Circulation As Assessment: Collection Development Policies Evaluated in Terms of Circulation at a Small Academic Library

46��

Circulation as Assessment: Collection Development Policies Evaluated in Terms of Circulation at a Small Academic Library

Debbi Dinkins

At the root of all library acquisition decisions is the goal to add to the collection those materials that meet users’ needs. Compiling circulation statistics is one way of assessing users’ needs. This project seeks to assess the current collection development practices at Stetson Univer sity with respect to the circulation of books purchased in support of se lected departmental curricula. Circulation statistics for books selected by five academic departments over a five-year period are compared with those of librarian selections in corresponding subject areas.

he process of allocating depart circulating books. Larry Hardesty con ment and program funding for ducted two studies at DePauw University library materials is a compli and at Eckerd College in the 1980s. At cated and timeconsuming en DePauw, Hardesty tracked all circulating deavor for acquisitions and collection books purchased over a sixmonth period development librarians in small academic (2,031 books) and found that "80% of the libraries. Although many academic librar . circulation was accounted for by 30% ies have been able to increase their mate of the books."l At Eckerd College, he rials budgets in recent years, these in tracked purchased circulating books ac creases have often failed to keep pace quired during one budget year (1,398 with the rising cost of materials. This de books) and found that 34 percent of the crease in buying power impacts libraries' books studied accounted for 80 percent ability to support the research needs of of the total circulation.2 their users. At Stetson University's main campus At the root of all library acquisition in DeLand, Florida, assigning materials decisions is the goal to add to the collec budget amounts for university depart tion those materials that will meet users' ments and programs is a highly refined needs; compiling usage statistics is an ef process involving an allocation formula fective way of assessing previous deci based on variables such as number of stu sions and allows extrapolation for the dent majors and number of faculty in a future. Studies have been conducted to department. There also is a general fund track the use, over time, of a sampling of from which librarians make selections.

Debbi Dinkins is Head of Technical Services and Associate Professor at Stetson University; e-mail: [email protected].

46 ��t�� A��t�� 47

Stetson University, primarily an under als in the field, and library use/research graduate institution with a few master's intensity of the field at Stetson. Participa programs, has a College of Arts & Sci tion of faculty in the development of the ences, a School of Business Administra collection is highly encouraged.? Each tion, and a School of Music. Stetson pro academic department designates a liaison vides a microcosm in which to study the responsible for coordinating, surveying, effectiveness of materials' selection by li and collecting library material requests brarians and classroom faculty.3 from other faculty in the department. These departmental requests come to the Academic Library Collection acquisitions librarian, who then approves Development Practices the requests for ordering. Faculty requests In a literature survey on collection devel almost always receive approval, with the opment policies, many articles confirmed rare question occurring about availabil that classroom faculty determine most of ity or cost. Faculty requests are purchased the selections made in small academic li with departmental library materials bud braries. A survey cited in Library Journal gets. The formula for departmental bud in 1998 claimed that "virtually every li get allocation is reevaluated periodically brary LJ surveyed relied on faculty when by the Library Administrative Team and making purchasing decisions, and half of by the University Library Committee.8 them ranked faculty as the numberone source."4 An earlier survey in 1997 stated Purpose and Hypothesis that "the two most important reasons for This project seeks to assess the current selecting a title are relevance to curricu collection development practices of lum, and requests by faculty."s Teaching Stetson University's duPontBall Library faculty's allegiance to their particular dis with respect to circulation of books pur cipline or specialty, as well as to the re chased in support of selected departmen search needs of their students, impacts tal curricula. Using the circulation data of books ordered, the study compares the T�� p�t�� f�t�� t�d�� t��t circulation percentages of books selected ��t��p��t�� f�� by departmental faculty to those of books ��t�d�� d�p��t��t��f��t� selected by librarians in the correspond w�� t�� t�� ing subject areas. Fiveyear data sets p��t�� f� �� t�d� �� (1997-2001) of acquisitions data and cir ��t�� culation data were used to conduct the study. The hypothesis of this study is that their selection decisions. "By definition circulation percentages of books selected and by tradition, the faculty are research by departmental faculty will be higher specialists. Their primary loyalty is often than circulation percentages of books se to a profession rather than to the institu lected by librarians in similar subject ar tion. The library, however, must assemble eas. If project results reject this hypoth collections that serve narrow subdisci esis, the results will be used to help the plines as well as the multidisciplinary selected departments' faculty to optimize needs of the community as a whole. Thus, library materials budgets and enhance the scope of faculty interests does not selection techniques. necessarily match those of the library."6 Methodology Stetson’s Collection Development Choosing Departments to Study Policy Departments were selected for this study Academic departments are allocated based on the percentage of the departmen funds based on a formula, taking into ac tal budget spent on circulating mono count number of majors, student contact graphs in fiscal years 1999-2000 and 2000- hours, number of faculty, cost of materi 2001. Stetson is somewhat unusual in that 48� �� allocations to departments TABLE 1 cover their journal sub Departmental Monograph Expenditure Percentage scriptions as well as mono graph purchases, with jour Department 2000-2001 1999-2000 nal subscription costs % of Total Budget % of Total Budget continuing every year. The on Cire. Monographs on Cire. Monographs study included depart Art 82% 82% ments with more than 50 English 66% 67% percent of their budgets History 59% 58% spent on circulating mono Music 66% 50% graphs. Based on this crite Political science 64% 65% rion, all natural science de partments were excluded. After consideration of all qualifying de 2001, each monograph title was checked partments, the departments of art, English, in the Sirsi system for the number of times history, music, and political science were the title had circulated since 1997. Titles chosen for study, based on their mono in the spreadsheet were matched to titles graphic selection percentages and on the in the Sirsi system by comparing factors ease of matching librarian selections to the such as title, author, OCLC number, pub subject matter.9 (See table 1.) lication date, and acquisition date. Refer ence collection titles and missing titles Generating Departmental Selection Data were deleted from the spreadsheet. Each Acquisitions records kept in the library's volume of multivolume sets that circu automated computer system (Sirsi Uni lated more than once was entered sepa corn®) generated lists of circulating mono rately, with notes in the Comments col graphs ordered by each department us umn about which volume was being rep ing its departmental library materials resented. If an entire multivolume set had budget for five fiscal years. Each list was not circulated at least once, one line in the converted to a spreadsheet, with columns spreadsheet represented the whole set for order number, order line number (if with a note in the Comments column. applicable), fiscal year, author, title, With all titles in the spreadsheet OCLC number, number of charges (times matched to circulation data, the spread circulated), and comments. (See table 2 for sheet was sorted to display the titles in an excerpt from one of the spreadsheets.) descending order, based on circulation. After the selection spreadsheets were From the spreadsheet data, the percent constructed for each department for the ages of titles checked out at least once and fiscal years between 1996-1997 and 2000- more than once were calculated. (See the

TABLE 2 Section of English Department Spreadsheet

Order #Line #FY Author Title # Charges 99-006 54 9899 Albright, Daniel Quantum poetics 25 98-269 49 9798 Peterson, Nancy J. Toni Morrison: critical and theoretical approaches 11 98-055 35 9798 Furman, Jan. Toni Morrison's fiction 9 98-371 10 9798 Petry, Alice Hall, 1951- Critical essays on Kate Chopin I 9 98-269 13 9798 Kaplan, Carla The erotics of talk: women's writing and feminist paradigm 9 ��t�� A��t�� 49 books that circulated at least once. Over TABLE 3 the last two years of the study, the art de LC Classification for Department/ partment spent an average of 82 percent Subject Area of its library materials budget on the book format. Sixtythree percent of the total Department/ LC number of books selected during the five Subjeet Area Classifieation year period circulated at least once, and Art N 36 percent circulated more than once. Li English P-PA, PR-PS, PZ brarians also selected effectively in the art History C, D, E, F category, with 54 percent of the books cir Music M culating at least once, and 36 percent cir Political Science J, K culating more than once (table 5). The de partmental faculty's high circulation Results section for these percentages.) The percentage is even more impressive con same process was followed for each of the sidering that art department faculty or five selected departments. dered almost eight times as many circu lating art books during the same time Generating Librarian Selection Data period as the librarians did. Acquisitions data were examined from the library's general fund, which is used English and Political Science to order items selected by librarians. For In the subject areas of English and politi the five fiscal years studied, circulating cal science, the departmental faculties and monographs ordered by librarians were the librarians compare evenly in selection drawn from the Sirsi system, and the data circulation percentages for books circu were entered into spreadsheets for each lating at least once. During the last two of the five department subject areas. The years of the study, the English department circulating monographs were matched to spent about 67 percent of its library ma each subject area based on the LC classi terials budget on the book format, and the fication associated with the monograph. political Science department spent about Table 3 shows the LC classifications used 65 percent. During the five years studied, for each studied subject area. the English faculty selected nearly three As with the departmental selections, times as many books as the librarians in each librarianselected title was checked that subject area. The political science fac in the Sirsi system for number of times cir ulty selected ten times as many books as culated since 1997. The spreadsheets for the librarians during the same time pe each subject area were sorted in descend riod. Interestingly, the circulation percent ing order, based on the number of times circulated. Percentages of se TABLE 4 lections that circulated at least once Number of Selections by Departmental and more than once were calculated Faculty and Librarians based on the spreadsheet data. Total Number Total Number Results of Seleetions of Seleetions Table 4 shows the approximate to by Departmental by Librarians tal number of circulating books se Faeulty in Subjeet Area lected by departmental faculty and English 1,433 512 librarians in each subject area be Art 598 80 tween 1997 and 2001.l0 English 1,433 512 History 439 288 Art Music 635 23 Based on the data, the art department Political science 1,086 104 faculty performed best in selecting 5��

TABLE S Circulation Percentages for Departmental Faculty and Librarian Selections

Seleetions Cireulating Seleetions Cireulating At Least Onee More Than Onee DepartmentI Departmental Librarians Departmental Librarians Subject Area Faculty Faculty Art 63% 54% 36% 36% English 43% 46% 23% 22% History 44% 58% 18% 28% Music 46% 70% 25% 48% Political science 45% 48% 24% 31% ages for both groups' selections vary by An additional library materials fund ex seven percentage points or less. As shown ists for the School of Music that is prima in table 5, the largest variation occurs in rily used for purchasing scores and re a comparison of political science faculty cordings and was not included in the selections and librarian selections that cir study. At Stetson, a music librarian acts culated more than once, with 24 percent as liaison between the library and the of the departmental faculty selections cir School of Music faculty for selection of culating more than once and 31 percent materials. The music faculty and the mu of the librarians' selections circulating sic librarian selected about 1,500 more cir more than once. culating music books than did the other librarians. However, the librarians' selec F�� t�� d�� t�d�p��t� tions circulated at a higher percentage ��t�f��t�y�8��p��t��f�t�� rate than those of the faculty, with 48 per ��t��w�� t�d�f�� 4 cent of the librarians' selections circulat p��t��f�t�� t�d��d ing more than once, compared to a 25 per cent circulation rate for the faculty History selections (table 5). Because of the wide In history, the librarians' selections have gap between the numbers of books se circulated more frequently than the de lected by the two groups, more study and partmental selections. History faculty se attention should be given to music book lected almost twice as many circulating selection before collection development books as librarians during the fiveyear conclusions can be drawn. Also, it should time period. As shown in table 5, the li be noted that a portion of the music cir brarians' selections circulated at a higher culating books, including all selected by percentage, with 58 percent circulating at the music librarian, were housed in a least once and 28 percent circulating more separate music library until 2001. With than once, compared to the department the relocation of those books to the main faculty's 44 percent and 18 percent, re library, circulation rates may increase be spectively. During the last two years of cause the books are now more accessible the study, the history department spent to all library users. about 59 percent of its library materials budget on the book format. Comparison with Other Studies As stated earlier, Hardesty's study at Music DePauw University compared classroom The music department's faculty spent an faculty selections and librarian selections. average of 58 percent of their general li His study divided the use of circulating brary materials budget on the book for books into the following four categories: mat during the last two years of the study. heavy use (more than eleven circulations); ��t�� A��t�� 51

TABLE 6 Percentages of Selections by Stetson Departmental Faculty and Librarians Accounting for 80% of Circulation

Department Faeulty Librarians Dept.ISubject Area Percentage of Selections Percentage of Selections Accounting for 80% Accounting for 80% of Circulation of Circulation Art 34% 29% English 25% 25% History 29% 33% Music 25% 39% Political science 25% 28% moderate use (six to ten circulations); selected accounting for 80 percent of the light use (one to five circulations); and circulation. Lower percentages accounted none. Twentysix percent of the librarian for 80 percent of the circulation in other selected books were either moderately or subject areas. These percentages are very heavily used. Only 13 percent of the class similar to the percentages in both Hardesty room facultyselected books were in these studies. two categories.ll �By comparison, the cir culation percentages of both librarianse Recommendations lected and classroom facultyselected Departmental Collection Development books at Stetson were much lower in the Changes moderately and heavily used categories. No change is recommended in collection Neither group had more than five percent development practices for the art depart of their selections circulate six or more ment. Both departmental faculty and li times. Because DePauw and Stetson are brarians are selecting effectively in this comparably sized universities, the differ area, with circulation percentages at or ence in use possibly can be attributed to above 36 percent. Also, no change is rec longer checkout periods. Typically, at the ommended for collection development time of Hardesty's study (1972-1978), the practices in the English subject area. Both checkout period for students was two departmental faculty and librarians are weeks. However, Stetson students have a selecting materials with circulation per onemonth checkout period and books centages above 22 percent. circulate to Stetson faculty for the entire In political science, there was a higher semester. percentage of librarian selections circu Hardesty's study at DePauw found that lating more than once, with 31 percent for 80 percent of circulation was accounted for librarians and 24 percent for departmen by 30 percent of the books studied.l2 In his tal faculty. In history, librarian selections replication study at Eckerd, Hardesty circulating more than once also circulated found that 80 percent of the circulation was more frequently than departmental fac accounted for by 34 percent of the books ulty selections in the same category, with studied.l3 In this Stetson study, for selec 28 percent for librarians and 18 percent tions made by art department faculty, 80 for departmental faculty. Librarians percent of the circulation was accounted should work more closely with political for by 34 percent of the books studied (table science and history faculty to enhance 6). Other departmental faculty selections their selection choices. By exposing them had lower percentages accounting for 80 to more diverse sources of book reviews percent of the circulation. Librarian selec (e.g., subjectspecific journals) and by tions in music had 39 percent of the books encouraging the faculty to select books 5�� more specific to the Stetson curriculum eas. Based on circulation percentages of and class assignments, the departments selections circulating more than once (table should be able to select books that circu 5), the hypothesis is rejected. The circula late more frequently. Coursespecific, tion percentages for librarians' selections classroombased surveys, as developed circulating more than once were equal to by Patricia Weaver, might offer depart or higher than those of departmental fac mental faculty some insight into selection ulty selections in all subject areas studied. in their fields.l4 "Classroombased sur The librarians and staff should open veys of students and interviews with their a dialogue with the history, political sci instructors should be an ongoing collec ence, and music faculty about the use of tionbuilding tool for academic libraries, the books they are currently ordering for where space and budgetary restraints of the library. As Hardesty concluded from ten limit the number of books that can be the study at Eckerd College, "most class made available at any one time."ls More room faculty have received little or no over, the librarians should offer to work formal education on how to select library with political science and history faculty materials that are appropriate for the un in developing research methods and strat dergraduate student or on how to encour egies for their students, using a broader age undergraduate student use of these spectrum of the library's circulating ma materials."l6 Better communication be terials. tween the librarians and the faculty of all Because of the low number of circulat departments will enhance the selection ing books selected in the music subject accuracy of the departmental faculty and area by librarians, no specific conclusions the librarians in those subject areas. The can be drawn on the effectiveness of mu results of this project will be made avail sic collection development by nonmusic able to all five departments. librarians. Based on local experience, the The data generated by this study may circulation percentages of musical scores be of interest for future studies. The raw and recordings selected by music depart data could be used to gather more specific ment faculty should be much higher than information about areas such as the fol for music books. Further study should be lowing: librarian selections over the five conducted on music scores and record year study period; circulation performance ings circulation to determine circulation of large standing order and/or continua percentages and to compare the figures tion sets; general trends in selection among with those of circulating music books. librarians and departmental faculty; com parison to Choice reviews (Choice card Conclusions reviews are sent to all departments for use The hypothesis of this study theorized that in the selection process). The study data circulation percentages of books selected will be useful in the future in making se by departmental faculty would be higher lection and acquisition decisions for the than circulation percentages of books se library and will be used as a basis for fu lected by librarians in similar subject ar ture studies or projects.

Notes 1. Larry Hardesty, "Use of Library Materials at a Small Liberal Arts College," Library Re- search 3 (1981): 261-82. 2. ---, "Use of Library Materials at a Small Liberal Arts College: A Replication," Collec- tion Management 10 (1988): 61-80. 3. For many years, some departments had to cut back on their monographic library pur chases because of lack of funding and failure of budget growth to match inflation. New pro grams developed over the past few years have had no library budgets and been forced to rely on existing departmental budgets to fund their library needs for research and curricular support. 4. Barbara Hoffert, "Book Report, Part 2: What Academic Libraries Buy and How Much They Spend," Library Journal 123 (Sept. 1, 1998): 144-46. ��t�� A��t�� 5 �

5. James H. Sweetland and Peter G. Christensen, "Developing Language and Literature Collections in Academic Libraries: A Survey," Journal of Academic Librarianship 23 (Mar. 1997): 119-25. 6. Lawrence Thomas, "Tradition and Expertise in Academic Library Collection Develop ment," College and Research Libraries 48 (Nov. 1987): 487-93. 7. Stetson University Library, "Acquisitions and Collection Development," Dec. 2001. Avail able online from http://www.stetson.edu/departments/library/colldev.html. 8. ---, "Collection Development and Organization Policies," Dec. 2001. Available online from http://www.stetson.edu/departments/library/TSManual.html. 9. It should be noted that in recent years, monographs ordered by political science faculty have gone unordered because of increasing journal subscription costs in this subject area. 10. Numbers are approximate because some multivolume sets with none of the volumes circulating are represented as one title with one line in the spreadsheet. 11. Hardesty, "Use of Library Materials at a Small Liberal Arts College," 275. 12. Ibid., 266-67. 13. Hardesty, "Use of Library Materials at a Small Liberal Arts College: A Replication," 67. 14. Patricia Weaver, "A Studentcentered Classroombased Approach to Collection Building," Journal of Academic Librarianship 25 (May 1999): 202-10. 15. Ibid., 208. 16. Hardesty, "Use of Library Materials at a Small Liberal Arts College: A Replication," 78.