Describes an analysis of the subject distribution of library stock as compared with current faculty and subject profile

Dyson, Philippa

University of Lincoln Institutional Repository

52 SCONUL Focus 49 2010Is the library collection fit for purpose? Collection analysis at the University of LincolnPhilippa Dyson Senior Academic Librarian, Library and Learning Resources, University of LincolnTel: 01522 886433E-mail:  pdyson@lincoln.ac.uk   What question did We Want to ansWer?Does the current subject distribution of the collec-tion match the current configuration of the univer-sity as defined by faculty and subject distribution? the backgroundIn 2004, the Library moved into a converted ware-house. The building was technically full when we moved in because at a late stage we accom-modated the art and design library, which was moved from another campus, thereby removing at a stroke any room for growth that might have been part of the planning process until that point.Concern was such that a ‘stock space manage-ment group’ was established in 2006 to monitor the space available and try to ensure that there was enough. Since then, migration from print to electronic format has become a departmental priority. One would expect the space pressures to have declined over time, therefore. However, we still seem to spend part of each meeting of the stock space management group – which now meets roughly quarterly – ascertaining whether we have room for the stock where space pressure is tightest.The question arose as to how closely the distri-bution of our library stock was aligned with the current faculty and subject profiles, as measured by student numbers, and whether this might help us determine an optimum shelving arrange-ment – and how far away from it we were. As is doubtless the case everywhere, our collection has its strengths and weaknesses. In the former category are areas such as business and manage-ment – where we have been able to build for decades – and also art and design, where we have merged two originally separate collections. The weaker areas include subjects which have recently come on stream and for which we have struggled to lay down a strong foundation since to date we have had to fund such innovations out of normal budgets. These include dance and drama, and health subjects such as nursing and complemen-tary medicine.The original intention of the profiling exercise was to provide evidence of our weak areas for use in any bids for additional funding to build up our collection. The current financial environ-ment means that this is a vain hope. However, the results of the analysis still have their uses. the analysisOur library system is SirsiDynix’s Horizon. The senior academic librarian worked with the circula-tion systems librarian, who consulted with the cataloguers, who determined Dewey runs by subject. (The cataloguers rather than academic subject librarians were approached because it was thought they had an overall view, whereas subject-librarian input might have led to some overlap of subjects.) Around fifty subject divisions were thought to be appropriate and manageable. The resulting spreadsheet lists each of our five faculties and the subjects therein. Subdivisions of subjects, by faculty, range in number from eight to sixteen. Listed under each subject are the number of students and their percentage of the total student body and the number of items in the col-lection and their percentage of the total collection. Using this data, a table was put together which shows the percentage of the collection as com-pared with the percentage of student numbers for each subject, and which subject collections are less than, more than or equal to (the difference being less than 1%) the equivalent student numbers. The table also shows the age of the collection in age bands: less than two years, three to five years, six to ten years, eleven to fifteen years and greater than fifteen years. From this data the percentages by age band can be determined, and the percent-ages of greater than ten years and greater than fifteen years have been calculated.SCONUL Focus 49 2010 53exampleThe example (Figure 1) shows the data and calcu-lations for dance and drama which, as has already been mentioned, is one of our newer subjects but which includes texts of plays that have been in the collection for longer. E-books were included.Age of collection Dance and dramaEqual or < 2 years 1323–5 years 2266–10 years 36911–15 years 274> 15 years 630Total items 1,631% of total collection 0.47Items in collection 346,158Number of students 478% of total 3.00Number of students 15,939Figure 1. From this was determined the situation in Figure 2.% of collection v % of total student nos. >10 years as % >15 years as %Less than Equal (< 1%) More thanDance & drama  55% 39%Figure 2. hoW can We use this information?Though the original intention in gathering this information – to use it as evidence in negotiations to increase funding – is not appropriate at this time, it still has its uses. It provides the academic subject librarians with an age profile of their sub-ject collections and gives them a ‘health check’ as to whether their subject collection is greater than or less than the student profile. As it is not feasible in the current financial climate to improve the age of the collection by ‘front loading’ it with an increase in the proportion of new items purchased, we are approaching it from the other direction. The academic subject librarians are being asked to weed their subject areas during the summer of 2010: to address the items that are more than fif-teen years old in the first instance and also to look at those that are between ten and fifteen years old. The hope is that a similar exercise carried out after the summer will reveal a much reduced propor-tion of old books (except in areas where age matters less, as mentioned earlier). The obvious benefit will be one of space released, but it should improve usage since items that are sought should be easier to find, and thereby contribute to an increase in user satisfaction. 

Is the library collection fit for purpose? Collection analysis at the University of Lincoln

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Lincoln Institutional Repository