|
|
CMI
> Project Background > Mellon Proposal
Mellon Proposal
Collection Management Strategies in a Digital Environment
Proposal to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
- Significance of the Proposed Project
- Project Overview
-
Objectives
Project Design
- Project Organization
-
Project Deliverables
-
Appendix A: Project Timeline (Table)
- Significance of the Proposed Project.
The emergence of digital publication as a major force in scholarly
communication promises significant benefits for research institutions
and their libraries, including the ability to manage the mix of print
and digital collections in a way that maintains and enhances service
while relieving pressure on overtaxed library stacks and other physical
facilities. These benefits will be diminished, however, if libraries
are unable to avoid purchasing and housing print materials when digital
equivalents are available. This outcome could result from lack of
trust in the persistence or reliability of digital publications, or
from concerns about the adequacy of digital materials as substitutes
for print. The proposed study addresses these concerns by:
- Producing objective data on variety of factors, including characteristics
of research library users and uses and characteristics of published
journal literature, that influence the acceptance of journal publications
in digital form as substitutes for their print equivalents; the impact
on research library users of dependence on digital versions of scholarly
journals;
- Assessing the implications of these findings for institutional
policies, strategies and obligations for archiving of scholarly journals
in print and digital form;
- Assessing the implications of these findings for institutional
strategies and programs to more effectively manage their print and
digital collections.
- Project Overview.
Due to the pressures of enrollment growth and the need to address urgent
seismic safety deficiencies and replace deteriorating campus infrastructure,
the University of California has a compelling interest in managing existing
library facilities to accommodate continually-growing collections, while
relieving demands on its overtaxed capital program. One way to provide
such relief is to use digital technologies to assist in managing the
library collections developed to support the academic mission of the
University. However, uncertainty about technologies, methods and costs
of ensuring persistent digital archives means that issues associated
with this strategy are not yet resolved. These uncertainties include:
- The means of ensuring the archival persistence of published material
in digital form.
- The costs and benefits of removing print materials from library
collections and relying on their digital equivalents.
- The varied characteristics of research library materials, users,
and uses, and the manner in which these factors influence the acceptability
of digital publications as a substitute for print.
In January 2000, UC's Systemwide Library and Scholarly Information Advisory
Committee endorsed resolutions supporting the implementation of experiments
to increase the University's understanding of strategies for creating
a persistent archive of digital collections and the issues for library
management of both digital and print materials. While these initiatives
are of critical importance to the University of California, the lessons
learned are likely to be of considerable interest to the academic and
research library communities nationwide. To this end, the University was
awarded a six-month planning grant by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
to support planning for an initial experiment that involves withdrawing
from campuses a sample of journal titles that are represented in our collections
in both print and digital formats. During the course of the experiment,
faculty and students would rely on the digital versions of these titles
to meet their information needs, while the obligation of the UC libraries
to provide persistent access to these materials will be ensured by depositing
complete runs of these titles in print format in one or both of the University's
regional library facilities. The proposal described here is the result
of that planning process.
The project has a planned duration of 24 months and is organized with
two overlapping components. The first component (Phases I and II, months
1-18) concentrates on assessing the impact of removing print material
from active collections and relying on the equivalent digital publications
to meet current demand. This component includes studies of user response,
comparative usage of print and digital formats (including print formats
relocated to remote storage), and relative costs of processing, storage
and use of equivalent print and digital materials. The primary focus
of this component is identification of the variety of factors that may
influence the acceptability and usability of digital journal publications
as substitutes for their print equivalents. The second component (Phase
III, months 13-24) builds on the results of Phase II and deals with
application of findings to the framing of institutional strategies,
policies and programs. This component includes review and reinterpretation
of archival policies, obligations and activities in light of the characteristics
of the emerging print+digital research collection, framing programmatic
strategies for print+digital archiving, and crafting flexible strategies
for management of research library collections that are responsive to
these strategies as well as to budgetary, technological and facilities
constraints and the demonstrated needs of research library users. As
these considerations are closely linked to those that have informed
the Mellon Electronic Journal Archiving Program, it is expected
that the University's work in Phase III will be closely coordinated
with the Foundation's electronic journal archiving activities. Work
on this phase will begin six months before the completion of Phase II
in order to make use of in-progress results of Phase II findings and
to help shape the later stages of the Phase II inquiry and data analysis.
- Objectives
The goal of the project is to explore the complex issues associated
with integrating and managing research library journal collections composed
of shared print and digital formats when a print copy is located remotely
and the user relies primarily on the digital version. The study will
evaluate the factors that affect reliance on shared digital resources
to relieve pressure on physical facilities and capital budgets to house
and manage print materials. The specific objectives are to:
- Study the behavior and attitudes of users when selected print
journals for which electronic access is provided
are relocated to a remote storage facility and primary use is of the
electronic version, and ascertain the variety of factors affecting
the acceptability of digital publications as a substitute for the
equivalent print publications
- Design and test processes for consultation and decision-making
for selection, processing, relocation and administrative management
of print materials relocated to remote storage
- Document the costs incurred and avoided for maintaining selected
journal titles for which electronic access is provided
when paper copies of the journals are relocated to a storage facility
and primary use is of the electronic version
- Document the change in usage of digital and print versions of selected
journal titles when print is relocated to storage
- Assess the institutional implications for library organization
and operations, including facilities planning, capital budgeting,
systems and resource management
- Evaluate institutional strategies and policies for archiving of
research library materials in a mixed print/digital environment.
- Project Design
- Phase I: Assessing the Characteristics and
Costs Affecting the Use of Digital Journal Collections as Substitutes
for Print: Consultation and Preparation (Months 1-6). During the
first six months of the project, effort will be devoted to consultation
with campus constituencies regarding the overall project, selection
of titles to be included in Phase II, staff training, processing of
materials and other activities required to prepare for Phase II implementation.
Titles selected during this portion will also be thoroughly inventoried
to create a database recording the extent of holdings at each UC campus,
shelf space consumed, content characteristics, prices and other factors.
- Phase II: Assessing the Characteristics and
Costs Affecting the Use of Digital Journal Collections as Substitutes
for Print: Controlled Experiment (Months 7-18). The second phase
of the project is focused on a controlled experiment designed to test
the study hypothesis that effectively shared digital resources can
begin to relieve pressure on physical facilities and capital budgets
to house and manage print materials.
Experimental Design. To permit comparison of use, cost, and user
preferences as between experimental conditions (i.e. storage of print
and reliance on digital) and traditional provision of access, we propose
to structure the study as a controlled experiment. All UC campuses now
have access to the digital versions of titles that are candidates for
inclusion in this study. For each title selected for the
study, one or more of the campuses that hold the title in print will
participate as an "experimental group," and one or more of the campuses
that hold the title in print will participate as a "control group."
Usage of digital versions for both experimental and control campuses
will be tracked continuously using data supplied by the respective publishers/suppliers
Experimental Group. "Experimental group" campuses will remove
print copies of the selected title(s) from their shelves and relocate
them to storage; usage of the print copies will be tracked by the
storage facilities, which are intended to be the only source of print
versions of these titles for the experimental group. Recognizing that
some requests for print from experimental campuses may inadvertently
be directed to other UC campuses, external institutions, or commercial
document suppliers, procedures will be put in place to both control
the handling of these requests and capture data on their occurrence.
To ensure a valid comparison of print and digital usage as between
"experimental group" and "control group" libraries, it will be necessary
to remove from campus all print copies of selected titles in "experimental
group" libraries, including current issues received during the study
period.
Control Group. "Control group" campuses will retain print
and monitor usage of study titles locally. Data on print usage will
be supplied by campus circulation systems where circulation of journals
is permitted. In-house use of selected titles will be monitored through
reshelving counts.
Criteria for selection of journals. To meet the objectives
set forth above, the selection of print journals with electronic versions
to be relocated to storage for the purpose of the controlled experiment
must address the following criteria:
- Sufficient data are provided by the electronic publisher to measure
use by title and use by campus. We would like to be able to determine
the date of the article being accessed if possible.
- To allow study of the variety of factors influencing use, the
sample of journal titles should include a variety of disciplines,
content characteristics (including, e.g., graphics, language, article
length), and use characteristics.
- The sample of journal titles includes both titles for which current
issues are available in both print and digital form and titles for
which the digital is available only retrospectively (e.g., JSTOR
titles), so we can provide cost, usage and behavioral data on both
publishing models.
- The sample of journal titles includes multiple publishers and/or
suppliers of electronic journals.
- To insure representation in both control and experimental campus
groups, print title must be held in more than one library in the
UC system.
- Titles will be selected from a limited number of disciplinary
areas.
Forms and sources of data for Phase II.
- Journal Characteristics. As noted above, in Phase I data
will be collected on the physical and content characteristics and
campus holdings of all titles included in the study.
- Costs. Professor Michael Cooper, School of Information
Management and Systems, UC Berkeley, has developed an extensive
research framework for acquiring and analyzing relevant costs in
the following categories:
- Access and circulation costs (applicable in varying ways to
both print and digital use, including print use from storage for
the "experimental group," and including costs both to the library
and the user)
- Selection, transfer and processing of titles for storage
- Ongoing storage costs for print (campus and storage)
It is anticipated that some of the necessary cost data can be derived
from published studies, and that much can be produced as a byproduct
of the project itself (e.g., selection, transfer and processing
for storage). Some cost elements may require special studies.
- Usage. As noted previously, usage of selected titles in
digital format (for both experimental and control libraries) will
be obtained from the relevant publishers/suppliers. For "control
group" libraries, procedures will be established for measurement
of usage of print copies of selected titles retained on campus during
the study period. For "experimental group" libraries, measurement
of usage of print will primarily be the responsibility of the participating
UC Regional Library Facility (RLF), but some participation by the
"experimental" campus in recording of usage of stored material may
be required as an adjunct to capturing campus costs related to use
of material requested from storage.
- User behavior and preferences. User studies (to be conducted
chiefly at "experimental group" campuses) will focus on users of
the titles selected for the study. Surveys and structured interviews
will be used (and complemented by use data) to explore such questions
as:
- Under what circumstances is the digital not an acceptable substitute
for print for the selected journals? Possible reasons may include:
technological reasons (availability of equipment and network access/capacity
for access; adequacy of display/printing technology; geographic
access limitations); the nature of the content (e.g., graphics,
color); the quality of the digital version; the completeness of
the digital version (inclusion of "non-editorial" content - letters,
event reports, advertising); the usability of the digital version
in support of common library research strategies (bibliographic
access, shelf browsing, navigation); physical disabilities of
users; user "culture" and acceptance.
- What do users do when digital is inadequate? Request print,
or forego use?
Initial interviews will be conducted with a small sample of users
(on the order of 100-200 respondents) to obtain information on the
factors that influence their use of journal materials in print and
digital form. These factors may include the characteristics of the
material they use, the manner in which it is used, and sources (including
personal and departmental collections as well as print and digital
collections of the library). Interviewees will be recruited through
contacts with relevant academic departments, self-identification,
identification by knowledgeable library staff, and other means.
The results of the interviews will be used in the design of surveys
to be distributed to a wider respondent audience in both experimental
and control libraries, including target departments, self-identified
users of journals selected for the study, library users, and others.
To supplement interviews and surveys, each time a print volume
included in the study is recalled from storage the requestor will
be asked to supply information on reasons for recalling the print
copy.
- Phase III: Evaluation of Institutional Strategies,
Policies, and Programs for Archiving and Management of Collections
in the Print+Digital Environment (Months 13-24). Phase II of the
project aims to obtain information about the rich variety of characteristics
affecting the acceptability and use of digital journal publications
as substitutes for their print equivalents. The goal of Phase III
is to apply these findings to the framing of institutional strategies,
policies and programs. Work on this phase will begin six months before
the completion of Phase II in order to make use of in-progress results
of Phase II findings and to help shape the later stages of the Phase
II inquiry and data analysis. Addressing this goal involves (1) reviewing
and reinterpreting archival policies, obligations and activities in
light of the characteristics of the emerging print+digital research
collection, (2) framing programmatic strategies for print+digital
archiving consonant with this reinterpretation, and (3) crafting flexible
strategies for management of research library collections that are
responsive to these strategies as well as to budgetary, technological
and facilities constraints and the demonstrated needs of research
library users. This activity implicitly involves, and will explicitly
include, an assessment of digital archiving strategies and policies,
including such factors as identification of currently-held journal
resources that should be archived in digital form (whether or not
currently available digitally) and means of ensuring the creation
of and/or persistent archival access to these resources. These considerations
are closely related to those that have informed the Mellon Electronic
Journal Archiving Program. It is expected that (1) the staff of
this project will participate in the planning discussions for the
new Mellon program, and (2) one outcome of Phase III may be a proposal
for an implementation project within the scope of that program.
- Project Organization.
- Key Personnel Resources.
- Principal Investigator: Brian E. C. Schottlaender, University
Librarian, University of California, San Diego, and Chair, UC Standing
Committee on Universitywide Library Collection Management Planning
(.05 FTE)(Contributed)
- Co-Principal Investigator: Gary S. Lawrence, Director,
Library Planning and Policy Development (.20 FTE) (Contributed)
- Project Director: Assistant or Associate University Librarian
or equivalent to provide effective leadership, communication and
coordination (.25 FTE)
- Project Analyst: Principal or Senior Analyst or equivalent,
with social science research experience, to design, implement and
monitor project procedures, including training, development and
administration of data collection instruments, data reporting and
analysis, project reporting (1.0 FTE)
- Project Data Manager: Administrative Analyst or equivalent,
with substantial database development and quantitative analysis
experience, to develop and maintain bibliographic and research databases
required to support selection, relocation, monitoring and disposition
of journal titles selected for study, as well as cost, usage and
user response data (1.0 FTE)
- Administrative Assistant: Administrative support for project
staff and advisory committees (1.0 FTE)
- Project Consultants (provision): To acquire consulting
services as needed for research design, data analysis and interpretation,
or specialist advice on key areas of project implementation. ($100,000)
- Advisory structure.
The University of California, with nine campuses and over 10,000 faculty
members, is a large, complex and highly decentralized institution.
Considerable communication and consultation will be required both
to successfully implement the controlled experiment in Phases I and
II and to reliably assess the implications of the findings for institutional
policy and programs. To facilitate the wide-ranging consultation required,
the University requests support from the Foundation for a project
advisory structure to advise on project planning, implementation and
preparation of deliverables. To supplement the project advisors, the
University will engage its existing extensive advisory structure to
assist in interpreting study results and assessing institutional implications.
- Project Advisory Structure.
- Project Steering Committee. The Steering Committee will
meet periodically, in person or by telephone conference, to provide
general oversight for the implementation of the project and the
preparation and interpretation of project results. The Steering
Committee will consist of the Principal Investigator, Co-Principal
Investigator, Project Director, one or two University Librarian,
two to four members of the UC faculty representing a variety of
disciplines, and a representative from each of the key advisory
committees.
- Operations Advisory Committee. The Operations Advisory
Committee will meet quarterly to advise on operational plans and
problems related to the implementation of the project. The committee
will be chaired by the Project Director and include representation
from the following groups: the UC Libraries Systemwide Operations
and Planning Advisory Group (SOPAG), consisting of senior professional
staff from each campus and from the California Digital Library;
the SOPAG Resource Sharing Committee, consisting of one representative
from each UC campus library system, the CDL, and the regional
library facilities, which recommends best practices to facilitate
resource sharing among the UC campuses; preservation librarians;
collection development; public services; technical services; the
regional library facilities; branch libraries; library facility
planners and the California Digital Library. A single appointment
could satisfy multiple criteria, and library appointees would
generally be at the department head or AUL level.
- Research Advisory Committee. The Research Advisory Committee
will meet quarterly during Phases I and II to advise on development
and implementation of the research methodology and analysis, interpretation,
and reporting of research results. The committee will be chaired
by the Project Director and will consist of persons with knowledge
of research issues related to use, users and evaluations of libraries,
library materials, and digital libraries. Committee members under
consideration at this time include Professor Michael Cooper (UC
Berkeley), Professor Nancy Van House (UC Berkeley), Professor
Christine Borgman (UC Los Angeles) and Assistant Professor Ann
Bishop (University of Illinois).
- Existing University of California advisory structure.
In addition to the special advisory groups appointed for the study,
we will make use of existing advisory structures related to libraries
and scholarly communication within the University to advise on the
conduct of the study. The principal entities comprising the current
advisory structure are:
- Systemwide
Library and Scholarly Information Advisory Committee. This
committee is appointed by and advisory to UC's Provost and Senior
Vice President for Academic Affairs, is chaired by the Executive
Vice Chancellor of the Los Angeles campus, and includes representation
from the UC faculty and its Academic Senate, campus and Universitywide
academic, budget and information technology administration, and
the University Libraries. Its charge is to advise the Provost
on establishing an environment that supports continuous planning
and innovation for UC's libraries; developing policies and strategic
priorities for the University's California Digital Library, including
policies that support the extension of CDL services beyond the
University; implementing strategies to sustain and develop both
campus and shared print and digital collections and identify mechanisms
that facilitate sharing resources across campus boundaries; and
initiating projects to improve the process of scholarly communication
and assist faculty in distributing the results of their research.
- Standing Committee on Universitywide Library Collection Management
Planning. This committee is appointed by and advisory to SLASIAC
and consists of the ten UC University Librarians, a representative
of the Academic Senate's University Committee on Library, and
such other members of SLASIAC as it shall appoint from time
to time. It is charged to oversee and advise SLASIAC on continuous
strategic planning for library collection management on a Universitywide
basis.
- University Librarians. The UC University Librarians meet monthly
to review and discuss issues and initiatives of Universitywide
importance pertaining to libraries.
- Systemwide Operations
and Planning Advisory Group (SOPAG). This group, consisting
of senior library management representing all campuses and library
functional areas, is charged to develop issue papers and action
plans for consideration by the University Librarians, appoint
cross-functional teams (task forces and strategic issue groups)
to accomplish defined tasks or study specific issues in a specified
time frame, and appoint and oversee the work of All Campus Groups.
- All Campus Groups. These standing groups are appointed by
and accountable to SOPAG, and consist of UC senior library professional
staff with similar portfolios. Groups currently exist for public
services, technical services, systems, collection development,
and resource sharing.
- Project Timetable. See Appendix A.
- Project Deliverables.
- Report of Findings from Phase II: factors influencing acceptability
of digital publications as a substitute for print; costs and cost
trade-offs associated with storage of print copies of journals and
reliance on digital equivalents; effect on print and digital journal
usage of storage of print copies and reliance on digital equivalents.
- Final Report: Assessment of institutional policies, obligations,
strategies and programs for archiving of print+digital research library
collections; institutional strategies and programs for flexible management
of print+digital collections.
Appendix A
Collection Management Strategies in a Digital Environment
Project Timeline
| |
Phase I
|
Phase II
|
Phase III
|
| January |
Steering Committee meets |
|
|
| 2001 |
Operations Advisory Committee
meets |
|
|
| |
Research Advisory Committee
meets |
|
|
| |
Consult with campuses on selection
of disciplines and titles |
|
|
| February |
Steering Committee meets
(teleconference) |
|
|
| |
Consult with campuses on selection
of disciplines and titles |
|
|
| March |
Steering Committee meets
(teleconference) |
|
|
| April |
Operations Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
|
|
| |
Research Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
|
|
| |
Finalize selection of disciplines
and titles |
|
|
| May |
Steering Committee meets
(teleconference) |
|
|
| |
Finalize selection of experimental
and control campuses |
|
|
| |
Conduct campus & regional
facility training |
|
|
| |
Identify and mark study titles;
prepare for relocation |
|
|
| |
Prepare draft interview instruments |
|
|
| |
Obtain faculty and staff contact
information for target departments |
|
|
| June |
Prepare and distribute public
information material |
|
|
| |
Update bibliographic records
for study titles |
|
|
| |
Relocate study titles from
experimental campuses to RLFs |
|
|
| |
Develop final interview instruments |
|
|
| |
Select interview panels |
|
|
| |
Distribute advanced information
to interview panels |
|
|
| |
Train interview staff |
|
|
| July 2001 |
|
Operations Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
|
| |
|
Research Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
|
| |
|
Begin monitoring use |
|
| |
|
Conduct interviews |
|
| August |
|
Steering Committee meets
(teleconference) |
|
| |
|
Conduct interviews |
|
| September |
|
Analyze interview results |
|
| |
|
Prepare draft survey instruments |
|
| |
|
Capture and process quarterly
use data |
|
| October |
|
Steering Committee meets
(teleconference) |
|
| |
|
Operations Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
|
| |
|
Research Advisory Committee
meets |
|
| |
|
Prepare final survey instruments |
|
| November |
|
Distribute surveys; conduct
followup |
|
| December |
|
Steering Committee meets
(teleconference) |
|
| |
|
Receive and process survey
data |
|
| |
|
Capture and process quarterly
use data |
|
| January |
|
Steering Committee meets
|
| 2002 |
|
Operations Advisory Committee meets
|
| |
|
Report on survey results |
Identify institutional implications |
| February |
|
|
Consult with campuses |
| March |
|
Steering Committee meets (teleconference)
|
| |
|
Capture and process quarterly
use data |
Revise survey instruments and
methods as required |
| April |
|
Operations Advisory Committee meets (teleconference)
|
| |
|
Research Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
Identify policy and program
responses |
| |
|
Distribute surveys; conduct
followup |
Consult with campuses |
| May |
|
Receive and process survey
data |
|
| June |
|
Steering Committee meets (teleconference)
|
| |
|
Capture and process quarterly
use data |
Evaluate policy and program
proposals in light of final study data |
| |
|
Prepare final analyses of interview,
survey, use and cost data |
|
| |
|
Identify study titles to be
returned to campus or transitioned to Phase III |
|
| July 2002 |
|
|
Steering Committee meets
(teleconference) |
| |
|
|
Operations Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
| August |
|
|
|
| September |
|
|
|
| October |
|
|
Steering Committee meets
(teleconference) |
| |
|
|
Operations Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
| November |
|
|
Draft final report |
| December |
|
|
Steering Committee meets |
| |
|
|
Operations Advisory Committee
meets (teleconference) |
| |
|
|
Complete final report
|
|