Skip to main content

Annotated Bibliography- Data Driven Deselection: Using a Decision Support Tool

By

Ehret Snyder, C. (2013, Dec 20). Data-driven deselection: multiple point data using a decision support tool in an academic library. Collection Management, 39, 11-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/01462679.2013.866607

Weeding is a time-consuming and sensitive task for librarians. It is necessary to make space for new material, keep information current and updated, and remove items in poor condition. Librarians have to determine what kind of data is necessary to review in order to justify removing an item from the library’s shelves. Tools exist to help librarians gather multiple points of data to make the process more efficient. The librarians at Olin Library, part of Rollins College in Florida, utilized such a tool (Sustainable Collections Services) to help them update their collection and present the findings in this paper.

Summary:

Librarians are short on time and weeding is one of the most time-consuming tasks they can take on. Criteria is necessary to make decisions and librarians must find the information, analyze, and track it to make informed decisions. Some information, like circulation history, copies, donor information, and publication dates are available via the catalog. Decision support tools can help librarians identify data points, select the measurable information, and compile it into a useable format.

One example of a data point that can be identified and defined is the obsolescence rate. That is the degree to which the demand for an item decrease over a year, which varies by subject. Computer science texts will decrease rapidly, while history texts would decline more slowly. That information would be helpful to set cutoff years; librarians could say that science texts are available for deaccession after a period of 10 years since information is likely to have changed greatly and old texts may be inaccurate. 

The Olin Library weeding task force had planned a weeding project using only one point of data-- date of last use. They were contacted by Sustainable Collections Services to test out a new tool in development. The librarians agreed and provided SCS their holding data as well as choosing additional criteria from a suggested list, justification for the criteria, and limits for each point.  They ended up with six points of criteria and an item must meet each criterion to be a candidate for withdrawal. SCS provided additional information for those items like donation and gift notes for reference. The librarians then added physical flags to each book on the shelves and advertised that the books were up for review and that students and faculty could remove the flags if they felt like the items should stay. After a defined period of time, they then removed any flagged books that were left and donated them.

The task force found that the tool helped the process immensely. It asked the librarians to better determine withdrawal criteria, gave more information based on that criteria, and boosted the librarian’s confidence in their decisions to withdraw because the item was available elsewhere. It helped the librarians identify rare books that should qualify for preservation and note that information for future weeding cycles. The tool also facilitated the plan to utilize faculty review; most faculty noted that the withdrawal criteria was sound.

The library’s test agreement with SCS ended, but they decided to purchase a service to move the weeding project forward. They found that the service greatly improved their collection management by thoughtfully reviewing items, but in a timely and efficient manner.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Review: Weeding Without Worry

By
This website is done by the American Libraries Magazine and talks on the importance of weeding for libraries. It starts by speaking on different "weeding horror stories" of patrons seeing library staff throwing books into a dumpster and being outraged, or rare books being thrown out accidentally. Instances like this can give weeding a bad name, and make it harder for both library staff to weed, and patrons to accept the weeding of materials. The website goes on to explain how to avoid these pitfalls, such as making sure to communicate clearly with library patrons about weeding, and exactly what it is, and why it is needed in libraries, and how it helps the library continue to run well and continue serving the community well. One example they give is from the Milwaukee School of Engineering, where they have a page on their website dedicated to weeding, explaining why it is needed, and encouraging patrons to email or speak to a library staff member in person if they have co...
Post a Comment
Read more

Website Review - Awful Library Books

By
Awful Library Books The first thing that catches my attention when I navigate to Awful Library Books is the wonderfully out of date and kitschy covers. (Fran gets me ) It’s 246 pages (as of October 5th) of proof of why libraries need to weed. Many of the items are outside submissions and the whole project is curated by Michigan public librarians Mary Kelly and Holly Hibner. This site is… so much fun. Again, people from all over the country submit images of their books in need of deselection. Some of the titles, such as a copy of Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl will require repurchase at the discretion of the branch, and others, such as Easy DOS It! , a book about the no longer relevant DOS computer system, or a tacky as all get out Burt Reynolds book (likely not how he wants to be remembered, RIP), (This?) (Or THIS?) are best never to be seen again. Awful Library Books pokes fun at the idea that libraries are outdated by displaying the items that we get rid of...
Post a Comment
Read more