OhioLINK Collection Analysis Project

Similar documents
Building Collections Cooperatively: Analysis of Collection Use in the OhioLINK Library Consortium

THE IMPACT OF COLLECTION WEEDING ON THE ACCURACY OF WORLDCAT HOLDINGS. July, 2002

Collection Development Policies Revised December 2015; Updated August 2017

It's Not Just About Weeding: Using Collaborative Collection Analysis to Develop Consortial Collections

Finding items in the Gamble Library

Making Hard Choices: Using Data to Make Collections Decisions

AN ELECTRONIC JOURNAL IMPACT STUDY: THE FACTORS THAT CHANGE WHEN AN ACADEMIC LIBRARY MIGRATES FROM PRINT 1

With Careful Consideration and Managed Expectations: Migration from Ex Libris' Voyager to Ex Libris' Alma/Primo

Interpret the numbers: Putting e-book usage statistics in context

Cooperative Cataloging in Academic Libraries: From Mesopotamia to Metadata

The shelf-free generation

The John Kinder Theological Library. Using library resources effectively to support your study

COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY

Today s WorldCat: New Uses, New Data

As used in this statement, acquisitions policy means the policy of the library with regard to the building of the collection as a whole.

Don t Stop the Presses! Study of Short-Term Return on Investment on Print Books Purchased under Different Acquisition Modes

Success Providing Excellent Service in a Changing World of Digital Information Resources: Collection Services at McGill

ACRL STATISTICS QUESTIONNAIRE, INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE QUESTIONNAIRE

Shortwood Teachers College 77 Shortwood Road Kingston 8. Tel(876) , ext. 2222

A More-Product-Less-Process Approach to Cataloging Recordings

University of Wisconsin Libraries Last Copy Retention Guidelines

The Lilly Library of rare books, manuscripts, and special collections at Indiana

Providing an Effective Gateway to the World of Information

Analysis Using the OCLC and RLG Bibliographic Databases

ASERL s Virtual Storage/Preservation Concept

BOOKS AT JSTOR. books.jstor.org

The Proportion of NUC Pre-56 Titles Represented in OCLC WorldCat

White Paper ABC. The Costs of Print Book Collections: Making the case for large scale ebook acquisitions. springer.com. Read Now

THE AUTOMATING OF A LARGE RESEARCH LIBRARY. Susan Miller and Jean Yamauchi INTRODUCTION

Libraries as Repositories of Popular Culture: Is Popular Culture Still Forgotten?

Presenter: JoEllen Ostendorf, Troup-Harris-Coweta Regional Library

Cataloguing for the world: motivation, method and madness

More than a feeling: I see my MARC life walking away. Eric Childress Consulting Project Manager OCLC Research

Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Library and Information Science Commons

Akron-Summit County Public Library. Collection Development Policy. Approved December 13, 2018

Do we still need bibliographic standards in computer systems?

CLEAR LAKE ELEM SCHOOL

Collection Development Policy Western Illinois University Libraries

LIBRARY. Preble County District Library Annual Report. Preble County District

University Library Collection Development Policy

E-Books in Academic Libraries

Record Group 60 IUP Libraries

HERITAGE ELEM SCHOOL. Analysis Overview. Collection Information Date of Analysis: 21-May :34:53

BONDUEL ELEM SCHOOL. Analysis Overview. Collection Information Date of Analysis: 29-Mar :42:38

SURING ELEM SCHOOL. Analysis Overview. Collection Information Date of Analysis: 08-Apr :44:23

SEBASTIAN MDL SCHOOL Fall 2013

DOWNLOAD PDF BOWKER ANNUAL LIBRARY AND TRADE ALMANAC 2005

Creating a Shared Neuroscience Collection Development Policy

Lynn Lay Goldthwait Polar Library Byrd Polar Research Center The Ohio State University 1090 Carmack Road Columbus, Ohio USA

PELICAN ELEM SCHOOL Oct 2010

LC GUIDELINES SUPPLEMENT TO THE MARC 21 FORMAT FOR AUTHORITY DATA

Separating the wheat from the chaff: Intensive deselection to enable preservation and access

Background. CC:DA/ACRL/2003/1 May 12, 2003 page 1. ALA/ALCTS/CCS Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access

PRAIRIE ELEM SCHOOL. Analysis Overview. Collection Information Date of Analysis: 10-May :02:04

ARBORETUM ELEM SCHOOL

Visualize and model your collection with Sustainable Collection Services

NORTHWOODS COMMUNITY ELEM SCH Oct. 1,2010

The Ohio State University's Library Control System: From Circulation to Subject Access and Authority Control

Researching Islamic Law Topics Using Secondary Sources

E-journals: the OhioLINK experience

The Cincinnati Bible Seminary of the Cincinnati Christian University. Course Syllabus

INFO 665. Fall Collection Analysis of the Bozeman Public Library

THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES ARCHIVAL SERVICES COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY

How Libraries are Providing Access to Electronic Serials: A Survey of Academic Library Web Sites

The CYCU Chang Ching Yu Memorial Library Resource Development Policy

Collection Development Policy Moore Reading Room Department of Religious Studies, University of Kansas. Mission

Monographic Collections Analysis Webinar

China National Bibliography at the Crossroad. Ben Gu ( 顧犇 ) National Library of China

Special Collections/University Archives Collection Development Policy

Getting Started with Cataloging. A Self-Paced Lesson for Library Staff

Research Methods Electronic Bibliographic Searches

Library Acquisition Patterns Preliminary Findings

Introduction to the Library s Website

Keywords art education art education AND creativity multicultural education creative thinking art - study and teaching

Leveraging your investment in EAST: A series of perspectives

Questionnaire for Library of Congress Reclassification

6/12/2013. Deselection: Defined Broadly. Rethinking Library Resources: Print Books and Data-Driven Deselection. Sustainable Collection Services (SCS)

The National Program for Acquisitions and Cataloging: Its Impact on University Libraries

ROLE OF FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORDS IN DIGITAL LIBRARY SYSTEM

Jeanette Albiez Davis Library. Literature Pathfinder Selected Resources and Services

Comparing gifts to purchased materials: a usage study

Authority Control in the Online Environment

Collection Development Policy. Bishop Library. Lebanon Valley College. November, 2003

COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY

Patron-Initiated Collection Development: Progress of a Paradigm Shift

III. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY

Guides to Resources

IDS Project Conference

Comparing Books Held by Japanese Public Libraries: Outsourcing versus Local Government Management

SHARE Bibliographic and Cataloging Best Practices

Running head: HARRISON COLLGE 1

The Societal Impact of History Books: Citations, Reader Ratings, and the 'Altmetric' Value of Goodreads

Jerry Falwell Library RDA Copy Cataloging

Library Catalog in Transition

Web of Science Unlock the full potential of research discovery

Periodical Usage in an Education-Psychology Library

Retrospective Conversion of East Asian Materials

A. Principles of Material Selection

Experiences with a bibliometric indicator for performance-based funding of research institutions in Norway

Libraries and MARC Holdings: From Works to Items

Transcription:

OhioLINK Collection Analysis Project Annual RLG Partnership Meeting June 2, 2009 Preliminary Analysis Ed O Neill, OCLC Research

The Overview

Origin of OhioLINK Originated in 1987 with the Library Study Committee Report s recommendation to: Build shared depositories Create a statewide catalog

OhioLINK Today Shared catalog with patron initiated borrowing Nearly 50 million books and other library materials Over 600,000 users at over a hundred institutions Includes virtually all academic libraries in Ohio: The State Library of Ohio 5 ARL Institutions 11 Universities 44 Colleges 15 Community Colleges 28 Branch campuses 5 Depositories 3 Museums and other independent cultural institutions 20 Off-campus hospitals and medical centers

Project Goals For the book collection: To reduce unnecessary duplication To increase local collection development activities To expand the amount spent on cooperative acquisitions To strengthen the collective collection

Research Project Joint study by OhioLINK, OhioLINK members, OhioLINK Collection Building Task Force (CBTF) and OCLC Research This project is distinct from OCLC s collection analysis service Much of the planned analysis is new and untested

Distinctive Aspects Size and scope of collections Use of local holdings and circulation information Number and variety of institutions FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) New metrics (Audience Level, Comprehensiveness, )

Caution! The project is in progress and further data analysis is planned. Results are preliminary.

The Data Item No.: OCLC No.: Title: LCCN: Location Code: Status Code: Circulation: Renewals: Accession date: Date of Last Use: ISBN: Source: i25878591 45207959 The infinite / A.W. Moore 00051722 bc - 5 1 8/3/2001 8/23/2004 0415252857 (pbk.) Akron

Data Collection Circulation data for all institutions was collected twice: First Sample: May 2007 Second Sample: May 2008

WorldCat Linking The OCLC Number is used to link the circulation records to the corresponding bibliographic record in WorldCat Obsolete OCLC numbers were replaced, Unique LCCNs or ISBNs were used to identify an OCLC number, Records lacking any standard number were excluded from the study, Records from the 2007 & 2008 circulation files were paired to determine annual circulation, Approximately 93% of the records were validated; many of the unvalidated records were for non-book materials.

The Circulation Data Total circulation 49,697,093 No. of items (Volumes) 29,570,205 Number of items circulated 11,850,584 No. circulated in previous year 2,715,573 No. of manifestations (Books) 6,955,505 Number of books circulated 3,402,603 No. circulated in previous year 986,208

Types of Analysis Institution focused The Collective collection Subject based

Institution Focused Analysis Detailed holdings General Statistics Languages Age Subjects

Multi Level Structure Top level units: University of Akron Individual campus, depositories, and external organizations (Museums, Centers, Hospitals) Second level units: University Libraries Separate administrative units [university libraries, law, medicine, etc.) or distinct library units. Third level units: Distinct library units. Bierce Library Location codes : bccco, bccct, bccir, bccm, bcgd, bcgdo, bcmu, The codes used within OhioLINK to identify the location of the individual items. Over 4,200 different location codes are used.

Three Level Structure for Akron Complete Circulating Circulation Circulation Library Unit Collection Collection (2007 08) Rate Akron Campus 841,303 705,119 84,332 0.120 Law 89,231 37,503 4,852 0.129 University Libraries 752,072 667,616 79,480 0.119 Bierce 637,975 587,793 63,623 0.108 Science 88,055 78,837 15,848 0.201 Archives 25,600 595 8 0.013 Local Storage 442 391 1 0.003 Wayne Campus 21,327 18,664 4,135 0.222 NE Depository 261,070 257,182 4,539 0.018

General Holdings Unique Holdings Total Circulation Annual Circ. Active Materials Library Unit Total Circulating Non Circ Number Percentage Audience Level Frequency Rate Frequency Rate Number Percentage NE Depository 260,382 256,961 3,421 16,719 6% 0.65 310,785 0.102 4,403 0.017 106,624 41% Wayne Campus 21,474 19,792 1,682 807 4% 0.37 54,051 0.278 4,699 0.237 13,895 65% Akron Art Museum 41 0 41 7 17% 0.62 0 41 100% University of Akron 764,925 650,730 114,195 38,590 5% 0.60 2,716,868 0.370 71,186 0.109 430,628 56% Law 89,207 27,381 61,826 3,674 4% 0.71 47,993 0.166 4,714 0.172 74,827 84% University Libraries 675,718 623,349 52,369 34,916 5% 0.59 2,668,875 0.378 66,472 0.107 355,801 53% Bierce 637,975 621,624 16,351 30,192 5% 0.59 2,663,292 0.378 65,267 0.105 318,405 50% Science 11,701 1,620 10,081 766 7% 0.59 5,579 0.430 1,204 0.743 11,394 97% Archives 25,600 0 25,600 3,940 15% 0.46 0 25,600 100% Local Storage 442 105 337 18 4% 0.83 4 0.007 1 0.010 402 91%

Age Library Unit Average Age All Items Circ. Items All Dates Active Items Annual Circ. Circ. Rate NE Depository 50.5 261,070 256,961 4,010 4,403 0.017 Wayne Campus 18.1 21,474 19,792 3,562 4,699 0.237 Akron Art Museum 25.1 11,760 0 0 0 0.000 Akron Campus 28.3 841,303 726,994 67,887 87,309 0.120 Law 34.4 89,231 27,381 1,713 4,714 0.172 University Libraries 27.8 752,072 699,613 66,174 82,595 0.118 Bierce 27.2 637,975 621,624 53,415 65,266 0.105 Science 21.1 88,055 77,884 12,758 17,328 0.222 Archives 64.6 25,600 0 0 0 0.000 Local Storage 49.1 442 105 1 1 0.010 Goodyear Tire Company 20.1 497 0 0 0 0.000

Languages All Languages French Library Unit All Items Circ. Items Circ. Circ Rate All Items Circ. Items Circ. Circ Rate NE Depository 260,382 256,961 4,403 0.017 6,429 6,429 76 0.012 Wayne Campus 21,474 19,792 4,699 0.237 4 4 0 0.000 Akron Art Museum 41 0 0 0 0 0 University of Akron 764,925 650,730 71,186 0.109 3,500 2,678 153 0.057 Law 89,207 27,381 4,714 0.172 52 42 0 0.000 University Libraries 675,718 623,349 66,472 0.107 3,448 2,636 153 0.058 Bierce 637,975 621,624 65,267 0.105 2,934 2,633 153 0.058 Science 11,701 1,620 1,204 0.743 29 0 0 Archives 25,600 0 0 480 0 0 Local Storage 442 105 1 0.010 5 3 0 0.000

Subjects All Materials Ethics Library Unit All Items Circ. Items Annual Circ. Circ. Rate All Items Circ. Items Annual Circ. Circ. Rate NE Depository 260,382 256,961 4,403 0.017 386 386 6 0.016 Wayne Campus 21,474 19,792 4,699 0.237 84 80 19 0.238 Akron Art Museum 41 0 0 0 0 0 University of Akron 764,925 650,730 71,186 0.109 1,606 1,456 198 0.136 Law 89,207 27,381 4,714 0.172 38 37 1 0.027 University Libraries 675,718 623,349 66,472 0.107 1,568 1,419 197 0.139 Bierce 637,975 621,624 65,267 0.105 1,431 1,419 197 0.139 Science 11,701 1,620 1,204 0.743 0 0 0 Archives 25,600 0 0 137 0 0 Local Storage 442 105 1 0.010 0 0 0

Collective Collection: What Do We Have? How many items are held? What languages? How old? How many are unique? In what subjects? How many copies are needed?

Most Used Total Circulation 2007-2008: 796

Most Widely Held Held by 69 Institutions (95%)

Distribution of Resources Manifestations

OhioLINK Resources (FRBR View)

Duplication Rate Average No. of Copies 4.5 Publication Date

Subject Distribution

Annual Circulation Rates by Subject

Obsolescence Rates

Circulation Rate vs. Age

Annual Non-English Circulation Rates Average Circulation Rate: 0.109

Usage Distribution Annual Circulation 455,000 6.5% Number of Manifestations

Duplication by Subject

Metrics

Simple Metrics Collection size (FRBR View) Number of items Number of Manifestations Number of Works Circulation Annual circulation (Count \ rate) Total circulation (Count \ rate) Active Proportion Age Mean (Average) Median Percent English

Coverage The percent of all OhioLINK manifestations held in a given collection. Example: The University of Akron s Ethics collection Collectively OhioLINK libraries hold 13,308 different manifestations classified as Ethics, 1,560 of these manifestations are held by the University of Akron, Coverage = 1,560 / 13,308 = 12%

Comprehensiveness The proportion of all OhioLINK circulations that could have been met by the manifestations in a given collection. Example: The University of Akron s Ethics collection All Ethics manifestations in OhioLINK libraries circulated 8,817 times last year, Collectively the Ethics manifestations held at the University of Akron accounted for 3,060 circulations, Comprehensiveness = 3,060 / 8,817 = 0.347

Audience Level Phylogeny and systematics of the treehopper subfamily Octopusses and squid Audience level: 0.96 Fundamentals of entomology Audience level: 0.06 Audience level: 0.51 0 (Juvenile) (Scholarly) 1

Subjects

View within Institutions University of Akron No. of Subject Description Number of Works Manifestations Number of Items Annual Circulation Coverage Comprehen siveness Average Age Percent English Audience Level Philosophy and Religion 24,934 25,946 27,581 3,181 6% 0.230 33.5 98% 0.60 Philosophy: Periodicals, Societies, Congresses 316 327 377 20 10% 0.359 34.8 97% 0.61 Philosophy: History and Systems, Ancient through Renaissance 1,805 1,917 2,036 321 11% 0.397 31.1 97% 0.65 Philosophy: History and Systems, Post Renaissance 4,848 5,101 5,408 507 15% 0.433 33.3 96% 0.65 Logic 579 607 643 30 17% 0.297 41.3 98% 0.68 Speculative Philosophy 1,517 1,539 1,603 116 16% 0.384 31.2 98% 0.65 Aesthetics 321 328 334 43 13% 0.349 29.5 98% 0.64 Ethics 1,500 1,560 1,606 198 12% 0.347 34.1 99% 0.61 Religions, Mythology, Rationalism 2,685 2,774 2,885 551 9% 0.278 33.8 99% 0.56 Judaism 680 699 717 51 4% 0.222 25.6 99% 0.55 Islam, Baha'ism, Theosophy 644 673 689 221 4% 0.290 21.7 100% 0.54 Buddhism 222 227 231 51 4% 0.118 22.1 99% 0.59 Christianity (General) 2,366 2,456 2,731 325 7% 0.285 32.6 97% 0.59 Bible 1,289 1,448 1,572 141 3% 0.089 37.7 97% 0.51 Doctrinal Theology 1,257 1,298 1,336 151 3% 0.138 36.2 98% 0.55 Practical Theology 1,256 1,275 1,397 147 2% 0.097 35.7 99% 0.54 Eastern Christian Churches 106 107 111 10 2% 0.143 32.3 100% 0.59 Roman Catholic Church 1,673 1,710 1,849 153 3% 0.158 31.0 97% 0.58 Protestantism 1,870 1,900 2,056 145 5% 0.247 40.4 99% 0.58

View across Institutions Number of Manifestations Ethics (BJ 1 1800) Number Number Annual Institution of Works of Items Circulation Coverage Comprehen Average Percent Audience siveness Age English Level Cincinnati 2,482 2,638 3,014 462 20% 0.60 26 93% 0.65 Oberlin 2,793 2,960 3,236 344 22% 0.54 46 95% 0.64 Miami 1,955 2,016 2,088 427 15% 0.53 25 99% 0.62 BGSU 1,729 1,858 2,132 571 14% 0.48 27 99% 0.57 Dayton 2,297 2,395 3,180 308 18% 0.46 34 95% 0.57 CWRU 2,245 2,401 2,656 293 18% 0.40 45 92% 0.66 Ohio Univ. 1,613 1,688 1,789 395 13% 0.38 27 91% 0.65 John Carroll 1,640 1,672 1,782 200 13% 0.37 28 96% 0.61 Toledo 1,582 1,634 1,721 197 12% 0.36 26 100% 0.62 Wright State 1,059 1,080 1,130 157 8% 0.35 14 100% 0.62 Akron 1,500 1,560 1,606 198 12% 0.35 34 99% 0.61 Ohio State 1,952 2,052 2,364 399 15% 0.34 34 80% 0.70 Kent State 2,178 2,375 2,818 294 18% 0.34 52 95% 0.63 Denison 1,311 1,343 1,380 213 10% 0.33 28 99% 0.59 Youngstown 1,595 1,650 1,741 184 12% 0.32 35 99% 0.59

Conclusions Preliminary conclusions: Duplication rates are steady, The 80/20 rule may be closer to 80/6, Limited use of non-english materials, Unique resources widely distributed, Circulation rates vary greatly by subject, institution, Next Steps What information is helpful; what isn t? What did we get wrong? What did we miss?