Using Evidence in Practice
Evidence for Removal of a Reference Collection in an
Academic Health Sciences Library
Linda Seale
John W. Scott Health Sciences Library
2K3.28 Walter C. Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Email: [email protected]
Trish
Chatterley
John W.
Scott Health Sciences Library
2K3.28
Walter C. Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Email: [email protected]
Marlene
Dorgan
John W.
Scott Health Sciences Library
2K3.28 Walter
C. Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Email: [email protected]
Received: 21 Oct. 2013 Accepted: 5 Feb. 2014
2014 Seale, Chatterley, and Dorgan. This is an
Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License 2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ca/), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed, the
resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this one.
Setting
The survey was conducted at the John W. Scott Health
Sciences Library, a large academic health sciences library, at the University
of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
The Library serves undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, and
researchers in five faculties (Medicine and Dentistry, Nursing, Pharmacy and
Pharmaceutical Sciences, Rehabilitation Medicine and School of Public Health),
as well as members of a number of affiliated research institutes, University of
Alberta affiliates, members of the NEOS Consortium (a resource sharing
collaboration of hospital, government, and academic libraries in the province
of Alberta), and the general public.
Problem
One goal of the Library is to maintain the relevancy of and provide
optimum access to the Library’s print resources. In the
fall of 2011 it was noted that observational and anecdotal data gathered over
the previous two years had indicated that use of the print reference collection
was declining. Less re-shelving was required of titles removed from the shelves
in the Reference Room, and fewer requests were made at the Service Desk for
print reference titles. It is assumed the decline can be at least partially
attributed to a change in the library’s collections policy which now stipulates
preferential purchasing of reference titles in electronic format to enhance
access. A large deselection project was completed in the summer of 2011, with
approximately half the titles from the Reference Collection transferred to the
stacks so they could circulate. Four hundred and nine titles remained. Evidence
was needed for further decisions on the future of the collection, and on its
possible elimination.
Evidence
A literature search was conducted, revealing that very little recent
literature exists on the deselection of reference collections or on their
replacement by electronic or virtual collections.
A shelf list of the Reference Collection was printed and a spreadsheet
created to allow recording of the use of each title. A staff member verified
that all titles on the shelf list were present and missing titles were located.
With the cooperation of the Shelving Supervisor, the student shelving staff was instructed to record each title re-shelved
fora 12-month period (January-December 2012). Notices were placed in the
Reference Room asking clients not to re-shelve books.
In January 2013, the results were summarized and
analyzed. While the evidence is somewhat imperfect as some
students may have re-shelved their own books, it is the best available
indicator of usage.
The evidence indicated that only 33% (n=136) of titles
were used during that year. Of these,
eight had more than ten uses and constituted 39% of overall use. The two
top-used titles in this group together accounted for 22% of overall use. A
further 14 titles had five to ten uses and constituted 20% of overall use. Both
high-use categories were almost entirely comprised of pharmacy materials.
Pharmacy titles (LC Classification RM and RS) represented 24.4% of the
collection but 59% of usage. Titles with one to four uses accounted for 23% of
titles overall, and those with no uses for 67%.
Usage peaked in the latter half of the fall and winter
terms, when papers were due and examinations were pending, with two pharmacy
titles dominating.
Implementation
Overall the evidence indicated that levels of use did
not warrant the maintenance of a separate Reference Collection. All the
reference titles were transferred to circulating stacks, the majority with a
standard circulation period. Six high use titles and eleven in the five to ten
uses category were transferred but with a shorter (four day) loan period; all
but three were pharmacy titles. (This
selection was based on use, on the pharmacy librarian’s knowledge of titles
important in the pharmacy curriculum, and the availability or lack of
electronic versions). Notices were placed in the Reference Room indicating that
the books had been integrated into the regular collection. A few instructors
who list reference titles with call numbers on student assignments were
informed of the change so that assignments could be updated.
Outcome
Circulation statistics for the period
February-September 2013 indicate moderate circulation of short loan titles and
low or no use of the majority of regular loan titles. However, this does not reflect in-house use,
which would require a separate survey. Virtually no feedback from clients has
been provided at the Service Desk.
The Reference Room is now used for quiet study and as
a location for receptions for special events.
Several classes have been held in the area and after the installation of
glass doors at the entrance, it will be even more usable as a teaching space, a
facility otherwise lacking in the Library.
Reflection
The survey, the analysis of the results, and the
implementation of the evidence all proved to be a straightforward process. The Shelving Supervisor was helpful in
instructing student shelving staff in the procedure, and in ensuring that the
new student shelving staff for each academic term were informed. A Library
associate staff member collated the statistics and wrote the summary report.
Another associate staff member changed the location and loan status of each title
in the catalogue, removed reference stickers, and applied stickers indicating
short loan as appropriate. Re-shelving
was done on a daily basis by the student shelving staff over a period of three
weeks, as part of normal operations. Although a formal evaluation was not
conducted, no negative comments were received by subject librarians or by
service desk staff. Given that feedback received from health sciences library
clientele usually expresses a preference for electronic content, an assessment
of the change was not deemed necessary.
The evidence obtained from this survey provided a
sound basis for elimination of the Reference Collection, for physical
re-location of the books, and for re-purposing of the Reference Room. It
achieved the goals of providing optimum access to the Library’s print resources and
maintaining their relevancy.