HELIN collection development committee unofficial minutes 6/7/05
HELIN COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
MINUTES of meeting
Tuesday, June 7, 2005
Roger Williams University
PRESENT:
Committee members: Hope Houston (JWU); Judith Stokes (RIC); David Kaplan (CCRI); Michael Voccino (URI); Deborah Porrazzo (RI Dept. of Health, representing ARIHSL); Joan Bartram (Salve); Dominique Coulombe (Brown); Anne Cerstvik Nolan (Brown); Norman Desmarais (PC); Janice Schuster (PC).
Guest: Paul Bazin (PC)
Representing HELIN: Bob Aspri (HELIN); Tjalda Nauta (RIC)
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Christine Fagan, co-chair.
PRESENTATION BY LIBRARY DYNAMICS: Christine introduced Susan Severtson of Library Dynamics, and the librarians present introduced themselves. Susan gave a power point presentation and a live demonstration of the Spectra CRC product, which was introduced last year. Power point: Library Dynamics was formed in 1998 and currently has one consortium as a client: the Tri-College consortium in Pennsylvania (Bryn Maur; Haverford; and Swarthmore Colleges). There are 3 levels of analysis possible: library wide, intermediate, and precision level. The primary functions of the system are to provide: holdings and usage; title count comparison; percentage overlap; percentage of uniqueness; overlap concentration; gap analysis (which titles do the others have that your library does not have?)
The live demonstration of Spectra CRC showed how the comparisons are color-coded: base library: blue; comparison library: yellow; overlap: pink. It is possible to change the colors, though. The libraries provide the data to LD via FTP (holdings and use data). HELIN would give this information as a group. The comparison information comes from the North American Title Count (NATC). Susan demonstrated importing the information from the analysis to a spreadsheet. Spectra CRC requires client software to be installed. The cost of the system is based on the library’s Carnegie classification which categorizes based on large groupings of FTE. Several librarians asked whether we could have a price quote based on FTE instead of Carnegie classification. Anne mentioned that Brown usually pays more using Carnegie than using FTE. URI, with 14,000 FTE, is in the same Carnegie classification as Brown, with approx. 7,600 FTE. Susan indicated that she would look into it.
Another option, in addition to Spectra CRC, is the NATC program: to compare with members of the NATC. It gives title counts by subject category but gives no usage data and does not compare the collections beyond the established categories. The NATC program does not require client software to be installed.
Susan answered several questions at the end of the demo.
After a brief break, the group reconvened for the business meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the April 5, 2005, meeting were approved as written.
OLD BUSINESS:
a. Status of Age of Collection Report (HELIN and Brown combined):
Bob had sent the report to all collection development committee members via e-mail on 6/6/05. He showed that the report consists of the categories: SCAT table #; call #; other HELIN institution; and Brown. It is possible to substitute an individual library for the “other HELIN” category in order to compare a specific HELIN library to Brown.
b. Status of “List of Key Considerations for Electronic Resource Purchasing”:
Dominique had e-mailed the group the list prior to the meeting; she and Anne had edited the original list drafted by the birds of a feather group in January of 2005. Dominique and Anne organized the list by categories: needs of user population/selection; access, linking, related usage; license agreements; cost and fees; statistics; maintenance and updates; catalog records; customization. The list was unanimously accepted by the group. Tjalda and Bob will present it to the directors at their 6/17/05 meeting, and Ruth Souto will add it to the HELIN FYI page.
c: Status of Electronic Resources Selection Lists for FY 2005-2006:
Bob discussed the procedure for compiling the spreadsheet; he’s received 4 lists back from libraries. Judith mentioned that some of the trials we had requested as part of the process never appeared as trials. The group discussed whether we should set up those and other trials in September or wait until next calendar year. We agreed to share the databases we are interested in with the group; Bob will activate those trials for the fall of 2005.
d: Status of consortium pricing for the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA):
All HELIN libraries represented at the meeting subscribe to NEJM in print. There were questions about how online access would affect the price of the print. Bob will get a price quote.
(Judith Stokes from RIC will fill in the rest of the minutes, fyi).
Respectfully submitted,
Janice G. Schuster
Providence College
6/9/05
MINUTES of meeting
Tuesday, June 7, 2005
Roger Williams University
PRESENT:
Committee members: Hope Houston (JWU); Judith Stokes (RIC); David Kaplan (CCRI); Michael Voccino (URI); Deborah Porrazzo (RI Dept. of Health, representing ARIHSL); Joan Bartram (Salve); Dominique Coulombe (Brown); Anne Cerstvik Nolan (Brown); Norman Desmarais (PC); Janice Schuster (PC).
Guest: Paul Bazin (PC)
Representing HELIN: Bob Aspri (HELIN); Tjalda Nauta (RIC)
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Christine Fagan, co-chair.
PRESENTATION BY LIBRARY DYNAMICS: Christine introduced Susan Severtson of Library Dynamics, and the librarians present introduced themselves. Susan gave a power point presentation and a live demonstration of the Spectra CRC product, which was introduced last year. Power point: Library Dynamics was formed in 1998 and currently has one consortium as a client: the Tri-College consortium in Pennsylvania (Bryn Maur; Haverford; and Swarthmore Colleges). There are 3 levels of analysis possible: library wide, intermediate, and precision level. The primary functions of the system are to provide: holdings and usage; title count comparison; percentage overlap; percentage of uniqueness; overlap concentration; gap analysis (which titles do the others have that your library does not have?)
The live demonstration of Spectra CRC showed how the comparisons are color-coded: base library: blue; comparison library: yellow; overlap: pink. It is possible to change the colors, though. The libraries provide the data to LD via FTP (holdings and use data). HELIN would give this information as a group. The comparison information comes from the North American Title Count (NATC). Susan demonstrated importing the information from the analysis to a spreadsheet. Spectra CRC requires client software to be installed. The cost of the system is based on the library’s Carnegie classification which categorizes based on large groupings of FTE. Several librarians asked whether we could have a price quote based on FTE instead of Carnegie classification. Anne mentioned that Brown usually pays more using Carnegie than using FTE. URI, with 14,000 FTE, is in the same Carnegie classification as Brown, with approx. 7,600 FTE. Susan indicated that she would look into it.
Another option, in addition to Spectra CRC, is the NATC program: to compare with members of the NATC. It gives title counts by subject category but gives no usage data and does not compare the collections beyond the established categories. The NATC program does not require client software to be installed.
Susan answered several questions at the end of the demo.
After a brief break, the group reconvened for the business meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the April 5, 2005, meeting were approved as written.
OLD BUSINESS:
a. Status of Age of Collection Report (HELIN and Brown combined):
Bob had sent the report to all collection development committee members via e-mail on 6/6/05. He showed that the report consists of the categories: SCAT table #; call #; other HELIN institution; and Brown. It is possible to substitute an individual library for the “other HELIN” category in order to compare a specific HELIN library to Brown.
b. Status of “List of Key Considerations for Electronic Resource Purchasing”:
Dominique had e-mailed the group the list prior to the meeting; she and Anne had edited the original list drafted by the birds of a feather group in January of 2005. Dominique and Anne organized the list by categories: needs of user population/selection; access, linking, related usage; license agreements; cost and fees; statistics; maintenance and updates; catalog records; customization. The list was unanimously accepted by the group. Tjalda and Bob will present it to the directors at their 6/17/05 meeting, and Ruth Souto will add it to the HELIN FYI page.
c: Status of Electronic Resources Selection Lists for FY 2005-2006:
Bob discussed the procedure for compiling the spreadsheet; he’s received 4 lists back from libraries. Judith mentioned that some of the trials we had requested as part of the process never appeared as trials. The group discussed whether we should set up those and other trials in September or wait until next calendar year. We agreed to share the databases we are interested in with the group; Bob will activate those trials for the fall of 2005.
d: Status of consortium pricing for the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA):
All HELIN libraries represented at the meeting subscribe to NEJM in print. There were questions about how online access would affect the price of the print. Bob will get a price quote.
(Judith Stokes from RIC will fill in the rest of the minutes, fyi).
Respectfully submitted,
Janice G. Schuster
Providence College
6/9/05
posted by Janice at 4:40 AM
<< Home