To: Scott Bennett
From: Ann Okerson
Re: LSF Selection Draft
Background
As the appointed date for opening of the Library
Shelving Facility approaches (November 1998), Library subcommittees are
addressing the numerous processes
and services needed to ensure operational success. The work of some groups
will near completion as the facility begins to serve Yale readers; other
groups, those connected with ongoing service and selection, will have
a
longer life before they can declare victory by becoming more or less routinized.
This report describes the status of the Selection Group's work, procedures,
and findings to date and attempts to answer the questions: How is
selection done and how will it "feel" to Yale's readers? What have
we learned and what remains to be learned? What will the end-state
of the selection process be? This report is an addendum to the earlier
publicly distributed document from the Selection Group called "Selection
Policy for Off-Campus Shelving" (last revision 12/97) which can be found
on the following site:
http://www.library.yale.edu/Administration/Shelving/ocs.html
1. How is selection done?
Selection is a collaborative, consultative effort
between subject and/or format librarians and their interested constituents,
mostly faculty. Exceptions
to consultation might include materials already in storage (such as the
Manuscripts & Archives Department collections housed in 149 York
Street). That is, in some cases materials already housed outside the
library will
be moved from an existing location to the new Hamden facility to take advantage
of its superior environmental conditions and easier retrieval. However,
even in those cases, usage patterns of readers or specific needs of users
are taken into account.
Over the past academic year, nearly all of Yale's
subject librarians/liaisons and curators have conducted one or more meetings
with their departments,
programs, or councils. In these meetings the librarians have described
the LSF and requested input from their constituents. These librarians
have submitted
to the LSF Selection Group their accounts of numerous consultations in
subjects including: East Asia, Biology, Biophysics & Biochemistry, English literature,
Architecture, Art, Drama, Art History, Graphic Design, Divinity, Religious
Studies, Latin America, Spanish & Portuguese, History (various subsets),
Near East, French, Italian, School of Management, Film and Theater Studies,
Social Sciences (various and Advisory Council), Russian & East European,
German, Comparative Literature, Judaica, Classics. Some departments such
as Chemistry, Physics, Maths, and Geology, have arranged meetings in the
coming month.
As one might imagine, the resulting faculty
involvement has varied, with some departments such as English and East
Asian setting up or planning to
set up advisory committees to work with their subject librarians; others
making suggestions for materials to be moved or approving their librarian's
suggestions; still others wishing to be kept informed but not actively
shaping
the program at least at this time; and still others who remain skeptical
that LSF is a good idea. The numbers of users who see the utility and
benefits
of the LSF and believe it will work, has risen considerably from the first
time that the topic was discussed in the ACLP two academic years ago.
The
ACLP's support has been instrumental in the changes of perception, as has
the librarian outreach on various levels, including aisle way chats while
choosing groceries at Stop & Shop.
2. What sorts of materials
are being proposed for housing in the LSF, by the various faculty
and advisory groups?
The choices vary widely. Below is a list of some of the sorts of materials
under consideration (though not necessarily already selected) from different
departments. This list signals the large range of types of materials being
contemplated for LSF.
Arts departments and areas -- "Core" collections will
remain in the A&A library. Criteria for sending to LSF will include
a strong preservation element (primary sources need extra protection), along
with a systematic, rolling publication cutoff date (such as 1900, which
seems to be viewed as a reasonable date). Low use is another key LSF criterion
for A&A.
CCL -- Will follow the same criteria as the disciplines
it houses and will work in conjunction with appropriate subject selectors
to accomplish this.
Divinity -- Like A&A, the collections resident in
the new Divinity Library will be based around the definition of a "core" which
has been developed in conjunction with a users committee. LSF selections
include titles published before 1850, low use monographs, low use monographic
microfilms, and 2/3 of the archival and manuscript collections.
Economics, SOM -- Consider all pre-1900 materials and
anything over 10 years old that has never circulated, older (superseded)
reference materials.
Engineering -- Consider ceased journals, non-current
serials duplicated in other campus libraries, pre-1975 monographs that have
not circulated.
English and Commonwealth Literature -- Send materials
that have not circulated since the advent of the GEAC circulation system
some 18 years ago.
Film & Theater -- Send materials that have never
circulated (except for journals).
French & Italian, Modern Languages -- Outdated surveys
and editions will go to LSF, along with minor contemporary belles lettres,
as well as 17th century materials. Faculty prefer to keep journals in SML.
Move all Romansh, Basque?
German -- Selectively move Scandinavian and Dutch materials,
pre-1850 titles, materials that have not circulated in 18 years, certain
areas of criticism.
Government Documents -- Consider material held both in
print and fiche; print in poor condition; infrequently used materials.
Judaica -- Send the many books in poor shape that need
a better preservation environment, books that have not circulated in 18
years.
History -- Contenders are monographs published before
1850 if little used; ditto runs of local/regional journals and serials,
other monographs that have never circulated.
Latin America, Spanish & Portuguese -- Send
contemporary belles lettres; official government publications such
as census materials, statistical reports, government annual reports, presidential
messages; older monographs that have not circulated.
Music -- The old Sterling Yale-class collection of music
books (Vs) will move from Mudd to LSF; these are little used and often duplicate
titles in the main collections. Certain archival/special collections will
move from storage into LSF.
Near East -- Suggestions include Modern Arabic literature;
novels and poetry excluding complete works by important authors; older materials
in poor condition or on poor paper (needing preservation treatment); materials
in Western and NE languages that have not been used.
Political Science -- Numerous
categories are under consideration, including: all materials from Mudd
that were part of the NEH preservation
grant treatment; transfer all foreign official gazettes, monographs in
J & K classification that have not circulated in 10 years or more,
serials ceased more than five years ago, backfiles from Mudd and SML
where microfilm
backfile exists on campus.
Reference collections -- After consultations with subject
librarians and assorted faculty, materials under consideration include older
editions of dictionaries and encyclopedias, periodicals which have been
indexed or which are available electronically in full text, and older monographs.
Religious Studies -- Date of publication is a key consideration
(imprints 1850 or earlier), as are older serials (which are not journals),
small subsets of call numbers in certain sub disciplines.
Russian & East European -- Consider titles published
before 1850, thin out the literature PG section by keeping only standard
sets of complete works in SML while moving out less important editions and
titles; items with no circulation in 18 years.
Sciences, assorted -- Send low use materials, non-English
language titles, older textbooks (but not classic textbooks or first editions),
older reference works, selected sources that are now available electronically,
copy 2/3s, and very few journal titles. Especially consider materials no
longer being used in teaching or research, many science items already housed
in Mudd, low use materials, materials not circulated in 18 years.
Sociology -- Low use materials as determined by circulation.
3. Specifically, what is the procedure by which librarians
are selecting materials, apart from faculty consultation about categories?
A. Fill out a template that will be used to generate an
ORBIS report form for the category being considered for LSF. The LSF Selection
Group has developed a Web form that resides on the Library's Collection
Development site, called the " EZ Template ".
This template guides librarians through a series of options for specifying
titles in the existing ORBIS catalog by both subject (by class number)
and
non-subject parameters (such as language, format, circulation data).
B. The " EZ Template " is
reviewed by the Selection Group and passed to Library-Systems whose
staff use them to program for title by title reports. This part of
the
process is still in early days, as until recently Systems has been working
flat out on the latest NOTIS (ORBIS) upgrade. The initial reports are
generating paper printouts in classification number order.
C. Librarians review the reports and
may look at specific titles in the stacks as a double-check (or send
students into the stacks to do
this). [N.B: by default, titles NOT in ORBIS cannot be considered for
LSF. Also, serials are not considered for LSF unless their holdings
information
is recorded -- at the moment, many serials cannot, therefore, be LSF
candidates.]
D. Interested faculty may choose to
review the line by line reports as well.
E. Titles that are deemed to have met the criteria established
by librarians and their users, will become those that are "picked" for
LSF. The final details of format and pick lists are not yet settled,
and
today's line by line lists may not be the tools later used by selectors.
4. How will the movement to LSF actually "look and feel" to
the Library's readers?
Two categories of materials need to be moved to LSF: (a) those to be moved
in response to construction pressures and (2) those to be moved to alleviate
current stack space shortages, particularly in SML. The construction pressures
derive from projects such as Music Library construction and the imminent
move of collections from Sprague Hall to the SML, and the reconstruction
and re-sizing of the Arts and Divinity libraries (those projects will begin
in the Year 2000). There is, of course, a tension between the construction/SML
needs, as both are urgent. However, it seems likely that the construction
driven moves must happen first, given known deadlines. Thus it could be
about a year from now before readers will notice a thinning out of SML stacks.
In the next few weeks, Library Circulation staff will be assessing the
most urgent SML stack needs (though there are plenty of full areas already)
and once the LSF action reaches Sterling, these over-full ranges will be
the first to send materials to LSF.
Once the moving and services have been "routinized," the intake to LSF
will be at least 250,000 volumes per year, whereas the Library's annual
acquisitions are around 160,000 volumes per year. The difference between
accessions and movement to LSF will result in space freed up in the center-campus
library buildings. It is likely to take 2-3 years before we can make any
real "elbow" room in the stack collections and longer to achieve a comfort
level in this regard. At a point about 5-8 years out, a steady state growth
will have been achieved in which the outflow to LSF generally matches the
intake of materials into the Library system.
5. What have we learned from the above experiences?
¥ The LSF selection processes
are shaping up successfully and are falling into place.
¥ No two subjects approach the selection
issue in an identical manner.
¥ Faculty have vastly different desires
to be involved in LSF decisions. While most choose to influence the
move, very few are interested in reading
line by line printouts or online lists.
¥ Titles that either need extra care
or are low use are the most frequently recurring choices for movement
to LSF.
6. What should you do if you would like to (continue to) shape
the LSF decision making for your discipline or program, or change the currently
identified parameters, or any other aspect selection at all?
For specific discussions about your discipline, please contact your liaison
librarian. Chances are you already know the librarian well, but a list of
contacts is provided at the URL:
http://www.library.yale.edu/NotaBene/selector.htm
For discussions about overall Selection policy, please contact Ann Okerson,
Associate University Librarian/Collection Development (Ann.Okerson@yale.edu), Margaret
(Maggie) Powell, Librarian for English and Commonwealth Literature chairs
the Library Selection Group and coordinates the related
processes (Margaret.Powell@yale.edu).
We are happy to talk with you at any convenient time about these matters.
alo
8/31/98
