Exploring Collaborative Print Sharing Strategies

looking beyond academic libraries looking beyond n.w
1 / 12
Embed
Share

Delve into a comprehensive overview of a shared print program involving academic and public libraries, focusing on collaborative efforts, founding members, commitment totals, collection analysis, and the similarities and differences between including public libraries. Learn about the challenges and benefits of shared print initiatives in the evolving landscape of library collections.

  • Shared print
  • Library collections
  • Collaborative programs
  • Public libraries
  • Academic libraries

Uploaded on | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Looking Beyond Academic Libraries Looking Beyond Academic Libraries in Shared Print in Shared Print Matthew Revitt, Maine Shared Collections Librarian University of Maine PAN, June 21, 2019 www.maineinfonet.org/mscs/ www.maineinfonet.org/mscs/

  2. Background Background Founded in 2011, one of the original monograph shared print programs Eight founding libraries, unique mixture of public universities, private colleges, public libraries & the state library grant of $821,065 to create a shared print collections strategy, grant period 2011 to 2015 Worked with SCS (pre OCLC & GreenGlass) on collection analysis & collectively agreed to retain approx. 1.4 million titles for 15-years www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  3. Founding Members Founding Members Public universities: Private colleges: Public libraries & the state library:

  4. Commitment Totals from 2013 Commitment Totals from 2013- -2014 2014 www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  5. 2019 Collection Analysis 2019 Collection Analysis Analyzing titles too new to be considered as part of original work (published or added between 2003-2012) Smaller pool of titles to consider (700k vs. 3 million) Founding members being joined by 20 additional members (subset of 40 members), inc. some extremely small public libraries. Collection sizes ranging from 12k to 1 million print titles www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  6. www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  7. Similarities of Including Publics Similarities of Including Publics Public libraries get the idea of shared efficiencies & responsible withdrawals to ensure material isn t lost from the collective collection Willing and enthusiastic (& proud) to be playing their part in shared efforts www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  8. Differences with Including Publics Differences with Including Publics Very different philosophies & reasons for being publics more driven more by demand & activity Refresh collections more frequently less willing to retain low use legacy material Choose to prioritize funding for public facing programming easier sell to stakeholders than behind the scenes work www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  9. Differences with Including Publics Differences with Including Publics Differing perspectives regarding usage and circulation levels between publics and academics factoring into retention rules Retention burdens at two founding publics made them hesitant about future commitments add to the list of publishers not considered retention worthy & inc. more public libraries in group To be effective need critical mass of public libraries participating Public libraries bring unique materials, not held by academic libraries www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  10. www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  11. www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

  12. Conclusion Conclusion Including more libraries shares the retention burden and lessons load of founding partners Publics bring different perspectives to the table & facilitated further multiple type collaboration Good PR of working with Maine library community PLA proposal hoping to spread word of shared print & replicating MSCC www.maineinfonet.org/mscs

Related


More Related Content