Cancellation Projects Marcia Tuttle 19 Nov 1992 20:48 UTC
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 09:01:24 EST From: Cindy Hepfer <HSLCINDY@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu> Subject: cancellation projects In response to Cheryl McKee: The Buffalo Health Sciences Library has reviewed its entire journal/index & abstract listing annually for cancellation. We maintain a very dynamic journal collection, adding new titles continually. In order to do that, naturally we have had to adopt an annual pruning process. It seems to be a natural and necessary part of collection development, particularly in a STM collection. The core individuals involved in the process are the head of collection development and the serials librarian. Even when inflation has not been dread- ful, we have both taken time to review the entire list and have created a hit list. Our selections were based on price/price history, index coverage (or lack thereof), where else located on campus/in Western New York, language, publisher, etc. We do have some use data from previously conducted use studies (we sampled use by means of a reshelving study done one week each quarter) that was also used, but taken with a grain of salt because of the small sample size. We are looking forward to using the data gathered during the 1991/92 CRL use study as we believe this will give us a much truer picture of use. Once our target list was put together, we have consulted with relevant teaching and clinical faculty, with the subject selectors on our staff, and with the teaching hospital librarians. The process has always been very consultative. How have faculty reacted? Until last year, I contacted faculty directly by phone and discussed titles on the target list with them. In the majority of cases, I found them interested, flattered and happy to talk. Some showed a great deal of interest, asked many questions, offered the names of other faculty members who might be interested in the titles. Last year we had a very large list to circulate to faculty, and so sent printed lists to department chairs and other faculty known to have a particular interest in the collection. This was less satisfactory than actually talking to the faculty directly, but did give us some useable feedback. Given sufficient time however, I'd prefer to use the phone call approach. Phone calls are personal, end up involving a number of folks (in some cases, as many as 100), and provide insights you don't get from a paper list. They also allow you to DISCUSS price/publication trends with faculty one-on-one, rather than expecting them to read a cover letter accompanying a "hit list." Anyway, I heartily endorse an annual review process as a natural part of collection development. Considering inflation, a changing curriculum, the publication of new titles, stagnant budgets, the growth of document delivery services such as CARL, etc., I really believe that an annual review of serials subscriptions should be obligatory for collection development librarians. Cindy Hepfer Serials Librarian State University of New York at Buffalo Health Sciences Library