Email list hosting service & mailing list manager


Re: Discarding bound journals...-- 2 messages Stephen D. Clark 08 Oct 1999 09:52 UTC

2 messages:

1)----------------------------------
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Discarding bound journals...-- 5 messages -Reply
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 21:55:41 +0000
From: "Fiona A. McPherson" <Fiona.McPherson@FCT-CF.X400.GC.CA>

My 2 cents:

What a great list of guidelines! Thanks to everyone. I'll save that.

Consider also:
1) Duplication with current online full print databases you have access
to
and balance the pros and cons of the cost of online retrieval vs
storage,

2) Duplication with full print electronic sources on subscription or via
CD
you have in your collection and whether you are getting those ever
helpful
archival CD's,

3) Retention policies... which means you make a decision regarding a
title
once and then implement a procedure whereby books are discarded
regularly (works with those computer mags). Here, we do it with
Parliamentary Papers, annual reports, newspapers. We buy the current
parliament's minutes and proceeding in paper and replace with microfiche
once the new parliament is sitting (aka after a federal election).

4) Caution: Before discarding any titles because you can see other
libraries
are holding them, ensure that those other libraries plan to keep them
and
haven't put them on the "discard" list as well. Educate yourself on
their
retention policy if having access to the print of a particular title is
important
to you. There's nothing worse than discarding and then finding out
everyone was relying on your collection to provide the print. This would
mean some co-operation between institutions, perhaps locally. (I'm not
familiar with your geography.) Make collection development and retention
agreements with other libraries which specialize in subject areas you
don't
and vise versa... promise to keep titles you have and need that they
don't
have and want access to or that they need on a rare occasion, if for no
other reason than to complete both your collections. Another great
benefit
of resource sharing... and this benefit isn't strictly monetary.

5) Microfiche may be yucky to use, but it gets used a lot when needed.
Consider the number of people sitting at those machines. The technology
is
arguably less prone to the vagaries of time and toys (PC's).

6) Is it only available in print? Can you replace it with electronic
(and have
archival disks), microfiche, or internet access?.. Is the company
willing to
sell you an archival disk?

You have all made some very good comments. I am keeping them all for
the day when I finally have the time to sit down and write a policy on
de-selection.

Cheers!

Fiona A. McPherson
Collection Development Librarian
Federal Court of Canada Library

2)-----------------------------
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Discarding bound journals...-- Buddy Pennington
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 08:30:49 -0400
From: Kim Laird <klaird@gw.libofmich.lib.mi.us>

I write this from the perspective of one who has worked in three or four
libraries, where this was discussed. In two cases, older volumes were
deaccessioned and/or the collection was weeded. I have collected a lot
of information against discarding older journals, particularly if you do
not have fiche replacements for them.

Statistics show that if the journal is not there, it is not used. The
faculty do not always/often go after interlibrary loans for things that
are not already on the shelf. As the library's collection changes, so do
the faculty member's citations.

A stronger way to deal with the situation is to either purchase
fiche/film copies of the journals in question, determine whether some
journals are outside the scope of your collection, determine whether
your automated system can tell you which journals are not being used,
etc.

The solution of taking out short runs of journals is a possibility, but
be careful because sometimes those titles are from title changes. We had
one title which changed titles every year to two years, and so whenever
someone brought it to me, I always had to explain all the title changes
& the fact that this was actually a ten year run, not an incomplete set.

The more you can get your faculty involved in the process of weeding
(even though it is cumbersome & a lot of work for you) the better of
you'll be. They'll be happier about the situation. In one case, we had
quite a few volumes taken by the faculty for their departmental
libraries. While I wasn't happy to see our stuff leaving the library, I
was pleased that the institution was able to use them elsewhere.

BTW, from the medical library standpoint, I was interested in hearing
what one hospital library said. Keep in mind that many hospital
libraries, particularly the smaller ones, often only keep the last
five-ten years in the library. She said that there were some journals,
where the doctors asked to keep the entire run, including the bone &
joint journals. Why? Because there were rare diseases and problems that
might only be discussed once in a great while. They needed to have
access to anything in that area & most typically needed it right then &
there.

Well, my two cents.... hope that's helpful input.

Kim Laird, Acquisitions, Documents, Serials Team Leader
Library of Michigan, PO Box 30007, 717 West Allegan Street,
Lansing, MI 48909.  517-373-9438 (Fax)  517-373-5866 (TDD only)
klaird@libofmich.lib.mi.us  HOURS: 7:30a.m. - 4 p.m.