Kieft.nitle webinar april112013
Download as PPT, PDF•1 like•570 views
This document discusses the benefits of collective print collections among college libraries. It notes that Occidental College has reduced its print collections and expanded partnerships to share resources. Collective print collections increase preservation capacity, free up library space, reduce duplication, and encourage greater access through digitization. Regional and national models are emerging for collectively housing and archiving print journals and other materials. The document assumes these efforts will succeed based on factors like improved borrowing networks, technology advancements, and incentives around funding and resources. It acknowledges emotional aspects of reducing local print collections and encourages staying informed on developments through various listservs, conferences, and publications.
Kieft.nitle webinar april112013
- 1. College Libraries, Resource Provision, and a Collective Collection Bob Kieft Occidental College [email protected] NITLE, April 11, 2013
- 2. Blame it on… • The TriColleges, with assists from CBB, CTW, and Bridge • PALCI, PACSCL • CDL and SCELC • Rick Lugg, Constance Malpas, Lizanne Payne, Emily Stambaugh
- 3. ToC • Propositions about libraries • Why “extreme collections” work at Occidental? • Colleges and shared collections • Why shared print • Why shared print will (eventually) work – The Devil made me do it • Keeping up
- 4. What is a library? 1 • A body of accessible materials • Staff, tools, and services • Spaces for working with them • Node in a network • Cultural institution • Site for learning • Publisher, scholar, scholarly communicator • Community center
- 5. What is a library? 2 • The library is many and various and not the same for everyone on all occasions • The Web has shown that the library is less about books, dvds, and 35mm slides than it is about what people do with texts, images, and sound, less about the medium than the work that people do • The library is what Lorcan Demspey calls a “service bundle,” not a monolithic integration but a set of possibilities or methods for doing work, of providing resources to the campus and related communities • Not the heart of the campus
- 6. Why at Occidental? • Academic Commons project • Building, staff, program • Collections program – Reduce space given to print – No self-storage – Extended partnerships – More e, less p – More use, less resource – DDA – Discontents of CA
- 7. LACs and Collections Planning The Mono Case • TriCo and Poughkeepsie 2008 • Ithaka library director survey 2010 • Followup—what’s different about LACs? – Different in kind from R1s? – Inhibitors to collection sharing – Managing growth – The apocalypse – What will they do?
- 8. Why Collective Print? • Increases preservation capacity. • Reinvests space. • Reduces risk of loss of scarce and unique copies. • Shifts library resources to new services/materials. • Encourages greater access through digitization. • Increases support for scholarship through inter- institutional collaboration. • Reduces rate of unnecessarily duplicative print collection growth.
- 9. Why This Will Work: Some Assumptions • Robust user-initiated borrowing networks already exist; additional networks are forming. • Regional and national models for housing/archiving journals have emerged and will for other kinds of materials in three to five years. • The library will continue to grow, but it will grow mostly in electronic resources or through the strength, number, and variety of access partnerships. • Even though many now say they like e-books for some purposes but will not read extended text on screen, mass digitization and reading devices/software improvement are creating a shift away from print. • Current funding or resource-allocation incentives are too great to do otherwise. • Faculty and disciplines differ in their preferences and habits with respect to library materials, which means libraries can accomplish a lot without accomplishing the same thing in all areas of the collection. • Information, discovery, and materials delivery systems are improving.
- 10. Remember---- Affective dimensions of plans for remote housing for or collective access to print, especially monographs: • How to mitigate the sense of loss so many feel in a program to draw down open-shelf print? • How to work with the sense some faculty and students have that “we” are forcing them to change their work practices and preferences? • How to work with the sense that print collaboration affects the identity open-shelf print collections lend some faculty/disciplines and librarians? • Can we talk about this without “management speak?”
- 11. In the Know • Subscribe to the CRL-sponsored listserv for the “Print Archives Network” (send a message to [email protected] Subscribe PAN “your name”). • Attend CRL-sponsored PAN Forum, ALA, Fri mornings. • Read Against the Grain column, “Curating Collective Collections,” edited by Sam Demas. • Monitor Rick Lugg’s blog, “Sample and Hold” (http://sampleandhold- r2.blogspot.com/); follow OCLC Research • Read background material and a bibliography of recent writing on shared- print at “Collaborative Retention of Print Monographs” (http://www.lyrasis.org/Products-and-Services/Grants-and-Special- Projects/Collaborative-Print-Monograph-Retention.aspx) as summarized in “A Nation-Wide Planning Framework for Large-Scale Collaboration on Legacy Print Monograph Collections” (Collaborative Librarianship, 2:4 (2010). 229-233). • Read elegantly summarized version of the case for shared print by Sam Demas and Wendy Lougee in “Shared Print Archiving and Formation of a National Trust: Will your campus participate in a collective print preservation strategy?” (Library Issues, 31:6 (July 2011).