The collection assessment is done…now what? 30 secs Hello, I am Karen Harker from the University of North Texas Libraries. My colleagues and I wanted to share with you a practical application of collection assessment. Paper by Karen R. Harker, MLIS, MPH Laurel S. Crawford, MLIS Coby Condrey, MLIS University of North Texas Libraries

Information Needs of Collection Development Inputs Outputs Outcomes Collection management has changed significantly in the last 50 years – evolving from title-by-title selection by bibliographers, to book jobber approval plans to demand-driven acquisitions, with selections made not necessarily by individual librarians, but rather the patrons themselves. This shift has resulted in a greater need of information about our collections by those who manage collection development. The information needed is on the inputs (costs of materials and the needs (actual or anticipated), the outputs (expenditures, circulations or uses), and the patron outcomes or impact on institutional goals.

Evidence-Based Collection Assessment Content Use Impact Evaluation of… “how effective the collection is in satisfying the purpose for which it was intended.” Utility Collection assessment has evolved into a specialized activity in which the collection is evaluated on its content, use and impact. While there is some interest in the external “quality” of a collection, the focus of most collection evaluations is on its “utility” – defined by Peggy Johnson in her foundational text, as “how effective the collection is in satisfying the purpose for which it (the collection) was intended.” Johnson, P. (2009). Fundamentals of collection development and management. Chicago Ill.: American Library Association.

Frustrations With Collection Assessments Most are ad hoc Little positive change From recent research a colleague and I conducted of collection assessment in ARL libraries, we found that most libraries conduct collection evaluations on an ad hoc basis, and librarians are most frustrated with the lack of positive change in collection policy, selection, funding or patron perception resulting from these assessments. Harker, Karen and Janette Klein (2016). Collection Assessment. SPEC Kit #352. Washington, DC : Association of Research Libraries.

Collection Management at UNT Libraries From 2015 Centralized collection development Funding Selection Prior to 2010, there was no Collection Development department at UNT – all selection and development was managed by the subject librarians, who were responsible for spending a set amount of funds on books and/or journals. In reaction to budge cuts, the library started centralizing collection development activities, eliminating most the subject-based funds, and combining them into two main accounts – one for firm orders (books, but also digitized primary resources) and recurring (subscriptions). We also implemented demand-driven acquisitions to bring about more balance to our collection, and while we eliminated the responsibility for subject librarians to spend a set amount of funds on purchases, the librarians are encouraged to make selections, many of which are selected for the DDA Discovery pool.

Subject-Based Collections at UNT Libraries Overlapping subjects Conspectus subject categories One of the main ways we manage the UNT Libraries’ overall collection is by examining individual subject-based collections. We have developed 96 such collections all based on our academic programs, ranging in scope from very broad (interdisciplinary arts), to very narrow (like “aviation logistics”). These collections are defined largely by call number ranges. While many libraries have categorized their collections as such, our method is more unique because we assign subjects to multiple collections, as necessary. Thus, many collections have overlapping subjects. For instance, the subjects of management and social statistics are relevant to many fields, including library science. The call number ranges, or subjects, are based largely on the Conspectus subject categories developed in the early 1980’s initially by the Western Library Network, absorbed by the Research Library Group and eventually by OCLC, which is used in the WorldShare Collection Evaluation System (CES). Subject-Based Collections at UNT Libraries

Collection Evaluation at UNT Libraries Routine and regular 10-year cycle How well does the collection meet the needs of those interested in this subject?* Collection assessment or evaluation at UNT Libraries has evolved into a routine and regular process. Currently, evaluations of each subject-based collection are spread over a 10 year cycle. The goal of each evaluation is to answer this question about each collection – “How well does the collection meet the needs of those interested in this subject?” What is important to note here is that we examine the collection from the subject perspective, not the academic department – we do not limit our analysis to those directly associated with the program. This is because we know that academic programs are becoming more interdisciplinary.

Gaps Report Contents Need Description Usage Quality Strengths Need Enrollment trends ILL request Subject librarian’s input Collection description Usage Circulation Online Quality - Comparison with authoritative lists JCR Choice’s OAT Subject areas needing enhancement

…Now what? Putting the evaluations to good use The initial uses of collection evaluations were to report for accreditation reviews. Once the library’s budget was stabilized by additional funds, we realized we had an opportunity to apply the results of these analyses to better use – that of enhancing the collection. Putting the evaluations to good use

Collection Enhancements at UNT Libraries Assess Budget Enhance Funds for enhancing the subject-based collection that is currently under review are planned for the next year’s budget. The amount of funds to set aside is based in part on the gaps and needs identified in the assessment and the overall funds that are expected to be available. This flexibility is made possible largely by the centralized account structure that was put into action.

Enhancement Process Select/Acquire Research Options Missing Titles Selections are initially drawn from Choice’s Outstanding Academic Titles (OAT) which we don’t own and the titles requested by ILL. These are typically added to the DDA Discovery pool or are purchased out-right, depending on availability. Then the acquisitions librarian (Coby) researches ebook packages or sets, digitized archives, or perhaps thinking outside-the-box to help fill gaps in specific subject areas that were identified in the assessment. Finally, we go about acquiring the new resources, often by selecting for DDA Discovery, purchasing outright, or subscribing, if necessary.

Enhancement of Engineering Difficult Needed subscriptions Compromise Half on subscriptions Half on books 30 secs Our first enhancement under this process was for the very broad subject of engineering. The enhancement of this collection did not fit into the model for which the process was originally developed. A large number of resources requested by the subject librarian and gaps noted in the collection assessment were for recurring expenditures (subscriptions of databases and journals), and the flexibility of funds is largely associated with firm orders. For this enhancement, we compromised – applying half of the funding to selected database subsriptions and an online library of technical reference resources. The rest were applied toward reference books. Also, a large number of title were added to the DDA Discovery collection, the purchase of which would be absorbed by the general fund. Enhancement of Engineering

Enhancement of Education & Learning Technology Original Intent Mostly Books Technologies: Robot kits Tablet computers Charging station 30 secs The enhancement of education & learning technology, by contrast, was in line with the original vision of enhancements, with 80% of funding spent on books. The remaining funds were spent on educational technologies – robot construction kits, tablet computers and a charging station. The purpose was to provide student teachers with the opportunity to learn how to use these tools in a classroom setting. Enhancement of Education & Learning Technology

Enhancement of Ethnic Studies Highly interdisciplinary General ethnic studies Specific populations Split funding Books Journals Archive from under-heard voices 30 secs We next enhanced our collections associated with ethnic studies. These collections are highly interdisciplinary covering general ethnic studies with studies of specific populations. About 40% of funds were spent on reference works and OAT titles, while the remaining 60% was spent on archive of digitized primary resources from under-represented groups. Subscriptions to a few new journals were included, as well as DDA titles. Enhancement of Ethnic Studies

Of Collection Evaluations Limitations Of Collection Evaluations Too much work Too infrequent Not always useful No outcomes Of Enhancements Dependent on available funds Limited to firm orders Not the end Our collection assessments are very in-depth and labor-intensive, and the information provided is not always useful for making decisions, largely because there are limitations on the factors of selection and collection development that can be changed. More importantly, the assessments are based largely on inputs and outputs, with no research on outcomes or impact. Our enhancements are totally dependent on the availability of funds – this model would have to change if/when we face more difficult financial times. Also, while we have quite a bit of flexibility with the centralized funds, we are usually limited to firm orders. But we hope to continue to think “outside” the box and include non-monographic resources, where needed. Finally, we have to remember that this is not the end of the development for this subject. These enhancements are like booster shots – we will continue to maintain the collection through careful selection of resources in the intervening years.

Future Directions Improve processes Quicker rotation More outcomes and impacts Impact of enhancements Given these limitations, we are revising our procedures to be more efficient and effective, and thus increase the frequency of evaluation & enhancement. We are also considering how to incorporate data or information regarding outcomes (like student achievement, faculty research publication and success in getting grants). Finally, we are considering methods for evaluating the impact of the enhancements themselves, such as tracking usage of newly acquired resources.

Conclusion Keys to success Centralization Collection evaluations Key Outcomes Structured enhancements Evidence-based decisions Evaluations put to good use 60 secs The enhancements could not have been possible without the restructuring of funding and the centralizing collection development, as well as collection evaluations which provide the information needed (gap of OAT, ILL, and subjects). The key outcomes are that we have a structured, systematic process of enhancing our collections, the decisions for which are based on data and analysis that is Conclusion

Contact Us Karen R. Harker, MLIS, MPH Laurel Crawford, MLIS Collection Assessment Librarian Karen.harker@unt.edu More information: https://facultyinfo.unt.edu/faculty-profile?profile=krh0186 Laurel Crawford, MLIS Head of Collection Development Department Laurel.Crawford@unt.edu More information: https://facultyinfo.unt.edu/faculty-profile?profile=lsc0082 Coby Condrey, MLIS Collection Development Liaison Librarian Coby.Condrey@unt.edu More information: https://facultyinfo.unt.edu/faculty-profile?cnc0137