepublishing.com books for grades 8−12

Child’s World www.childsworld.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of children’s books

MATERIALS
for schools and libraries
Columbia University http://cup.columbia.edu EDUCATIONAL Publisher of academic books
MATERIALS
Press and materials
Davidson Titles, Inc. www.davidsontitles.com EDUCATIONAL Library and classroom
MATERIALS
materials for pre-K through
12th grade including
nonfiction, fiction, reference,
Spanish, and bilingual
materials
Delaney www.deebooks.com EDUCATIONAL Nonfiction, fiction, and
MATERIALS
Educational curriculum-based books for
Enterprises schools and school libraries
Distribooks www.distribooks.net EDUCATIONAL Distributor of Cisco Press
MATERIALS
books on education for the
development of countries
Duke University www.dukeupress.edu EDUCATIONAL Publisher of academic
MATERIALS
Press books, journals, e-books,
and other scholarly materials
Enslow Publishers www.enslow.com EDUCATIONAL Nonfiction library books for
MATERIALS
grades K−12
Facts on File http://factsonfile EDUCATIONAL Curriculum-based resources
MATERIALS
.infobasepublishing.com for the school and library

Franklin Watts https://www.hachette EDUCATIONAL Publisher of children’s

MATERIALS
(Hachette childrens.co.uk/homepage educational books for
Children’s Group) _franklinwatts.page schools, libraries, and homes

Gale Group www.gale.com EDUCATIONAL Resource for public,

MATERIALS
academic, and school
librarians
228 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Gardner’s Book www.gbsbooks.com EDUCATIONAL Supplier of educational
MATERIALS
Service materials for school libraries
and educators
Gareth Stevens www.garethstevens.com EDUCATIONAL Curriculum-based nonfiction
MATERIALS
Publishing books

Garrett Educational www.garrettbooks.com/dyn/ EDUCATIONAL Distributor of curriculum-

MATERIALS
Corp showpage.php?id=15 based books

Greenhaven (The http://solutions.cengage EDUCATIONAL Nonfiction books with a wide

MATERIALS
Gale Group) .com/greenhaven/ view on every topic for the
school and library
Greg Escue & www.escuebooks.com EDUCATIONAL Educational materials for
MATERIALS
Associates Texas schools and public
libraries
Gumdrop Books www.gumdropbooks.com EDUCATIONAL Distributor of educational
MATERIALS
materials for pre-K through
college
Harcourt School www.harcourtschool.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of textbooks for
MATERIALS
Publishers pre-K through 6th grade
Harrassowitz www.harrassowitz.de EDUCATIONAL Vendor for scholarly books
MATERIALS
and serials for the academic
and research community
Harvard University www.hup.harvard.edu EDUCATIONAL Publisher of academic and
MATERIALS
Press nonfiction books

Holt McDougal www.hmhco.com EDUCATIONAL Educational resources for

MATERIALS
grades 6−12
Junior Library Guild www.juniorlibraryguild.com EDUCATIONAL Distributor of books for
MATERIALS
pre-K through 12th grade

Knowbuddy www.knowbuddy EDUCATIONAL Distributor of books for

MATERIALS
Resources/ resources.com grades K−12
Saunders
Lerner Publishing www.lernerbooks.com EDUCATIONAL Top-quality nonfiction and
MATERIALS
fiction books for grades
K−12
Mackin Library www.mackin.com EDUCATIONAL Distributor of K−12 materials
MATERIALS
Media for the school and library
Marcom Projects www.marcom.com.au EDUCATIONAL Distributor of educational
MATERIALS
materials for Australia and
New Zealand
Mason Crest www.masoncrest.com EDUCATIONAL Core-related materials for
MATERIALS
Publishers grades K−12
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 229

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

McGraw-Hill www.mhprofessional.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of professional
MATERIALS
Professional education materials
for business, medical,
education, technical, and
consumers
Midwest Library www.midwestls.com EDUCATIONAL Academic and scholarly
MATERIALS
Service book distributor
MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/ EDUCATIONAL Publisher of academic books
MATERIALS
main/home/default.asp and materials

Morgan Reynolds www.morganreynolds.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of nonfiction

MATERIALS
Publishing books for young adults
Nacscorp www.nacscorp.com EDUCATIONAL Distributor of books and
MATERIALS
other materials for colleges
Oliver & Andys www.oabookco.com EDUCATIONAL Distributor of fiction and
MATERIALS
nonfiction materials for
grades K−6
Oliver Press www.oliverpress.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of history,
MATERIALS
biography, and science
books for young adults
Oxford University https://global.oup.com/ EDUCATIONAL Publisher of a wide range of
MATERIALS
Press academic/?cc=ca&lang academic subjects
=en&
Perfection Learning www.perfectionlearning.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of curriculum-
MATERIALS
Corp based materials for grades
pre-K through 12
PHI Learning www.phindia.com EDUCATIONAL Distributors of educational
MATERIALS
materials for students
and professionals, from
computer information to
social sciences
Pineapple Press, www.pineapplepress.com EDUCATIONAL Educational and entertaining
MATERIALS
Inc. books about Florida
Princeton www.press.princeton.edu EDUCATIONAL Publisher of academic books
MATERIALS
University Press and materials
Rigby (Houghton www.hmhco.com/shop/ EDUCATIONAL Educational resource
MATERIALS
Mifflin Harcourt) education-curriculum/ for primary education,
reading/guided-reading/ independent reading, and
pm-books academic success

Rosen Publishing www.rosenpublishing.com EDUCATIONAL Curriculum-based books for

MATERIALS
grades pre-K through 12
Sage Publications http://online.sagepub.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of academic and
MATERIALS
educational books and
materials
230 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Saxon (Houghton www.hmhco.com/shop/ EDUCATIONAL Educational resource
MATERIALS
Mifflin Harcourt) education-curriculum/math/ for teachers in the math,
saxon-math phonics, and early learning
areas
Simon & Schuster www.simonandschuster.net EDUCATIONAL Publisher of exam and
MATERIALS
teachers guides, catalogs,
and other academic
materials
Smart Apple Media www.smartapplemedia.com EDUCATIONAL Nonfiction books for children
MATERIALS

Starkmann www.starkmann.com EDUCATIONAL Distributor of scholarly

MATERIALS
books and other materials in
both English and German
University of www.uapress.arizona.edu EDUCATIONAL Publisher of scholarly books
MATERIALS
Arizona Press including American Indian
studies, anthropology, and
geography
University of www.press.uchicago.edu EDUCATIONAL Publisher of scholarly books
MATERIALS
Chicago Press and journals
University of North http://uncpress.unc.edu EDUCATIONAL Publisher of scholarly books
MATERIALS
Carolina Press
Visible Ink www.visibleinkpress.com EDUCATIONAL Publisher of books that
MATERIALS
inform and entertain in
subject areas of culture,
science, history, religion, and
government
Yale University http://yalepress.yale.edu/ EDUCATIONAL Publisher of scholarly books
MATERIALS
Press yupbooks/home.asp

Yankee Book www.ybp.com EDUCATIONAL Distributor of books to

MATERIALS
Peddler, Inc. (YBP) academic and research
libraries
Abracadabra www.abrabks.com GENERAL Distributor of a wide range
Booksearch of books, including rare,
International antiquarian, and modern
books
American Overseas www.aobc.com GENERAL Distributor of corporate,
Book Co. medical, government,
educational books,
textbooks, training manuals,
government documents,
CDs, videos, audiocassettes,
etc.
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 2 31

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Askews & Holts https://www.askewsand GENERAL Book supplier for schools
Library Service holts.com/AskHolts/ and other libraries
CorpHome.aspx
Baker and Taylor www.baker-taylor.com GENERAL Supplies multimedia, books,
and related information
services to libraries and
retailers
Bertrams Library http://libraryservices GENERAL Library book supplier to
Services .bertrams.com/Bertram academic, public, school,
LibraryServices/ and special libraries in the
United Kingdom
Better World Books https://www.betterworld GENERAL Distributes more than 8
books.com million books with a book-
for-book donation policy
Blackwell’s Book www.blackwell.com GENERAL Book supplier for academic,
Services research, and public libraries
Book Farm www.thebookfarminc.com/ GENERAL Book distributor servicing
home.php schools and public libraries

Book House www.thebookhouse.com GENERAL Large book distributor

specializing in trade,
scientific, technical,
business, and university
press publications
Bookazine Co. www.bookazine.com GENERAL Wholesaler of books and
magazines
Buchhaus https://www.buchhaus GENERAL Supplier of books, journals,
Antiquariat Stern- -sternverlag.de/shop/action/ and electronic materials
Verlag mymagazine?aUrl
=90007403

Consortium www.cbsd.com GENERAL Distributor of books by

Book Sales and independent publishers
Distribution
Dover Publications http://store.dover GENERAL Publisher of a wide range of
publications.com subjects
Eastern Book www.ebc.com GENERAL Book distributor for
Company academic, public, and
governmental libraries
Emery-Pratt www.emery-pratt.com GENERAL Book distributors for
Company academic, public, and
hospital libraries
TITLEWAVE Follett www.titlewave.com GENERAL U.S. wholesaler of books,
School Solutions CD-ROMs, and audiovisual
for K−12 school libraries
2 32 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

ABC-CLIO www.abc-clio.com/ GENERAL Publisher of reference,
Greenwood ABC-CLIOGreenwood.aspx academic, and general
Publishing Group interest books for librarians

Independent www.ipgbook.com GENERAL Book distributor for

Publishers Group independent publishers
Ingram Content www.ingramcontent.com GENERAL Print and digital wholesale
Group distribution services
Ingressus www.ingressus.nl/ GENERAL Distributor of books and
Home.aspx subscriptions for a variety of
subjects, including medical
books
Kensington www.kensingtonbooks.com GENERAL Independent publisher of
Publishing Corp. various subjects
Licosa www.licosa.com GENERAL Distributor of books and
materials for Italian libraries
Macmillan http://us.macmillan.com GENERAL Publisher of adult trade
as well as college and
academic titles, magazines,
and journals
Marshall Cavendish www.marshall GENERAL Publisher of illustrated
Corp. cavendish.com encyclopedias, digital
resources, nonfiction series,
and children’s books
Marston Book www.marston.co.uk GENERAL Distributor of materials for
Services the United Kingdom
Micromedia www.proquest.com GENERAL General distributor for
ProQuest Canada’s various library
types
Mumford Library www.books-library.com GENERAL Hands-on book selection
Books for public libraries, K−12
schools, and academic
libraries
National Book www.nbnbooks.com GENERAL Distributor of books by
Network independent publishers
Navrang, Inc. www.navrang.com GENERAL Distributor of a wide variety
of materials with a focus on
children and young adults
Parnassus Book www.parnassusbooks.com GENERAL General bookstore for new,
Service old, and rare books on a
variety of subjects
Partners Publishers www.partners GENERAL Distributor of independent
Group publishersgroup.com publishers
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 233

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Penguin Group www.penguin.com GENERAL Large publisher of trade
books
Penguin Random www.penguinrandom GENERAL Distributor of fiction,
House, Inc. house.com nonfiction, and children’s
books
Peter Pal Library www.peterpal.com.au GENERAL Distributor of books for
Supplier Australia and New Zealand
Postscript Books www.psbooks.co.uk GENERAL Mail-order company in the
United Kingdom specializing
in overstock books at
discounted prices
Powell’s Books www.powells.com GENERAL Large bookstore for new,
used, and out-of-print books
on a variety of subjects
Publishers Group www.publishersgroup GENERAL Distributor of independent
West west.com publishers
Renaud-Bray www.renaud-bray.com/ GENERAL French book distributor for
accueil.aspx Canada

SCB Distributors www.scbdistributors.com GENERAL General book distributor

Scholarly Book www.sbookscan.com GENERAL Distributor of a variety of
Services, Inc. scholarly books from the
United States and United
Kingdom for Canada
Sourcebooks, Inc. www.sourcebooks.com GENERAL Independent publisher of
unique books
Strand Bookstore www.strandbooks.com GENERAL Used, new, and rare book
seller
Transmedia BV www.transmedia.nl GENERAL Distributor of books,
serials, and other materials
to universities and other
research centers
World Trade Press www.worldtradepress.com GENERAL Publisher of information
products dedicated to
providing reliable and up-to-
date digital media essentials
W.W. Norton & http://books.wwnorton GENERAL Independent publisher of
Company .com/books/index.aspx books for general audience,
professional, and collegiate

Adler’s Foreign www.adlersforeign LANGUAGE Distributor of French,

Books books.com/ Spanish, German, Italian,
Portuguese, Russian, and
Chinese language books
234 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Continental Book www.continentalbook.com LANGUAGE Distributor of language
Company materials in Spanish, French,
German, Italian, Latin,
Arabic, and Chinese
Grant and Cutler www.grantandcutler.com LANGUAGE Distributor of foreign-
Ltd. language materials

Langenscheidt http://en.langenscheidt LANGUAGE Publisher of language, map,

Publishers .com/ and travel materials

Lectorum www.lectorum.com LANGUAGE Spanish-language books for

Publications adults and children
Master www.master-comm.com LANGUAGE Publisher and distributor
Communications of bilingual books and
materials
Raven Tree Press www.deltapublishing.com/ LANGUAGE Publisher of picture books
index2.cfm for bilingual, English only,
and Spanish only
SBD Spanish Book www.sbdbooks.com LANGUAGE Distributor of Spanish books
Distributor, Inc.
Schoenhof’s www.schoenhofs.com LANGUAGE Distributor of foreign-
Foreign Books/ language materials
Midwestern
European
Publications
Andrews McMeel www.andrewsmcmeel.com NONFICTION Publisher of nonfiction trade
Publishing, LLC books and calendars
Alibris www.alibris.com OUT-OF-PRINT Online vendor of out-of-
print, rare, out-of-stock, and
academic press titles
Bookfever.com www.bookfever.com OUT-OF-PRINT Rare, used, and out-of-print
books mostly of Western
Americana and children’s
books
Howard Karno www.karnobooks.com OUT-OF-PRINT Books about Latin America.
Books new, out-of-print, and rare
books, documents, and
original materials
Xerxes Books www.xerxesbooks.com OUT-OF-PRINT Out-of-print scholarly and
unusual books
ABC-Clio www.abc-clio.com REFERENCE Educational reference
MATERIALS
publisher
DK Publishing www.dk.com REFERENCE Publisher of reference books
MATERIALS
for all ages
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 235

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Lincoln Library http://thelincolnlibrary.com REFERENCE Distributor of reference
MATERIALS
Press materials for schools and
libraries
Permacharts www.permacharts.com REFERENCE Creator of quick reference
MATERIALS
charts
Salem Press, Inc. http://salempress.com REFERENCE Reference books that are
MATERIALS
easily understood by high
school and undergraduate
students
World Book www.worldbook.com REFERENCE Publisher of encyclopedias
MATERIALS

A.I. Weinberg Book www.aiweinberg.com REGIONAL Distributor of Hebrew books

Agency
African Books www.africanbooks REGIONAL Publisher of African literature
Collective Ltd. collective.com

Akademibokhan- https://www REGIONAL Scandinavian vendor

deln Direkt .akademibokhandeln.se/

Akateeminen www.akateeminen.com REGIONAL Finnish vendor

Kirjakauppa

ATC Books www.atcbooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of books and

International, Inc. periodicals from Eastern
Europe and the republics of
the former Soviet Union,
for libraries, institutions, and
associates
Aux Amateurs de www.auxam.fr/indexgb.html REGIONAL French distributor of books
Livres to academic, public, and
research libraries
Bagchee Associates www.bagchee.com REGIONAL Distributor of Indian books
and materials
Balogh www.balogh.com REGIONAL U.S. distributors of European
International, Inc. publishers
Biblia Impex www.bibliaimpex.com REGIONAL Distributor of books and
other materials from India
Brockhaus/German https://germanbooks REGIONAL Distributor of books from
Books .brocom.de/de/default.aspx Europe

Buchversand www.buchversand-krieger. REGIONAL Distributor of books from

Krieger de/English.htm Central Asia and Russia

Casalini Libri http://libraries.casalini.it/ REGIONAL Publications in French,

Italian, Spanish, and
Portuguese
236 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Cheng & Tsui www.cheng-tsui.com REGIONAL Asian educational publishing
Company service to educate the world
about Asia
China Books www.chinabooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of books and
other materials from China
D.K. Agencies Ltd. www.dkagencies.com REGIONAL Distributor of books from
India, Bangladesh, Bhutan,
Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri
Lanka
East View www.eastview.com REGIONAL Distributer of Russian books
Information
Services

Eastwind Books of http://asiabookcenter.com REGIONAL Distributor of books about

Berkley Asia and related studies
Edelweiss BP http://edelweiss-bp.com REGIONAL Distributer of Bulgarian
books
Galda and Leuchter www.galda.com REGIONAL Distributor of German
monographs
Houtschild www.houtschild.com REGIONAL Supplier of English and
International foreign-language books and
Booksellers journals

Iberbook Sanchez www.ibersaculib.com/lsc/ REGIONAL Provides Spanish,

Cuesta, S.A. Portuguese, and Latin
American books and
nonprint materials
India Books Center www.indiabookcenter.com REGIONAL Distributor of books and
other materials from India
International www.isbs.com REGIONAL Distributor for over sixty
Specialized Book academic overseas
Services (ISBS) publishers. Specializing in
topics including Irish,
Australian, Islamic, Judaic,
and military studies
Internet Bookshop www.ibuk.com REGIONAL Supplier of books in the
UK, Ltd. United Kingdom
Iranbooks, Inc. www.iranbooks.net REGIONAL Distributor of English and
Persian books about Iran
Islander Group https://www.islandergroup REGIONAL Distributor of books about
.com Hawaii

James Bennett Pty www.bennett.com.au REGIONAL Vendor of Australian

Ltd. publications
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 237

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Jean Touzot www.jd-touzot.fr/en/ REGIONAL Bookseller and general
Librairie home.asp agent for all French-
Internationale language books and
periodicals
K.K. Agencies www.kkagencies.com REGIONAL Supplier of books and other
materials from India
Kenny’s Bookshop www.kennys.ie REGIONAL Supplier of Irish books as
well as non-Irish materials
Kinokuniya www.kinokuniya.com REGIONAL Distributor of Japanese
Bookstores of books
America Co. Ltd.
Kubon & Sagner www.kubon-sagner.de/ REGIONAL Distributor of materials from
index.php Eastern and Southeastern
Europe
Latin American www.latambooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of books from
Book Source, Inc. Latin America and Spain
Latin American www.latinamerican REGIONAL Distributor of Latin American
Book Store, Ltd., books.com and Spanish academic
The publications
Lavoisier www.lavoisier.eu/books/ REGIONAL Publisher, bookseller, and
news.asp subscription service for
French materials
LEA Book www.leabooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of materials for
Distributors Spain and Latin America
Leila Books www.leilabooks.com REGIONAL Bookseller and subscription
agent specializing in serving
academic and research
libraries for
Egypt and Arab publications
Liberia gia www.nardecchia.it REGIONAL Italian bookseller
Nardecchia
Liberia Linardi & www.linardiyrisso.com/ REGIONAL Large supplier of Latin
Risso english/english.html American books

Librairie Duchemin www.librairie-duchemin.net REGIONAL Distributor of books from

French publishing houses
specializing in legal
materials
Librairie Erasmus www.erasmus.fr REGIONAL Distributor of French and
Swiss-French publications
Librerias Marcial www.marcialpons.es REGIONAL Independent bookseller of
Pons Spain
Libros www.libroscentro REGIONAL Distributor of books from
Centroamericanos americanos.com Central America
2 38 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Libros Latinos www.libroslatinos.com REGIONAL Distributor of books and
journals from Latin America
and the Caribbean
Maruzen Company, https://yushodo.maruzen REGIONAL Supplier of Japanese books
Ltd. .co.jp/corp/en/services/ and journals
index.html

Mary Martin www.marymartin.com/web/ REGIONAL Distributor of materials from

Booksellers HomeTemplate East, Southeast, and South
Asia, the Middle East, and
the Pacific islands
McBlain Books www.mcblainbooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of books from
Africa, Asia, and the Middle
East
Mezhdunarodnaya www.mkniga.ru/books/eng/ REGIONAL Books from Russia
Kniga index.shtml

MIPP International, www.mippbooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of books from

Inc. Russia, Central Asia, Baltic
states, Mongolia, Ukraine,
Belarus, and Moldova
Native Book Centre www.nativebooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of Native North
American books
New Zealand Export www.nzeb.co.nz REGIONAL Supplier of books and other
Books materials from New Zealand
Oriental Research www.orpgroup.com REGIONAL Distributor of Russian and
Partners Eastern European books
Overlooked Books http://texasover REGIONAL Distributor of Texas regional
lookedbooks.com and Hispanic materials

Pan Asian www.panap.com REGIONAL Publisher of Japanese,

Publications Chinese, Korean, and
Vietnamese materials
Polart www.polandbymail.com REGIONAL Wholesaler of books, CDs,
art, and other items from or
about Poland
Puvill Libros S.A. www.puvill.com REGIONAL Supplies Spanish, Mexican,
Portuguese, and Andorran
books
Richard C. Ramer www.livroraro.com REGIONAL Rare books and manuscripts
Old and Rare Books on Spain, Portugal, Latin
America, Brazil, Africa, and
Asia
South Asia Book www.southasiabooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of books from
Distributors India
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 239

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Star Publications http://starpublic.com REGIONAL Distributor of books from
India
Sunbelt http://sunbeltpublications REGIONAL Distributor of natural history
Publications .com/ and guide books from the
southwestern United States
Susan Bach www.sbachbooks.com.br REGIONAL Distributor of books from
Brazil
Tuttle Publishing www.tuttlepublishing.com REGIONAL Publisher that focuses on
bridging Japan and the
United States
U.P.I.E. www.upie.it/index-eng.html REGIONAL Distributor of Italian and
foreign books and serials
Vedams Books www.vedamsbooks.com REGIONAL Distributor of books from
International India
Washington Book http://washin2.fatcow.com REGIONAL Distributor of books about
Distributors the mid-Atlantic United
States, Washington DC, and
surrounding area

White Lotus Press, www.whitelotuspress.com REGIONAL Distributor of books

Ltd. published in Thailand
Beacon Book www.beaconbooks.net RELIGION Christian book distributor
Service
Christian Book www.christianbook.com RELIGION Supplier of Christian
Distributor materials
Dove Booksellers www.dovebooksellers.com RELIGION Distributor of books on
religion and history
Zondervan https://www.zondervan RELIGION Christian book publisher
.com
AnimEigo https://www.animeigo.com/ SPECIAL Distributor of Anime
INTEREST -
ANIME

Antiquariat im www.lange-springer SPECIAL Antiquarian scientific

INTEREST -
Hufelandhaus -antiquariat.de/ ANTIQUARIAN bookseller of Europe

D.A.P. (Distributed www.artbook.com SPECIAL Distributor of catalogs,

INTEREST - ART
Art Publishers) museum publications, and
other art books
Erasmus Books www.erasmusbooks.nl SPECIAL Comprehensive services for
INTEREST - ART
academic, professional, and
research libraries worldwide
Khazana: India Arts www.khazana.com SPECIAL Supplier of art, music, and
INTEREST - ART
Online: Bookshop literature from all over the
world
24 0 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Michael Shamansky, https://www.artbooks.com/ SPECIAL Supplier of art books from
INTEREST - ART
Bookseller, Inc. wc/home.abks or about Italy, as well as
European and American
publishers
Phaidon www.phaidon.com SPECIAL Publisher of books on visual
INTEREST - ART
arts
Worldwide Books www.worldwide-artbooks SPECIAL Exhibition catalogs and art
INTEREST - ART
.com books

Teldan Information http://teldan.com SPECIAL Subscription service for

INTEREST -
Systems Ltd. BUSINESS AND business, science, and
SCIENCE technical journals
Last Gasp https://www.lastgasp.com SPECIAL Distributor of comic books
INTEREST -
COMIC BOOKS

Homestead Book www.homesteadbook.com SPECIAL Distributor of a large

INTEREST -
Co. COUNTER- selection of counterculture
CULTURE books
Chronicle Books www.chroniclebooks.com SPECIAL Publisher of unique design
INTEREST -
ECLECTIC books, art books, literary
fiction, and pop culture
Milkweed Editions www.milkweed.org SPECIAL Independent nonprofit
INTEREST -
ECLECTIC literary publisher

Bernan Associates https://rowman.com/Page/ SPECIAL Distributor of government

INTEREST -
(Rowman & Bernan GOVERNMENT publications
Littlefield)

Diamond Book www.diamondbook SPECIAL Distributor of graphic novels

INTEREST -
Distributors distributors.com GRAPHIC
NOVELS

American https://www.appi.org SPECIAL Publisher of books and other

INTEREST -
Psychiatric HEALTH materials on psychiatry and
Publishing, Inc. other mental and behavioral
health topics
Routledge https://www.routledge.com SPECIAL Publisher of scholarly books
INTEREST -
HUMANITIES and other materials for
AND SOCIAL the humanities and social
SCIENCES
sciences
University of www.press.umich.edu SPECIAL Publisher of scholarly books
INTEREST -
Michigan Press HUMANITIES in the humanities and social
AND SOCIAL sciences
SCIENCES

Harry N. Abrams, www.abramsbooks.com SPECIAL Publisher of illustrated books

INTEREST -
Inc. ILLUSTRATED
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 241

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Thorndike Press - www.gale.com/thorndike/ SPECIAL Distributor of large-print
INTEREST -
The Gale Group -/N-5p LARGE PRINT books for the educational
community
Gaunt, Inc. www.gaunt.com SPECIAL Distributor of non-American
INTEREST - LAW
English legal publications
Hammicks https://www.hammicks SPECIAL Distributor of legal materials
INTEREST - LAW
Bookshops legal.com/live/ for the United Kingdom

Martinus Nijhoff www.brill.com/about/ SPECIAL Publisher of books on public

INTEREST - LAW
Publishers (Brill) imprints/brill-nijhoff international law, human
rights, humanitarian law, and
international relations
William S. Hein & www.wshein.com SPECIAL Publisher of legal materials
INTEREST - LAW
Co., Inc.
Small Press www.spdbooks.org SPECIAL Distributor of poetry, fiction,
INTEREST -
Distribution LITERARY ARTS and literary nonfiction

Rand McNally http://store.randmcnally SPECIAL Publisher of mapping books

INTEREST -
.com MAPS and materials

Wide World of Maps https://maps4u.com/ SPECIAL Wholesaler of maps focusing

INTEREST -
and More MAPS on Arizona and surrounding
areas
Karger Medical www.karger.com SPECIAL Distributor of biomedical
INTEREST -
and Scientific MEDICAL serials and books
Publishers
Login Brothers www.lb.ca SPECIAL Canadian book distributor
INTEREST -
MEDICAL of heath science, scientific,
technical, trade, and
electronic books
Matthews Book www.matthewsbooks.com SPECIAL Distributor of medical
INTEREST -
Company MEDICAL information

Ovid www.ovid.com SPECIAL Book, journal, and database

INTEREST -
MEDICAL supplier of health care
information
Rittenhouse Book https://www.rittenhouse SPECIAL Distributor of health care
INTEREST -
Distributors, Inc. .com MEDICAL and medical information

Majors Scientific www.majors.com SPECIAL Distributors of medical,

INTEREST -
Books MEDICAL, scientific, business, and law
SCIENTIFIC, books
BUSINESS, LAW

One World Book https://oneworld SPECIAL Distributor of black and

INTEREST -
Company -publications.com MULTICULTURAL multicultural materials in the
United Kingdom
242 / APPE N DI X

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

J.W. Pepper & Son, www.jwpepper.com/ SPECIAL Blanket order distributor of
INTEREST -
Inc. sheet-music/welcome.jsp MUSIC recently published sheet
music
Theodore Front www.tfront.com SPECIAL Distributor of sheet music
INTEREST -
Musical Literature, MUSIC and music books
Ltd
GEM Guides Book www.gemguidesbooks.com SPECIAL Publisher and distributor of
INTEREST -
Co. NATURAL books on gems and related
HISTORY subjects
Alpenbooks (Kayak https://kayakproshop.com/ SPECIAL Distributor of outdoor books
INTEREST -
Pro Shop) collections/alpen-books OUTDOORS
-press

Cornell Lab of www.birds.cornell.edu/ SPECIAL Leader in the study and

INTEREST -
Orinthology Page.aspx?pid=1478 OUTDOORS conservation of birds

Mountain Press http://mountain-press.com SPECIAL Book publisher for natural

INTEREST -
Publishing OUTDOORS history, earth science, and
Company, Inc. ecology
New Harbinger www.newharbinger.com SPECIAL Publisher of psychology and
INTEREST -
Publications, Inc. PSYCHOLOGY self-help books
AND SELF-HELP

ACS Publications http://pubs.acs.org SPECIAL Publisher of journals and

INTEREST -
SCIENCES books in the chemical and
related sciences
CRC Press www.crcpress.com SPECIAL Publisher of books in the
INTEREST -
SCIENCES sciences

John Wiley & Sons www.wiley.com/WileyCDA SPECIAL Publisher of nonfiction,

INTEREST -
SCIENCES science, and textbooks

Natural History www.nhbs.com SPECIAL Distributor of books for the

INTEREST -
Book Service SCIENCES sciences and natural history
(NHBS)
Springer US www.springer-sbm.com SPECIAL Publisher of science-related
INTEREST -
SCIENCES books and e-books

Forest Books www.forestbooks.com SPECIAL Supplier of books and

INTEREST - SIGN
LANGUAGE, other materials about sign
DEAFNESS language and deafness
issues
Quality Books www.quality-books.com SPECIAL Premier supplier of small
INTEREST -
SMALL PRESS press titles and special
BOOKS interest nonprint resources
to the library community
 LIST OF LI B R AR Y V E N DOR S: P U B LISH E R S, W H O LE S ALE R S, AN D V E N DO R S / 24 3

VENDOR WEBSITE TYPE ADDITIONAL INFO

Azuregreen www.azuregreen.net SPECIAL Supplier of metaphysical,
INTEREST -
Distribution SPIRITUAL witchcraft, pagan, and other
spiritual books and materials
Devorss & Co. http://devorss.com SPECIAL Distributor of metaphysical
INTEREST -
SPIRITUAL and spiritual books

New Leaf www.newleaf-dist.com SPECIAL Distributor of books and

INTEREST -
Distributing Co. SPIRITUAL materials for the body, mind,
and spirit.
Samuel Weiser (Red http://redwheelweiser.com SPECIAL Distributor of spiritual books
INTEREST -
Wheel) SPIRITUAL on metaphysics, magic,
astrology, etc.

Shambhala www.shambhala.com SPECIAL Supplier of spiritual books

INTEREST -
Publications SPIRITUAL including Buddhism, yoga,
philosophy, and nature

Timeless Books www.timeless.org SPECIAL Publisher of books and

INTEREST -
SPIRITUAL media about yoga

InFocus Research www.infocus-research.com SPECIAL Supplier of books, college

INTEREST -
Services TECHNICAL textbooks, and technical
DOCUMENTS documents

Tecni Ciencia Libros www.tecniciencia.com SPECIAL Importer of technology

INTEREST -
TECHNOLOGY books from the United
States, Spain, Argentina, and
Mexico for Venezuelans

Central News http://cna-india.com SUBSCRIPTION Subscription service for

SERVICES
Agency journals and magazines to
India from the United States
and United Kingdom

Swets www.swets.com SUBSCRIPTION Large subscription services

SERVICES
company
W.T. Cox www.wtcox.com SUBSCRIPTION Subscription service to
SERVICES
Subscriptions, Inc. libraries
Barrons Educational www.barronseduc.com TEST Publisher of test preparation
PREPARATION
Series, Inc. manuals and school
directories
Kaplan Publishing http://kaplan-publishing TEST Publisher of test preparation
PREPARATION
.kaplan.co.uk/pages/ manuals
default.aspx
Power to Pass http://ppi2pass.com TEST Publisher of test preparation
PREPARATION
materials
 I N DE X

A formats, 88–89
AASL (American Association of School gifts/exchanges, 84–88
Librarians), 23 methods of acquiring materials, 76–77
ABC-CLIO, 232, 234 nature of library resources, 74–75
Abdo Group, 226 out-of-print purchasing, 83–84
AbeBooks, 65, 84 overview of, 73
Abracadabra Booksearch International, 230 principal goal of, 73–74
academic library sources of library materials, 77–83
acquisitions, methods of, 76 statement of principles for acquisitions
analysis of collection by format, 42 librarians, 160
assessment of collection, 106 summary about, 89
budgeting/funding in collection development vocabulary of, 100–102
policy, 36 AcqWeb Directory, 65
censorship in, 166–167 ACS Publications, 242
citation analysis for evaluation of collection, activity
109–110 for assessment/evaluation of collection, 118
formula budget and, 96 for budgeting/fiscal management, 102–103
future of collection development/management, for collection development policy, 47
190–191 for ethics/intellectual freedom, 171
marketing of collection, 21–22 for legal issues in collection development, 154
out-of-print purchasing, 83 marketing campaign, 24
responsibility for collection development, 35 for preservation, 184–185
selection process of, 50 for selection process, 70
selection teams in, 57 user needs assessment scenarios, 23–24
special collections, 46 ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), 151–154
target audience, identification of, 36 Adler’s Foreign Books, 233
weeding, public reaction to, 116–117 Advanced Book Exchange (website), 65
weeding, what to weed, 115–116 African Books Collective Ltd., 235
access age, 150–151
cooperative collection development and, 121 Agee, Ann, 111
DRM system controls, 144 aggregator, 181
institutional repositories for, 183 A.I. Weinberg Book Agency, 235
to library materials, budget and, 94 Akademibokhan-deln Direkt, 235
as selection criteria for electronic resources, Akateeminen Kirjakauppa, 235
55–56 ALA
selection of Internet resources and, 58–59 See American Library Association
accountability, 94–95 ALCTS
accounting, 100–102 See Association for Library Collections and
acid-free paper, 174, 175 Technical Services
acquisition, xiv Alesi, Stacy, 65
acquisitions Alexander Street, 223
ALCTS Statement on Principles and Standards Alibris, 65, 234
of Acquisitions Practice, 163 All About Romance (website), 59
discussion questions, 89–90 All Our Worlds (database), 59

/ 24 5 /
24 6 / INDE X

Alpenbooks (Kayak Pro Shop), 242 archiving

alternative literature, 151 of electronic resource, responsibility for,
alternative press reviews, 170 181–182
Amazon.com of Internet resources, 59
as general review source, 66 Arizona State Library, Archives & Public Records
Goodreads owned by, 62 division, 18
out-of-print materials on, 84 ASCII text, 180
as selection tool, 65 Ashman, Allen B., 110
as source for library materials, 78–79 ASIS&T
unique titles and, 5 See American Society for Information Science
American Association of Publishers, 2–3 & Technology
American Association of School Librarians (AASL), Askews & Holts Library Service, 231
23 assessment, of donations, 86
American Book Publishing Record (ABPR) assessment/evaluation of collection
(R. R. Bowker), 59 activity for, 118
American Library Association (ALA) choice of areas to evaluate, 106–107
Booklist, 60 deselection or weeding, 111–117
censorship and, 165 discussion questions for, 117–118
Choice, 61 evaluation methods, 108–111
Code of Ethics of the American Library getting started with evaluation, 107–108
Association, 164 goal of, 106
Intellectual Freedom Manual, 170 overview of, 105–106
Library Bill of Rights, 44, 166 summary about, 117
Midwinter conference, 2010, 188 Association for Library Collections and Technical
American Overseas Book Co., 230 Services (ALCTS)
American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc., 240 Guidelines for ALCTS Members to Supplement
American Reference Books Annual (ARBAonline), 59 the ALA Code of Ethics, 1994, 165
American Society for Information Science & Statement on Principles and Standards of
Technology (ASIS&T) Acquisitions Practice, 160, 163
Digital Library, 68–69 Association of College & Research Libraries, 108
Professional Guidelines of, 160, 161–162 Association of Research Libraries, 140, 177
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), The Astonishing Adventures of Fanboy and Goth Girl
151–154 (Lyga), 168
Anderson, Chris ATC Books International, Inc., 235
on filtering, 53 attorney, 140
on Long Tail, 5–6 attribution license, 133
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, 80 audience
Andrews McMeel Publishing, LLC, 234 of collection development policy, 29
AnimEigo, 239 selection criteria about, 54
Annenberg/CPB, 223 target audience, identification of, 36
antiquarian/out-of-print books and serials, audio materials, 153–154
65–66 audiobooks.com, 223
Antiquariat im Hufelandhaus, 239 author
appeal, weeding for, 113 copyright protections, 130–133
appendix, 223–243 Creative Commons licenses, 133–134
appraisal, of gifts, 149 predatory journals and, 69
approval plans, 79 self-publishing, 3–5
See also acquisitions authoritative reputation, 55
archival preservation, 132 authoritative resource, 55–56
archives authorization, 145
of digital information, 179–181 Aux Amateurs de Livres, 235
of electronic serials, 80 availability, 55
 I N DE X / 247

AWE Learning, 223 Bonk, Wallace John, 105

Azuregreen Distribution, 243 book challenge, 168
Book Farm, 231
Book House, 231
B Book Review Digest (H. W. Wilson), 60
background statement, 34–35 Book Review Index (BRI) (Thomson Gale), 60
backups, 177 book reviews
Bagchee Associates, 235 See reviews
Baker, Nicholson, 176 Bookazine Co., 231
Baker, Whitney, 175 bookbinding, 174
Baker and Taylor (library vendor), 78, 231 BookBitch.com, 65
Balogh International, Inc., 235 Bookfever.com, 234
Banks, Paul N., 176 BookFinder.com, 66
Barnes & Noble bookkeeping terminology, 93, 100–102
as general review source, 67 Booklist (American Library Association), 60, 67
as source for library materials, 78–79 books
unique titles, sales of, 5 antiquarian/out-of-print books/serials, 65–66
Barr, Pelham, 173 assessment of gifts, 86
Barrons Educational Series, Inc., 243 current, for acquiring/selecting materials,
Bass, Frank, 167 59–65
Beacon Book Service, 239 preservation of, 173, 174–176
Bearport Publishing, 226 weeding, 115–116
behavior, 160 See also e-books
Beltway, Liane, 116 Books in Print (R. R. Bowker), 60–61
Bernan Associates (Rowman & Littlefield), 240 Books on Tape, 223
Bertrams Library Services, 231 booksellers, 5–7
best practices, for licensing, 140–141 Booksource, 227
Better World Books, 231 bookstores
Beyda & Associates, 223 marketing by, 19–20
Biblarz, Dora, 13 as source for library materials, 79
Biblia Impex, 235 BookWire, 67
Biblio, Inc., 65 “born-digital” content, 53, 179
BiblioBoard, 4 Bosch, Stephen, 13
Bibliofind, 66 Bossaller, Jenny S., 191
bibliography Bost, Wendi, 20–21
for checklist method of evaluation, 108–109 Bostwick, Arthur, 165
citation analysis for evaluation of collection, Bound to Stay Bound, 225
109–110 Bowers, Jennifer, 162
from library vendor databases, 78 Bowker Annual
BiblioLabs, 4 on new titles published in 2005, 6
Black, Nancy E., 21, 22 on self-publishing, 3
Blackwell’s Book Services, 231 Boy Toy (Lyga), 168
blanket orders, 79 Braille, 153–154
blogs Branin, Joseph J., 163, 165
as general review sources online, 67 Brockhaus/German Books, 235
impact on collection development/ Brown, Karen, 177
management, 7 Brown, Linda A., 53
Reading Reality, 63–64 Buchhaus Antiquariat Stern-Verlag, 231
Boggs, Shari, 190 Buchversand Krieger, 235
Bohannon, John, 69 budget
Boise State University Albertsons Library, 189 acquisitions methods and, 76–77
Bolton, Brooke A., 107 approval plans and, 76
24 8 / INDE X

budget (cont.) Chadwell, Faye, 117

in collection development policy, 36 challenge form, 45
cost of electronic resources and, 2 challenges, 123–124
priorities, setting, 97–98 change, 1–2
request, 98, 100 Charlesbridge Publishing, 227
types of budgets, 95–96 checklist method, 108–109
typical public library materials budget, 99 Chelsea House, 227
budgeting/fiscal management Cheng & Tsui Company, 236
accountability, 94–95 Child Graphics Company, 226
activity for, 102–103 Children’s Plus, Inc., 226
bookkeeping terminology, 100–102 Child’s World, 227
budget priorities, setting, 97–98 China, restrictions on web content in, 10
budget scenarios, 96–97 China Books, 236
consortium purchases, 100 Choice (American Library Association), 61
fiscal year, 95 Christian Book Distributor, 239
information for library materials budget Chronicle Books, 240
request, 98, 100 circulation
overview of, 93–94 statistics, evaluation of collection with, 109
types of budgets, 95–96 as weeding criteria, 115
typical public library materials budget, 99 weeding to stimulate, 112
Bullfrog Films, 223 citation analysis, 109–110
Burgett, James, 122 classification number
Burkhardt, Andy, 21 analysis of subject fields, 37–39
Bush, George H. W., 152 Conspectus-like example for library using LOC
Bushing, Mary C., 160 classification, 40
Byers, Fred R., 178 Conspectus-like example using Dewey Decimal
System, 39
clients, 145
C CLOSED LOCKSS (CLOCKSS), 180
Cambridge Educational, 223 collaboration, 7
Cambridge University Press See also cooperative collection development
copyright infringement lawsuit, 134–135 collection
link for/information about, 227 maintenance/weeding, in collection
Caminita, Christina, 76–77 development policy, 44
Capstone, 227 marketing to users, 19–25
Carlton, Debbie Yumiko, 150, 151 weeding, 111–117
Carpenter, D., 109 collection development
Carter, Mary Duncan, 105 definition of, xiv
Casalini Libri, 235 legal issues of, 129
case study, 126 responsibility for, 35
Casey, Michael E., 6 See also acquisitions
Cassell, Kay Ann, 188 Collection Development and Management for 21st
CCD Century Library Collections (Gregory)
See cooperative collection development approach of, xiii
CDs, preservation of, 178 organization of book, xiv–xv
censorship collection development policy
definition of, 163 activities, 48
discussion questions for, 171 analysis of collection by format, 42, 44
intellectual freedom and, 163, 165 analysis of subject fields, 37–39
self-censorship, 167–170 background statement, 34–35
types of libraries/efforts to censor, 166–167 budgeting/funding, 36
Central News Agency, 243 challenge form, sample, 45
 I N DE X / 24 9

collection maintenance/weeding, 44 community

collection mapping, 39, 43 community analysis, 13–14
discussion questions, 48 diversity issues in collection development,
gift policy/procedures, 44, 46 150–151
intellectual freedom, 44 marketing collection to, 19–25
mission, goals, objectives statements, 35–36 needs, selection criteria and, 54
overview of, 29–30 needs assessment scenarios, 23–24
phase levels, 42 user needs assessment, source of data
purpose of, 31–33 collection, 16–17
replacements, 46 user needs assessment, who/what will be
responsibility for collection development/ studied, 14–16
management, 35 weeding, displeasure about, 113–114
revisions, 47 weeding, public reaction to, 116–117
selection aids, 44 weeding for community needs/interests, 113
selection criteria, 37 See also users
selection process and, 49 community forum, 16
self-censorship and, 169 community organizations, 15–16
signature page, 33 complaints, 44
special collections, 46 computer resources, 56–57
statement of purpose, 34 Conklin, Jamie, 20–21
subject descriptions of senior high school conservation, of physical objects, 174–176
collection, 41 consortia, library
support levels, 40 acquisitions process with, 82–83
table of contents, 34 benefits/challenges of CCD, 123–124
target audiences, identification of, 36 case study, 125
title page/cover, 33 consortial repositories for preservation, 183
collection development/management, future of consortial/access relationships, 124–125
discussion questions, 191–192 OhioLINK consortium, 125
overview of, 187 overview of, 121–122
summary about, 191 purchases, 100
by type of library, 190–191 Consortium Book Sales and Distribution, 231
views on, 188–190 Continental Book Company, 234
collection development/management, impact of continuous review, evaluation, and weeding
new technologies on (CREW) method, 116
discussion questions, 11 contracts, 137–140
e-books, 2–3 Conway, Paul, 177
globalization, 9–11 cooperation
information commons, open access serials, for archiving of electronic resources, 182–183
open source software, 8–9 cooperative arrangements for preservation, 184
“long tail,” 5–7 cooperative collection development (CCD)
overview, 1–2 benefits/challenges of, 123–124
self-publishing, 3–5 case study, 126
Web 2.0/social networking, 7–8 consortial/access relationships, 124–125
collection management, xiii definition of, 122–123
Collection Management (journal), 117 discussion questions, 126
collection mapping, 39, 43 interlibrary loan, 125
Columbia University Libraries, 140–141 library consortia, 121–122
Columbia University Press, 227 overview of, 121
Committee on Institutional Cooperation, 182 summary about, 125
communication copies
about weeding, 111 copyright law on, 131, 132–133
records, preservation of, 178 fair use and, 134–135
25 0 / INDE X

copies (cont.) cultural and recreational organizations, 15

license negotiation and, 138 culture, 150–151
purchasing vs. licensing and, 136 currency
copyright as selection criteria, 55
Creative Commons licenses, 133–134 as weeding criteria, 115
DRM systems and, 141–147 Current Cites, 66
fair use, 134–135 customer-centered acquisition, 76–77
gifts and, 87–88 Cuyahoga County Library, 4
globalization and, 10–11
information commons and, 8–9
laws surrounding, 129 D
license negotiation, 137–140 D.A.P. (Distributed Art Publishers), 239
Marrakesh Treaty and, 152 dark archives, 180
open access journals and, 68 data
overview of, 130–133 collection for user needs assessment, 14–18
purchasing vs. licensing, 135–137 gathering for evaluation of collection,
Copyright Act, 136 107–108
Copyright Law of 1976, 134 from user needs assessment, interpretation
Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, 131 of, 18
Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 242 databases
costs licenses for web-accessed, 137
of journal subscriptions, 82 onsite databases, 75
pricing samples for electronic serials, 81 transaction log analysis, 110
in selection criteria for electronic resources, 56 Davidson Titles, Inc., 227
Courtney, Nancy, 8 debits, 102
Cox, J. Wendell, 162 decision-making
Cox, Kiersten, 189 about collection development, 52–53
Crabtree Publishing Co., 226 by selection team, 57
CRC Press, 242 Delaney Educational Enterprises, 227
Creative Commons licenses demographic data, 15
Creative Commons Attribution License, 68 demonstrations, of electronic resources, 67–68
overview of, 133–134 deselection
philosophy behind, 8–9 judgment for, 105
Creative Company, 226 weeding vs., 105–106
creator, 130–133 See also weeding
See also author deterioration, of books, 174
credibility, 113 Devorss & Co., 243
credits, 102 Dewey Decimal System, 39
CREW (continuous review, evaluation, and Diamond Book Distributors, 240
weeding) method, 116 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), 132
Crimson Multimedia Distribution, Inc., 223 digital objects, 173–174, 177–179
criteria See also electronic resources
selection criteria, 53–57 digital rights management (DRM) systems
selection criteria in collection development characteristics of, 143–145
policy, 37 for copyright protections, 131
for weeding, 114, 115–116 DMCA protections for, 132
Criticas Spanish Language Authors and Book fair use, 134–135
Reviews, 61 in libraries, 145–147
Crosetto, Alice overview of, 141–143
on library consortia, 122 process of, 142
on OhioLINK consortium, 125 purchasing vs. licensing, 135–137
Crowe, Katherine, 162 terminology, 145
 I N DE X / 251

digitization Double Fold (Baker), 176

preservation of digitized information, 179–181 double-entry accounting, 101–102
as preservation strategy, 177–179 Dove Booksellers, 239
dim archives Dover Publications, 231
description of, 180 Downey, Jennifer, 169
for preservation of print materials, 184 DRM systems
director, 85 See digital rights management (DRM) systems
Directory of Open Access Journals, 68 DSpace, 183
disability Dube, Liz, 175
ADA issues in collection development, 151–154 Duke University Press, 227
legal issues in collection development, 147–150 duplicate information
Marrakesh Treaty, 152 reduction of with CCD, 123
disaster plans, 176–177 selection criteria for electronic resources, 56
Discovery Education, 224 selection of Internet resources and, 58
discussion questions DVDs, preservation of, 178
for acquisitions, 89–90
for assessment/evaluation of collection, 117–118
for collection development policy, 47 E
for cooperative collection development, 126 East View Information Services, 236
for ethics/intellectual freedom, 171 Eastern Book Company, 231
for future of collection development/ Eastwind Books of Berkeley, 236
management, 191–192 “EBLIDA Position Papers and Statements:
for legal issues in collection development, 155 Intellectual Property Rights” (EBLIDA), 141
for preservation, 185 Ebook Review Central (Reading Reality), 63–64
for selection process, 70 e-books
for selection sources/processes, 70 impact on collection development/
for technology’s impact on collection management, 2–3
development/management, 11 popularity of, 189
for user needs assessment/marketing, 25 self-publishing, 3–5
Disher, Wayne EBSCO, 7
for assessment/evaluation, 106 economic information, 15
for future of library collections, 190 Edelweiss, 61
distance education, 133 Edelweiss BP, 236
Distribooks, 227 Edelweissplus, 61
diversity issues, 129, 150–151 educational theory, 50–51
D.K. Agencies Ltd., 236 e-journals, 189
DK Publishing, 234 electronic document delivery, 75
DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), 132 “Electronic Resource Coordinator Draft License
donations Agreement Checklist” (Columbia University
gift policy/procedures in collection Libraries), 140–141
development policy, 44, 46 electronic resources
legal aspects of handling, 129–130 access to library materials, 94
legal/tax issues of, 147–150 acquisitions process and, 73
See also gifts archiving, responsibility for, 181–182
donors citation analysis for evaluation of collection,
appraisal of value of gifts, 87 110
copyright issues of gifts, 87–88 collection development policy and, 30, 32–33
gift to library, dealing with, 84–85 consortium purchases of, 100
gifts with strings attached, 86–87 copyright issues with, 131
provenance of donations, 148 decision-making about, 52–53
relationships with, 86 disaster plan for, 177
tax deductions for donations, 148–150 DRM systems and, 141–147
252 / INDE X

electronic resources (cont.) intellectual freedom/censorship, 163, 165–167

e-books, 2–3 professional ethics, definition of, 159
evaluation of, 107–108 ethnicity, 150–151
fair use and, 134–135 European Bureau of Library, Information and
format of acquisitions, 88–89 Documentation Associations, 141
future of collection development/management, evaluation
187–192 assessment vs., 106
globalization and, 9–11 getting started with, 107–108
Internet resources, selection differences for, methods of, 108–111
58–59 weeding vs., 105–106
in library collection, need for, 1–2 See also assessment/evaluation of collection
license negotiation for, 137–140 Evans, G. Edward, 14, 190
licensing best practices, 140–141 Everbind, 225
Long Tail and, 5–7 exceptions, 132
nature of library resources, 74–75 exchange programs, 88
other selection means, 67–68
preservation of, 173–174, 177–181, 184
pricing samples for electronic serials, 81 F
selection bases and, 50 Facts on File, 227
selection criteria for, 55–57 faculty, 111
selection differences for Internet resources, Fagan, Jody Condit, 22
58–59 fair use
selection teams for, 57–58 of copyrighted materials, 132
selection tools for, 66 DRM systems and, 143, 146
self-publishing, 3–5 overview of, 134–135
Elsevier, 64 purchasing vs. licensing and, 136
emergency response plan, 176–177 Farmington Plan, 122
Emery-Pratt Company, 231 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), 167, 168
emotions, 111, 116–117 Film Ideas, Inc., 224
Empey, Heather, 21, 22 Films for the Humanities and Sciences, 224
encryption, 145 filtering, 53
encumbrances, 100, 102 firm orders, 76
Encyclopedia of Business and Finance (Gale First Monday (open access journal), 68
Cengage), 19 first sale doctrine, 131, 136
Ennis, M., 3 FirstSearch Electronic Collections Online, OCLC,
Enslow Publishers, 227 145–146, 181
entries, accounting, 102 fiscal management
Erasmus Books, 239 See budgeting/fiscal management
e-research collections, 188 fiscal year, 95
e-reserves, 134–135 501(c)(3) letter, 149
eReviews, 66 Florence, Italy, 175
Espresso Book Machine, 83 Florida, CCD activity in, 124
ethics Florida’s Orange County Public Library System,
ALCTS Statement on Principles and Standards 20–21
of Acquisitions Practice, 163 focus groups, 16
ASIS&T Professional Guidelines, 161–162 folksonomy, 8
Code of Ethics of the American Library Follett’s TITLEWAVE, 108
Association, 164 Forest Books, 242
codes of professional ethics, 160–162 format
discussion questions for, 171 acquisitions, considerations for, 88–89
Guidelines for ALCTS Members to Supplement analysis of collection by format, 42, 44
the ALA Code of Ethics, 1994, 165 evaluation of collection and, 107
 I N DE X / 25 3

in future of library collection development, 190 grammatical correctness, 55

preservation of digitized information and, Grant and Cutler Ltd., 234
179–180 grants, 9
as selection criteria, 54–55, 56 The Grapes of Wrath (Steinbeck), 165
formula budget, 96 Greenhaven (The Gale Group), 228
Franklin Watts, 227 Greg Escue & Associates, 228
Friedman, Thomas L., 10 Gregory, Vicki L.
Fry, Amy, 21 on e-books, 189
Fundamentals of Collection Development and on needs assessment, 14
Management (Johnson), 187 on selection criteria for electronic resources,
funding, 36 55–57
Futas, Elizabeth, 35 Guidance Associates, 224
Gumdrop Books, 228

G
Galda and Leuchter, 236 H
Gale Group, 227 H. W. Wilson, 60
Gardner, Richard K., 29–30 Haar, John, 122
Gardner’s Book Service, 228 Haines, Helen E., 50–51, 54
Gareth Stevens Publishing, 228 Hammicks Bookshops, 241
Garrett Educational Corp, 228 Handman, Gary P., 153
Gaunt, Inc., 241 Harcourt School Publishers, 228
GEM Guides Book Co., 242 “hard-sell” technique, 20
gender, 150–151 hardware
geographic data, 14–15 format challenges of preservation, 179
Georgia State University Library, 134–135 selection criteria for electronic resources and,
Germany, web restrictions in, 10 56
Getz, M., 109 Harrassowitz, 228
gifts Harris, Marlene, 63–64
assessment of, 86 Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 240
copyright issues, 87–88 Harvard University Press, 228
as double-edged sword, 84–85 Hauptman, Robert, 163
exchange programs, 88 Herschaft, Randy, 167
legal issues involving, 87, 129–130 Hiaasen, Carl, 20–21
legal/tax issues of, 147–150 historical data, 14
philosophy for accepting, 85 Historical Fiction Review (magazine), 62
policy/procedures for, 44, 46 Historical Novel Society, 62
responsibility for handling, 85–86 Hoffert, Barbara, 67
with strings attached, 86–87 Hoffmann, Frank W.
taxes, appraisals of gifts, 87 on collection development policy
“give ‘em what they want” theory, 51–52 elements, 34
globalization, 9–11 Library Collection Development Policies:
goal Academic, Public, and Special Libraries, 33
of acquisitions, 73–74 on mission, goals, and objectives statement, 35
of assessment/evaluation of collection, 106 Holt McDougal, 228
in collection development policy, 29, 30 Homestead Book Co., 240
goals statement, 35–36 Horn Book Guide (Horn Book, Inc.), 62
Goodreads (website), 62 Horn Book, Inc., 62
Google Books Library Project, 182 Horrigan, J., 3
government documents, 44 Houtschild International Booksellers, 236
government publications, 82 Howard Karno Books, 234
GPN (Reading Rainbow Videos), 224 Human Relations Media, 224
25 4 / INDE X

humidity, 174–175 International Coalition of Library Consortia

Hustin, Kristin, 168 (ICLC), 181
International Specialized Book Services (ISBS),
236
I Internet
Iberbook Sanchez Cuesta, S.A., 236 reviews, self-censorship and, 170
ICLC (International Coalition of Library search engines, 53
Consortia), 181 selection differences for Internet resources,
ILL 58–59
See interlibrary loan See also Web
IMLS (Institute for Museum and Library Internet Bookshop UK, Ltd., 236
Services), 121 Internet resources
In the Night Kitchen (Sendak), 167 evaluation, getting started with, 107–108
Independent Publishers Group, 232 general review sources online, 66–67
India Books Center, 236 selection differences for, 58–59
indigenous people, artifacts of, 162 invoice, 100–101
InFocus Research Services, 243 Iranbooks, Inc., 236
information IRS (Internal Revenue Service), 149
fluency, 189 ISBS (International Specialized Book Services),
gathering for evaluation of collection, 107–108 236
information commons, 8–9 Islander Group, 236
Ingram Content Group, 232
Ingressus, 232
“in-kind” gifts, 149–150 J
Institute for Museum and Library Services James Bennett Pty Ltd., 236
(IMLS), 121 Jean Touzot Librairie Internationale, 237
institutional repositories Jewett, Charles Coffin, 51, 108
for access/preservation, 183 John Wiley & Sons, 242
open source software, 9 Johnson, Liz, 53
for preservation of digital information, 184 Johnson, Peggy
intellectual freedom on collection development policy, 31
censorship, 63, 165–167 on ethics, 160
in collection development policy, 44 on future of collection development/
discussion questions for, 171 management, 187
professional ethics and, 159 on repair of books, 174
sample challenge form, 45 Jones, Barbara M., 166–167
self-censorship, 167–170 journals
Intellectual Freedom Manual (ALA), 170 acquisitions issues, 79–80
intellectual property JSTOR, 80
globalization and, 10–11 licenses for web-accessed, 137
information commons, open access serials, open access journals, 68–69
open source software, 8–9 predatory, 69
protection of, 130 pricing samples for electronic serials, 81
interlibrary loan (ILL) SPARC, 80, 82
CCD programs and, 125 See also serials
evaluation of collection with statistics JSTOR
on, 109 archiving of electronic resources, 181
selection criteria for electronic resources as cooperative arrangement for preservation,
and, 56 182
as traditional hallmark of library profession, overview of, 80
9–10 Junio Library Guild, 228
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 149 J.W. Pepper & Son, Inc., 242
 I N DE X / 25 5

K discussion questions, 155

Kaplan Publishing, 243 diversity issues, 150–151
Karger Medical and Scientific Publishers, 241 donations, 147–150
Kavanagh, Rosemary, 153 of gifts, 87
Keeran, Peggy, 162 overview of, 129–130
Kenny’s Bookshop, 237 user needs assessment and, 15
Kensington Publishing Corp., 232 legal jargon, 139
Kertesz, Christopher, 87 Leila Books, 237
key informants Lerner Publishing, 228
consulting with for needs assessment, 18 Lessig, Lawrence, 8–9
for data for user needs assessment, 16 letters, copyright issues with, 87–88
Khazana: India Arts Online: Bookshop, 239 Lewis, Linda K.
Kinner, Laura, 122, 125 on accepting gifts, 85
Kinokuniya Bookstores of America Co. Ltd., 237 on acquisitions departments, 73
Kirkus Reviews, 62 on exchange programs, 88
K.K. Agencies, 237 on professional ethics, 159, 160
Knowbuddy Resources/Saunders, 228 Liberia gia Nardecchia, 237
Kozel-Gains, Melissa A., 189 Liberia Linardi & Risso, 237
Kubon & Sagner, 237 Librairie Duchemin, 237
Librairie Erasmus, 237
librarians
L ALCTS Statement on Principles and Standards
Landmark Audiobooks, 224 of Acquisitions Practice, 163
Landmark Media, 224 archiving of electronic resources, 181–182
Langenscheidt Publishers, 234 bookkeeping terminology and, 93
language arts budget, accountability for, 94–95
phase levels, 42 Code of Ethics of the American Library
senior high school collection mapping, 43 Association, 164
languages diversity issues in collection development,
collection development policy on selection of 150–151
materials, 42 future of collection development/management,
Criticas Spanish Language Authors and Book 187–192
Reviews, 61 gifts, responsibility for handling, 85–86
LAP (Library Awareness Program), 167, 168 Guidelines for ALCTS Members to Supplement
Larson, Jeannette, 116 the ALA Code of Ethics, 1994, 165
LaRue, James, 4–5 intellectual freedom/censorship, 163, 166–167
Last Gasp, 240 license negotiation by, 137–140
Latin American Book Source, Inc, 237 marketing as part of job, 19
Latin American Book Store, Ltd., 237 predatory journals and, 69
Lavoisier, 237 professional ethics, 159–162
Law, Derek, 188–189 recommendations on electronic resources, 52–53
LEA Book Distributors, 237 selection role of, 50–51
leased materials selection teams, 57–58
methods of acquiring materials, 76 self-censorship, 167–170
nature of, 74 special libraries, marketing of, 22–23
Lectorum Publications, 234 weeding by, 111–116
Lee & Low Books, 226 Libraries Unlimited, 59, 63
legal issues library
activities for, 154 acquisitions, goal of, 73–74
ADA issues in collection development, 151–154 archiving of electronic resources, 181–182
copyright/licensing, 130–141 collection development policy, overview of,
digital rights management, 141–147 29–30
25 6 / INDE X

library (cont.) fair use, 134–135

collection development policy, purpose of, impact of license restrictions on use of
31–33 collection, 75
cooperative collection development, 121–126 laws surrounding, 129
donations, legal/tax issues of, 147–150 license negotiation, 137–140
DRM in, 145–147 purchasing vs., 135–137
electronic resources from other libraries, 68 selection criteria for electronic resources and,
Long Tail and, 5–7 56
marketing of collection, 19–25 tips for successful licensing agreement, 139
needs assessment by, 13–14 “Licensing Digital Information: A Resource for
as source of library materials, 77 Librarians” (Yale University), 141
See also acquisitions “Licensing Electronic Resources: Strategic and
library and information science (LIS), 159–162 Practical Considerations for Signing
Library Awareness Program (LAP), 167, 168 Electronic Information Delivery
Library Bill of Rights (American Library Agreements” (Association of Research
Association) Libraries), 140
adoption of, 165 Licensing Models website, 141
censorship and, 166 licensing phrasing, 145
in collection development policy, 44 Licosa, 232
Library Collection Development Policies: Academic, Lincoln Library Press, 235
Public, and Special Libraries (Hoffmann & line-item budget, 95–96
Wood), 33 LIS (library and information science), 159–162
library consortia Listen and Live Audio, 224
See consortia, library Listening Library, 224
Library Journal Live Oak Media, 224
on e-book usage, 3 LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe), 180
as selection tool, 62, 67 Logan Heights Branch of the San Diego Public
SELF-e initiative, 4 Library, 18
serials information in, 98 Login Brothers, 241
library materials Long Tail
budget request, 98, 100 impact on collection development/
methods of acquiring materials, 76–77 management, 5–7
nature of, 74–75 overview of, 5–7
sources of, 77–83 selection process and, 52–53
Library of Alexandria, 121 The Long Tail (Anderson), 5
Library of Congress classification, 40 lump-sum budget, 96
library staff, 31–32 Lyga, Barry, 168
library vendors Lyrasis, 224
list of major, 78
overview of, 77–79
self-censorship, selection tools and, 170 M
Library Video Company, 224 Mackin Library Media, 228
LibraryReads (website), 62–63 Macmillan, 232
Librerias Marcial Pons, 237 Magazines for Libraries (ProQuest), 63
Libros Centroamericanos, 237 magnetic disc formats, 179
Libros Latinos, 238 magnetic tape, 179
licensing Magrill, Rose Mary, 105
best practices, 140–141 Majors Scientific Books, 241
Creative Commons licenses, 133–134 Manley, Will, 114
DRM systems and, 141–147 manuscripts, copyright issues with, 87–88
ethical guidelines for acquisitions librarians, Marcom Projects, 228
160 Marcovitz, Hal, 167
 I N DE X / 25 7

Marion, Allison McClintic, 19 “Model Standard Licenses for Use by Publishers,

marketing Librarians and Subscription Agents for
of academic library collections, 21–22 Electronic Resources” (Licensing Models
activities, 23–24 website), 141
discussion questions, 25 mold, 86
of library collection, 19–20 Montgomery, David J., 63
marketing campaign activity, 24 Moody, Kim, 169–170
plan, elements of, 20 Morgan Reynolds Publishing, 229
of public library collections, 20–21 Morrisey, Locke J., 87
of school library media centers, 23 Mountain Press Publishing Company, Inc., 242
of special libraries, 22–23 Mumford Library Books, 232
studies, 13–14 MUSTIE acronym, 116
The Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Mystery Ink (website), 63
Published Works for Persons Who are
Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise
Print Disabled, 152 N
Marshall Cavendish Corp., 232 Nacscorp, 229
Marston Book Services, 232 Nardini, Robert F., 76
Martin, Murray S., 93–94 National Archives
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (Brill), 241 documents removed from, 167
Maruzen Company, Ltd., 238 preservation of digital information, 179
Mary Martin Booksellers, 238 National Book Network, 232
Mason Crest Publishers, 228 National Information Center for Educational
mass gathering plans, 79 Media (NICEM), 225
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), 183 National Library Service for the Blind and
Master Communications, 234 Physically Handicapped (NLS), 153–154
Matthews, Brian, 22 Native Book Centre, 238
Matthews Book Company, 241 natural disasters, 176–177
McBlain Books, 238 Natural History Book Service (NHBS), 242
McCook, Kathleen de la Peña, 191 Navrang, Inc., 232
McGraw-Hill Professional, 229 needs assessment
McNaughton plans, 79 assessment of library collection and, 106
Melcher, Daniel, 73–74 overview of, 13–14
mending, 173 See also user needs assessment
Meridian Education Corporation, 225 “NELLCO Decision Criteria Worksheet for
MetaArchive Cooperative, 180 Electronic Acquisitions” (New England Law
metadata, 178 Library Consortium), 141
Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga, 238 Nest Learning, 225
Michael Shamansky, Bookseller, Inc., 240 NetGalley, 63
microfilming, 176 network usage analysis, 110
Micromedia ProQuest, 232 New England Law Library Consortium, 141
Midwest Library Service, 229 New Harbinger Publications, Inc., 242
Midwest Tape, 225 New Leaf Distributing Co., 243
Milkweed Editions, 240 New Zealand Export Books, 238
MIPP International, Inc., 238 NewJour, 66
mission NHBS (Natural History Book Service), 242
of library, censorship and, 169 NICEM (National Information Center for
mission statement in collection development Educational Media), 225
policy, 35–36 niche market, 5
MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), 183 Nikkel, Terry, 116
MIT Press, 229 NLS (National Library Service for the Blind and
mobile communication, 8 Physically Handicapped), 153–154
25 8 / INDE X

no derivative works license, 133–134 Parnassus Book Service, 232

No Shelf Required, 2–3 Partner Publishers Group, 232
noncommercial license, 133 patron-driven acquisition, 76–77
North Korea, 10 patrons
Norwood House Press, 226 See user needs assessment; users
numbers, 113 peering, 7
Peet, Lisa, 89
Penguin Group, 233
O Penguin Random House, Inc., 233
objective statement, 35–36 Penworthy Company, 226
objectives, 35–36 Perfection Learning Corp, 229
OCLC, 181 Perma-Bound Books, 225
Office Central de Documentation (O.C.D.), 225 Permacharts, 235
OhioLINK consortium, 100, 125 Perrault, Anna H., 108
Oliver & Andys, 229 Peter Pal Library Supplier, 233
Oliver Press, 229 Phaidon, 240
Oltmann, S. M., 169 phase levels, 42, 43
100% Educational Video, 223 PHI Learning, 229
One World Book Company, 241 Phillips, Linda L., 122
ONEBOOKAZ, 4–5 Phoenix Learning Group, Inc., 225
online reviews, 53 physical objects, preservation of, 173, 174–176
online services, 137 Pineapple Press, Inc., 229
open access journals, 68–69 plan, marketing, 20
open access movement, 68–69 PloS Biology (open access journal), 68
open access (OA) PloS Computational Biology (open access journal),
benefits of, 9 68
overview of, 2 PloS Genetics (open access journal), 68
selection process and, 68–69 PloS Medicine (open access journal), 68
self-publishing and, 4 podcasts, 7
serials, 8–9 Poland, web restrictions in, 10–11
open house, 22–23 Polart, 238
open source software, 8–9 policy
optical disc formats, 179 for accepting gifts, 85, 150
oral agreements, 139 self-censorship and, 169
Oransky, Ivan, 69 See also collection development policy
Oriental Research Partners, 238 political information, 15
out-of-print materials, 83–84 Postscript Books, 233
outreach, 21 Potter, Ned, 19, 20
Overlooked Books, 238 Powell’s Books, 66, 233
Ovid, 241 Power to Pass, 243
ownership predatory journals, 69
nature of owned materials, 74 preservation
on nontraditional materials, 94 activity for, 184–185
provenance of donations, 148 archiving of electronic resource, responsibility
purchasing vs. licensing, 135–137 for, 181–182
See also intellectual property of books/other physical objects, 174–176
Oxford University Press, 229 of digital objects, 177–179
of digitized information, 179–181
disaster plans, 176–177
P discussion questions, 185
Pan Asian Publications, 238 of Internet resources, 59
parent organization, 95 issues, responsibility for, 182–183
 I N DE X / 259

microfilming, 176 cooperation for preservation of electronic

overview of, 173–174 resources, 182
summary about, 184 library vendors, list of, 223–243
price, 54 license negotiation, 137–140
See also costs open access and, 9
Princeton University Press, 229 self-censorship, selection tools and, 170
print resources as source of library materials, 77
format of acquisitions, 88–89 Publishers Group West, 233
popularity of, 189 Publishers Weekly, 63, 67
replacement of with e-books, 2 purchasing, 135–137
selection criteria for electronic resources purpose, statement of, 34
and, 56 Puvill Libros S.A., 238
selection of Internet resources and, 58–59
print-on-demand publishing, 83
privacy, 143 Q
professional ethics quality assurance
ALCTS Statement on Principles and importance of, 188
Standards of Acquisitions Practice, 163 for library materials, 189
ASIS&T Professional Guidelines, 161–162 Quality Books, 242
Code of Ethics of the American Library Quezada, Shelley, 151
Association, 164
codes of, 160–162
definition of, 159 R
discussion questions for, 171 R. R. Bowker
Guidelines for ALCTS Members to American Book Publishing Record, 59
Supplement the ALA Code of Ethics, Books in Print, 60–61
1994, 165 race, 150–151
program budget, 96 Rainbow Book Company, 226
ProQuest, 63 Rand McNally, 241
protection, 32 Random House, 83
provenance, of donations, 148 Raven Tree Press, 234
Pruitt, John, 151 Reader’s Advisor, 63
public Reading Reality (blog), 63–64
See community; users recommendations, 52–53
public library Recorded Books, 225
acquisitions, methods of, 76–77 recycling, of gift materials, 85
budgeting/funding in collection development Reed Business Information
policy, 36 Library Journal, 62
censorship, 167 Publishers Weekly, 63
evaluation of collection, 106 School Library Journal, 64
future of collection development/management, Regent Book Company, 226
191 relationships
leased library materials, 74–75 consortial/access, 124–125
marketing of collection, 20–21 with donors, cultivation of, 86
selection process of, 50 Renaud-Bray, 233
special collections, 46 repairs, of books, 115, 174
target audience, identification of, 36 replacements, 46
typical public library materials budget, 99 reporting, of gifts to IRS, 149–150
user needs assessment scenarios, 24 reputation, 55
published sources, 16 research libraries
publishers conservation measures in, 175
archiving of electronic resources, 181 cooperative preservation efforts, 183
260 / INDE X

research libraries (cont.) Rourke Publishing Group, 226

in exchange programs, 88 Routledge, 240
weeding in, 115–116 rules, for selection criteria, 53–55
resources
general review sources online, 66–67
library vendors, list of, 223–243 S
on needs assessment, 18 Sage Publications, 229
tools for acquiring/selecting materials, 59–66 Salem Press, Inc., 235
See also electronic resources; print resources; Samuel Weiser (Red Wheel), 243
sources Sandler, Mark, 190
Resources for College Libraries (RCL) (ACRL), 108 Sanett, Shelby, 184
resource-sharing Sanville, Tom, 100
case study, 126 Saponaro, Margaret Zarnosky
CCD, benefits/challenges of, 123–124 on needs assessment/marketing studies, 14
CCD, definition of, 122–123 on technology and libraries, 190
consortial/access relationships, 124–125 Savastinuk, Laura C., 6
copyright’s restrictions on, 130–131 Saxon (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt), 230
discussion questions, 126 SBD Spanish Book Distributor, Inc., 234
interlibrary loan, 125 Scales, Pat R., 166
library consortia, 121–122 Scarecrow Press, 65
overview of, 121 SCB Distributors, 233
summary about, 125 scenario, budget, 96–97
responsibility Schaffner, Bradley L., 75
of collection development librarians, 187, 188 schedule
in collection development policy, 35, 49 timing of data collection for user needs
for handling gifts, 85–86 assessment, 17–18
for license negotiation, 139 for weeding, 114
for preservation issues, 182–183 Schlosser, Melanie, 134
of selection team, 57 Schmidt Periodicals GmbH/Periodicals Service
for weeding, 115 Company, 225
review journals, 170 Schoenhof’s Foreign Books/Midwestern European
review sources, online, 66–67 Publications, 234
reviews Scholarly Book Services, Inc., 233
current books/serials for selection process, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources
59–65 Coalition (SPARC)
of electronic resources, 66 overview of, 80, 82
general review sources online, 66–67 work of, 9
for selection process, 53 Scholastic Library Publishing, 226
self-censorship, selection tools and, 170 School Library Journal (SLJ)
revisions, 47 article on censorship by librarian, 167
Reyes-Escudero, Veronica, 162 as selection tool, 64
Rheingold, Howard, 8 self-censorship story in, 168
Richard C. Ramer Old and Rare Books, 238 school library media centers
Rigby (Houghton Miflin Harcourt), 229 budgeting/funding in collection development
Riggs, Steve, 5 policy, 36
Rittenhouse Book Distributors, Inc., 241 future of collection development/management,
RLG Conspectus, 37–38 191
Robins, Natalie, 167 marketing of, 23
Robinson, Charles, 51–52 responsibility for collection development/
roles, 188 management, 35
Rosen Publishing, 229 special collections, 46
Rosenwald, M., 3 subject fields, analysis of, 39–42
 I N DE X / 2 61

target audience, identification of, 36 Shambhala Publications, 243

user needs assessment scenarios, 24 share alike license, 133
School Media Associates, 225 Shopware, 225
Scout Report, 66 signature page, 33
SCSU (St. Cloud State University), 21 silent censorship, 168
Sebco Books, Inc., 226 Simon & Schuster, 230
selection criteria Singh, Rajesh, 21
in collection development policy, 37 site, 138
for electronic resources, 55–57 Skold, Beatrice Christensen, 153
general, 53–55 Slote, Stanley J.
specific, 55 on core collection/weedable collection, 111
selection sources/processes on issues that discourage weeding, 113–114
activity for, 70 on reasons to weed, 111–113
considerations in selection process, 49–53 Small Press Distribution, 241
discussion questions, 70 Smart Apple Media, 230
Internet resources, selection differences for, social and educational organizations, 15
58–59 social indicators, 16–17
open access movement, 68–69 social media, 21
other selection means, 67–68 social networking, 7–8
overview of, 49 software
review sources online, 66–67 for institutional repository, 183
selection criteria, 53–57 license negotiation for, 137
selection teams, 57–58 open source, 9
summary about, 69–70 preservation challenges, 179–180
tools for acquiring/selecting materials, 59–66 purchasing vs. licensing, 136
selection tools, 44, 170 selection criteria for electronic resources and,
self-censorship 56
discussion questions for, 171 “Software and Database License Agreement
selection tools and, 170 Checklist” (University of Texas System), 141
steps to avoid, 169–170 Sony Corp. of America vs. Universal City Studios, 131
at subconscious/unconscious levels, 167–169 Source Area Characteristics of Large Public Surface-
SELF-e initiative, 4 Water Supplies in the Coterminous United
self-publishing States: An Information Resource for Source-
impact on collection development/ Water Assessment, 1999 (Asher), 167
management, 3–5 Sourcebooks, Inc., 233
preservation of, 179 sources
selection tools for, 67 consulting for needs assessment, 18
Sendak, Maurice, 167 of data collected for user needs assessment, 16–17
serials general review sources online, 66–67
acquisitions issues, 79–80 of library materials, 77–83
antiquarian/out-of-print books/serials for of predatory journals, 69
selection, 65–66 selection criteria for electronic resources, 55
current, for acquiring/selecting materials, See also selection sources/processes
59–65 South Asia Book Distributors, 238
JSTOR, 80 space, 112
preservation of electronic serials, 177–178 SPARC
pricing samples for electronic serials, 81 See Scholarly Publishing and Academic
publishers, library acquisitions and, 77 Resources Coalition
See also journals special collections, 46
Serials Review, 64 special libraries
sexual orientation, 150–151 budgeting/funding in collection development
SF Site, 64 policy, 36
2 62 / INDE X

special libraries (cont.) Tantor, 225

future of collection development/management, Tapscott, Don, 7
191 target audiences, 36
marketing of collection, 22–23 taxes
special collections, collection development gifts, appraisal of, 87
policy on, 46 tax deductions for donations, 148–150
target audience, identification of, 36 team, selection, 57–58
special needs technology
collection development for, 153–154 CCD, benefits of, 123
diversity issues in collection development, copyright issues with, 131
150–151 future of collection development/management,
specific criteria, for selections for collection, 55 187–192
Springer US, 242 impact on collection development/
St. Cloud State University (SCSU), 21 management, 1–11
standards, 189 weeding to make room for, 113
standing orders, 79 Tecni Ciencia Libros, 243
Stanford University, 180 Teldan Information Systems Ltd., 240
Star Publications, 239 temperature, 174–175
Starkmann, 230 terminology
statement of purpose, 34 bookkeeping, 93, 100–102
Steinbeck, John, 165 DRM, 145
Stoddart, Richard A., 189 terrorism, 167
Strand Bookstore, 233 Texas State Library and Archives Commission, 116
subject experts, 109 text messaging, 8
subject fields, analysis of Theodore Front Musical Literature, Ltd, 242
in collection development policy, 37–39 Thomson Gale, 60
collection mapping, 39 Thorndike Press - The Gale Group, 241
Conspectus-like example for library using LOC, time
40 as issue that discourages weeding, 113
Conspectus-like example using Dewey Decimal weeding to save, 112
System, 39 Timeless Books, 243
phase levels, 42 timing
subject descriptions of senior high school of data collection, 17–18
collection, 41 of weeding, 114
support levels, 40 title page/cover, 33
subscriptions TITLEWAVE Follett School Solutions, 231
to journals, crisis over, 80 tools, for acquiring/selecting materials, 59–66
overview of, 76 transaction log, 110
Sugnet, Chris, 13 trial offers, 67
Sunbelt Publications, 239 Truth, Frank, 69
Sunlink initiative, 124 Tuttle Publishing, 239
support levels, 40 type I error, 109
surveys type II error, 109
for assessment of electronic resources, 110
for data for user needs assessment, 17
Susan Bach, 239 U
Swets, 243 Ulrich’s International Periodicals Directory
(Ulrichsweb.com), 64–65
union catalogs, 121–122
T United Kingdom, 11
table of contents, 34 United Nations Convention on the Rights of
tagging, 8 Persons with Disabilities, 152
 I N DE X / 26 3

United States Book Exchange, 225 library vendors, domestic/international, 77–79

Universal City Studios, Sony Corp. of America vs., 131 license negotiation, 137–140
University of Arizona Press, 230 methods of acquiring materials, 76
University of British Columbia, 21–22 other selection means for electronic resources,
University of California Library, 150 67–68
University of Chicago Press, 230 preservation of electronic resources, 182
University of Michigan Press, 240 principles for acquisition librarians and, 160
University of Michigan’s Undergraduate Library, vendor-supplied statistics, 110–111
83 Via Christi medical library, 18
University of New Brunswick, 116–117 virtual libraries, 22
University of North Carolina Press, 230 Visible Ink, 230
University of Texas System, 141 visually impaired people, 152, 153–154
U.P.I.E., 239 vocabulary, of acquisitions process, 100–102
“up-sell” technique, 19 Voice of Youth Advocates (Scarecrow Press), 65
U.S. Census Bureau, 129
U.S. Constitution, 130, 131
U.S. Internal Revenue Code, 148 W
U.S. Supreme Court, 131 Washington Book Distributors, 239
Usborne, 226 watermarking, 145
user needs assessment Web
data interpretation, 18 general review sources online, 66–67
overview of, 13–14 globalization and, 9–11
scenarios, 23–24 Long Tail and, 5
source of data collection, 16–17 network usage analysis, 110
timing of data collection, 17–18 online reviews, 53
tips for good study, 18 selection criteria for electronic resources, 55–57
who/what will be studied, 14–16 selection differences for Internet resources,
user surveys, 110 58–59
users web links in collection development policy, 42
acquisitions goal and, 73–74 Web 2.0, 7–8
collection building/assessment and, 117 web log analysis, 110
collection development policy information for, website, library, 33
31–32 weeding
copyright protections and, 132 in collection development policy, 44
definition of in license, 138 core collection/weedable collection, 111
gifts, accepting from, 84 evaluation/assessment and, 105–106
licensing agreements and, 140 issues that discourage, 113–114
marketing collection to, 19–25 judgment for, 105
patron-driven acquisition, 76–77 professional ethics and, 159
selection, bases for, 49–50 public reaction to, 116–117
selection process approaches and, 50–52 reasons for, 111–113
what to weed, 115–116
when/who should weed, 114–115
V Weeding Library Collections: Library Weeding
value, 188 Methods (Slote)
values, 164 on core collection/weedable collection, 111
Vedams Books International, 239 on issues that discourage weeding, 113–114
vending machines, 68 on reasons to weed, 111–113
vendors Western Library Network/OCLC Western
archiving of electronic resources, 181 Conspectus model, 37–39
DRM systems and, 141–147 Weston Woods, 225
leased library materials from, 74–75 Whelan, Debra Lau, 168
264 / INDE X

White Lotus Press, Ltd., 239 WorldCat, 108–109

Wide World of Maps and More, 241 Worldwide Books, 240
Wikipedia, 7 wrapping, 145
wikis, 7 W.T. Cox Subscriptions, Inc., 243
Wiley Blackwell, 69 W.W. Norton & Company, 233
Wilkinson, Frances C.
on accepting gifts, 85
on acquisitions departments, 73 X
on exchange programs, 88 Xerxes Books, 234
on professional ethics, 159, 160 Xia, Jingfeng, 69
William S. Hein & Co., Inc., 241
Williams, Anthony D., 7
Willinsky, John, 9 Y
Wood, Richard J. Yale University, 141
on collection development policy elements, 34 Yale University Press, 230
Library Collection Development Policies: Yankee Book Peddler, Inc., 230
Academic, Public, and Special Libraries, 33
on mission, goals, and objectives statement, 35
World Book, 235 Z
World Intellectual Property Organization, 152 Zimmer, Kyle, 167
World Trade Press, 233 Zipkowitz, Fay, 159
World Wide Web, 9–11 Zondervan, 239
See also Internet; Web