Analysis of Collection Use in the OhioLINK Library Consortium Julia A. Gammon, University of Akron...
-
Upload
oswald-waters -
Category
Documents
-
view
233 -
download
1
Transcript of Analysis of Collection Use in the OhioLINK Library Consortium Julia A. Gammon, University of Akron...
Analysis of Collection Use in the OhioLINK Library Consortium
Julia A. Gammon, University of Akron
Anne T. Gilliland, OhioLINK
Edward T. O’Neill, OCLC
2
In the beginning….
Ohio’s libraries & cooperation
Ohio College Library Center (OCLC)
OhioLINK
3
1987 Library Study Committee Report
3 Recommendations:
Create a book depository system
Create a statewide electronic catalog
Appoint a steering committee
4
OhioLINK Planning Paper
Coordination in purchasing of shared collections
Expanded access to electronic information
Improved access to information infrastructure
Promotion of scholarly communications
Improved economies in purchase of electronic resources
5
OhioLINK’s Philosophy
User Empowerment–No Mediation
Abundant--Not rationed access
Universal—Not selected access
Integrated—Not segregated access
Leveraged spending
Cooperation—Not parochial orientation
6
Who belongs to OhioLINK?
87 members
16 public universities
23 community/technical colleges
47 private colleges
State Library
Testing Public and School Libraries
7
What do we share?
600,000+ Users
46 Million Shared Catalog Records
4,500 Simultaneous Users
140 Electronic Research Databases
12,000 Electronic Journals
25,000 E-books
14,000 Electronic Theses & Dissertation
Thousands of images, videos and sounds
8
Circulation of Materials
46 million items (27 million books) to pick from
120 delivery sites
Patron initiated
Delivered to patron selected site
48 hours
9
Materials Delivered Around State
10
OhioLINK’s Collection Building Task Force Charge
To reduce duplication
To increase local collection development activities
To expand the amount spent on cooperative purchases
To move beyond books…
11
Collection Building Task Force History
1997 Discussion began
1998 Wrote statewide RFP
1998 Selected vendor—YBP
1999 Coordination projects began
12
OhioLINK’s Current Tools for CCD
YBP’s Gobi
GobiTween“Not Bought” ListsPeer reportsManagement reports
Subject groups
Cooperative projects
Road Shows
13
Books: How Many Copies Do We Need?
14
Collection Assessment
“Selling” CCD without data
Informed decisions
Questions: What do we want to know?
Commercial products
OCLC Office of Research
15
Collection Analysis Information Needed
Is our OhioLINK collection getting more diverse?
Is duplication of titles increasing or decreasing?
What does the complete overall OhioLINK collection look like?
What books didn’t we purchase? (Not Bought in Ohio or ILL stats?)
Does the 80/20 rule (80% of users’ needs are satisfied by 20% of the collection) apply?
16
OhioLINK-OCLC Research Project
Project Goal
Collect, analyze and compare book circulation data from all OhioLINK libraries
Use OCLC #, ISBN or LCCN to link circulation records to WorldCat bib records
17
2. Data Collection
18
UCB Study vs. OhioLINK Study
Similar basic design
OhioLINK study includes items that do not circulate and more kinds of books
Neither could separate Inn-Reach transactions
Each is a snapshot
19
WorldCat Linking
For records with a valid OCLC No., the OCLC No. is used as the link
For records with an obsolete OCLC No., the obsolete OCLC No. is replaced with current OCLC No.
For records without an OCLC No. but with either a LCCN and/or an ISBN the LCCN (preferred) or the ISBN to identify the corresponding WorldCat record and find the OCLC No.
Records lacking an OCLC number, LCCN, or ISBN could not be validated
20
Design for Data Collection
Keep output simple for libraries
Libraries output circulation information
OCLC matches with richer bibliographic information from World Cat
OCLC filters some records
21
Testing
Testing throughout much of 2006 and early 2007
Wright State University and several community colleges
Refined instructions and matching techniques
22
Publicity
Project needs widespread support
Sufficient notice and time to complete
Support from staff at many levels
Areas of concern
23
Data Collection
April 29-May 27, 2007
Excellent participation rate
27,002,190 item records
Snapshot
24
WorldCat Linking
Validating link
The title from the OhioLINK circulation record was compared to the title from the WorldCat record
If the title from the circ record was similar to the title in the WorldCat record, the record was validated
Determining material type
Only books and manuscripts were included
Material type was based on fixed fields codes in the WorldCat records (bib lvl = m and type = a or t)
25
WorldCat Linking
Records Received … 33,146,008
Records Validated … 30,718,454 (92.7%)
Validated Books …… 27,002,190 (81.5%)
26
3. Analysis
27
Caution!
Only first phase of the data collection is complete
Results are preliminary; revisions and corrections will occur
28
Most Held
Libraries: 68
Copies: 109
Circulations: 99
29
Most Copies
Libraries: 12
Copies: 9,542
Circulations: 9The National union catalog, pre-1956 imprints
30
Most Circulated
Libraries: 6
Copies: 92
Circulations: 6,023
31
Group One FRBR Entities
Is exemplified by
Is embodied in
WorkA distinct intellectual or artistic creation
Is realized through
ExpressionThe intellectual or artistic realization of a work
ManifestationThe physical embodiment of an expression
ItemA single exemplar of a manifestation
32
Holdings vs. Circulations
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
Items Manifestations Works
Total
Circulated
33
Subject Distribution
0 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000
Language, Linguistics, and LiteratureHistory and Auxiliary Sciences
Business and EconomicsPhilosophy and Religion
LawSociologyMedicine
Engineering and TechnologyArt and Architecture
EducationPolitical Science
Library Science, Generalities, andBiological Sciences
Physical SciencesGeography and Earth Sciences
MusicMathematics
PsychologyPerforming Arts
AgricultureComputer Science
Physical Education and RecreationChemistry
Anthropology
Number of Items
34
Duplication by Subject
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
LawChemistry
PsychologySociologyEducation
MathematicsPolitical Science
Physical SciencesPerforming Arts
MusicLibrary Science, Generalities, and Reference
Biological SciencesMedicine
Business and EconomicsAnthropology
History and Auxiliary SciencesGeography and Earth Sciences
Philosophy and ReligionComputer Science
Art and ArchitecturePhysical Education and Recreation
Language, Linguistics, and LiteratureEngineering and Technology
Agriculture
No. of Copies
35
Circulation by Subject
0 1 2 3 4
Computer SciencePsychology
SociologyPhysical Education and Recreation
MedicineAnthropologyMathematics
Art and ArchitecturePerforming Arts
MusicChemistryEducation
Engineering and TechnologyBiological Sciences
Philosophy and ReligionPhysical Sciences
History and Auxiliary SciencesAgriculture
Language, Linguistics, and LiteratureBusiness and Economics
Political ScienceGeography and Earth Sciences
Library Science, Generalities, and ReferenceLaw
Circulation per Item
36
Age of Subject Collections
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
Computer ScienceLaw
MedicinePerforming Arts
SociologyGeography and Earth Sciences
Engineering and TechnologyBusiness and Economics
Physical Education and RecreationAnthropologyMathematics
Art and ArchitectureEducation
AgriculturePsychology
Biological SciencesPolitical Science
MusicPhysical Sciences
Library SciencePhilosophy and Religion
ChemistryHistory and Auxiliary Sciences
Language and Literature
Median Publication Date
37
Hot Subjects
Computer Science (QA 75-76)
Women, Feminism, Life Skills, Life Style (HQ 1101-2044)
Medicine: Special Subjects (R 690-920)
Buddhism (BQ)
Nursing (RT)
Broadcasting (PN 1990-1992)
38
Language Distribution
0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000
EnglishGerman
FrenchSpanishRussian
OtherChinese
ItalianJapanese
LatinHebrew
PolishGreek (Modern)
ArabicIndonesianPortuguese
24,386,814
Number of Items
39
Usage Distribution
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.001% 0.010% 0.100% 1.000% 10.000% 100.000%
% of Books
% o
f C
ircul
atio
n
12.86%
(788,483)
40
Annual Collection Growth
0
25,000
50,000
75,000
100,000
125,000
1900 1915 1930 1945 1960 1975 1990 2005
Publication Date
No
. of M
ani
fest
atio
ns
Ad
ded
Max 114,375 (2000)
41
Duplication Rate
1
2
3
4
5
6
1900 1915 1930 1945 1960 1975 1990 2005
Publication Date
Ave
rag
e N
o. o
f C
op
ies
42
Circulation
Library Unit Size Ave. Circ.
Akron Campus 758,839 4.20
University Libraries 683,222 4.59
Bierce 572,288 4.58
Science 85,973 6.01
Archives 24,961 .04
Law 75,250 .68
Local Storage 367 .08
Akron Art Museum 11,514 .00
Wayne Campus 20,639 2.42
Depository 245,644 1.08
43
Median Publication Date
Library Unit Size Pub. Date
Akron Campus 758,839 1989
University Libraries 683,222 1988
Bierce 572,288 1987
Science 85,973 1952
Archives 24,961 1952
Law 75,250 1995
Local Storage 367 1952
Akron Art Museum 11,514 1987
Wayne Campus 20,639 1994
Depository 245,644 1971
44
Questions?
This presentation is available at:
http://platinum.ohiolink.edu/cbtf/oclcres.ppt.