1. Taking the sting out of de-selection, or, Weeding is fundamental Les Lynam, Director of Technical Services Kirkpatrick Library / University of Central Missouri June 6, 2007

2. Abstract: The process of de-selection tends to be a painful one, as many librarians are apt to consider the collection in the same vein as pets, or even children. However, life is cruel, pets eventually die, children grow up and manage their own lives.... Now, how do we do learn to deal with our collections (which would happily sit on the shelves collecting dust forever)? This is a “how we do it” session, which discusses some of the tools used to identify for de-selection, some attitudes that students have about “old” books, as well as some alternatives to the dumpster for the materials moving out of the prime shelf space. We have “adopted out” several hundred titles, and formed a rather satisfactory relationship with a company named Better World Books. Looking into the radical future: is there a way to develop a statewide depository along the lines of what the UM System campuses are already doing? Come prepared to share YOUR thoughts on weeding, too.

3. Weed Wars

4. Why NOT weed?  Someone will want it as soon as it’s gone  Fear of faculty / administrators  Needed for “accreditations”  Every book is sacred  Public Outcry San Francisco “land fill”

5. In an article in The New Yorker that rallied the insurgents, Mr. Baker described the new Main as a great gray dungeon where a priceless card catalogue was coldly destroyed and defenseless books were condemned to the Discard Room or the ''Deselection Chamber.'' More than 200,000 books ended up at the dump, he wrote last October, ''many of them old, hard to find, out of print and valuable.'' From the New York Times, January 26, 1997

6. Why NOT Weed? EEmotional attachment to the book as an artifact.

8. Why TO Weed  Studies show well weeded collections circulate more  Esthetic appearance of shelves  Remove inaccurate, superseded titles  Fear Of the next generation ignoring libraries because all they contain are dusty old relics

9. I was disappointed to find that this new library was filled with OLD books. Why didn’t they buy new books? – student comment in campus newspaper when Kirkpatrick Library opened in 1999. All you have are old books, why don’t you get some new books? – student response in library survey in 2005.

10. But we HAVE new books!  UCM spends over $300,000.00 a year on new monographs  Roughly 600 to 900 cataloged each month to go on the shelves.  Currently, 7.8% of our circulating collection has a 2000 or newer copyright.  Less than 20% have 1990 or newer copyright.

12. So what IS old?  What do YOU think?  Is a book older than you “old”?  How relevant is a science book or business book that was written before you were born?  Do “old” books circulate?

15. Decade% of Collection% of Circulation 20007.838.4 199011.923.7 198019.314.6 197022.210.1 196018.97.0 1950 & older19.96.2

17. What % is “core”  More than 60% of our circulating collection has a copyright between 1960 and 1989  That 60% accounts for 17% of FY07 circulations.  MOST of our freshmen were born in 1989  So what is “old”?  Is a circulation a predictor of future circs?

19. Repeats – Newer is better  Of the items circulated in FY06, almost 1/3 of the same titles circulated again in FY07  Copyright of 1990 and newer accounted for 70% of repeat circulations.  Older than 1970 copyrights had largest percentages in History, Literature and other humanities.

20. Weeding Fundamentals  Get a written policy on your books  Use data to make decisions, not feelings  Circulation is NOT the only criteria, consult a “best books” guide.  Benchmark successes of others  Never trash 200,000 books at one time  Adopt “CREW” and “MUSTIE”?

21. CREW  C ontinuous R eview  E valuation  W eeding

22. MUSTIE  M isleading  U gly  S uperseded by better works  T rivial (may have been more valuable to the collection years ago)  I rrelevant  E lsewhere.

23. Soften the sting  UCM practices: Offer withdrawns to other clustermates Then offer to other MOBIUS sites Juvenile books go to KC charter schools Better World Books!!!

24. Our Hero  http://www.betterworldbooks.com/ http://www.betterworldbooks.com/  UCM has sent them over 5000 books  They’ve sent us nearly $2000.00  They’ve sent our literacy partner nearly $1000.00

25. Better World Books  http://www.betterworldbooks.com/Files/Library_FAQ. pdf http://www.betterworldbooks.com/Files/Library_FAQ. pdf  Directly sent more than 460,000 books to Books for Africa, the National Center for Family Literacy, and Feed the Children  More than $1.2 million for Books for Africa  Saved over 8 million pounds of books from landfills  Raised more than $783,000 for libraries and thrift stores nationwide  Collected over 4.6 million books through active book drives

27. How about central storage?  Grassroots campaign?  Statewide “last book” depository  Controlled environment for better preservation

28. Statewide storage?  http://mulibraries.missouri.edu/umld/umldab out.htm http://mulibraries.missouri.edu/umld/umldab out.htm  Stores for the 4 UM System campuses  Currently has 1,252,985 (Mar. 2007)  (this is nearly full)  Roughly 1200 “circulations” per month  (Less than.1% of collection)  Loans through MOBIUS INN-REACH  Can this idea be formulated for state-wide storage?

29. The End  Questions?  Thank you for attending