May 6, 2002 Joint Meeting of OAC & Campus Liaisons - Notes

MS Word version (40K)

Date: Monday, May 6, 2002

Time: 9:30 a.m. - 2:30 p.m.

Room: 5305 Franklin Building, UC Office of the President, 1111 Franklin St., Oakland, CA

The following background documents were provided in advance

• CMI Interim Use Data, October 1, 2001 - December 31, 2001
• CMI Interim Use Data, January 1, 2002 - March 31, 2002 (print data only)
• Status Report on Collection Management Initiative, April 5, 2002
• CMI Digital Usage Data over Time
• Potential Savings for UC Print Subscriptions: CMI Publishers with 2002 Contract Terms Applied (compiled by CDL Shared Acquisitions)
• CMI Research Plan
• Draft Formative Interview Script

Attending: Fosbender, Johns, Lawrence (CMI team); Mahoney (B); Andrews (D); Kjaer, Tanji (I); Medford, Randall (LA); Rios (R), Mirsky (SD), Wilson (SF), [Johns (SB)]; Hightower (SC); Miller (NRLF); Carleton (SRLF).

Introductions, Announcements (5 minutes)

After introductions, Johns indicated that she would be interested in campus responses to four questions:

1. Are any campuses routinely collecting use data for print
2. Local storage - effect on data collection
3. Who will leave experimental journals in storage
4. Anecdotes or verbal comments from library users

Review of CMI Interim Use Data, covering digital and print for October 1, 2001 - December 31, 2001 and print only for January 1, 2002 - March 31, 2002 - Cecily Johns (45 minutes)

Prior digital usage data from vendors for quarters preceding the study - Gary Lawrence (15 minutes)

Johns began by reminding the group of the standard caveats regarding the data: they represent only one quarter, and print use data from Berkeley and Riverside are only partial for the first two study quarters, by prior agreement. Lawrence highlighted some preliminary observations about the use data, and these were discussed. Johns noted the very high print use of the American Journal of Cardiology at UCLA (experimental), observing that this might be attributable to use by information brokers who were reportedly forbidden from retrieving and printing digital articles from public workstations, although UCLA representatives at the meeting felt that this was not the case. Davis, Irvine, and San Diego reported that their own fee-based article delivery services do not make use of digital, but that there were no restrictions on use of public terminals by non-UC users.

Among the factors cited as possible reasons for the substantial differences in use of print and digital:

• Operations of document delivery suppliers, who may either prefer print or face restrictions on access to and use of digital from public workstations (although this was not deemed to be a likely major factor)
• Prices for photocopying vs. printing (e.g., at SC, printing is currently free, while photocopying is not; photocopying volume has decreased at SF and SD, attributed to availability of digital; at UCI, photocopies are $.07/page, while computer printing is $0.12/page).
• The difference may correlate with changes in gate counts (e.g., at UCSC, campus construction makes the library somewhat less accessible, and may therefore make the digital more attractive)
• Size of population (where, e.g., UCR is control and UCLA is experimental, the mere size difference in the two campuses may explain part of the difference in respective use rates)
• Bound vs. unbound
• Social Science/Humanities vs. Science
• The effect of the JSTOR moving wall
• The extent of campus consultation and publicity

Analysis of projected savings from print cancellations of CMI journals compiled by CDL Shared Acquisitions - Gary Lawrence (15 minutes)

Lawrence briefly described the special study conducted by CDL Acquisitions at UCSD of the potential actual savings from print cancellations for publishers of CMI titles, given the restrictions of the extant license agreements. UCSC has announced that it will, beginning January 2003, cancel any print where financially advantageous, partly as a means of conserving scarce library space; treatment of existing print copies when duplicated by digital is at the discretion of each bibliographer. Other campuses are considering cancellations after the completion of CMI; ACM is being actively considered by some campuses now.

Update on Research Plan, interviews and surveys - Gary Lawrence (45 minutes)

Attendees had the following suggestions on interview and survey questions:

• Q10: add "instructions to authors," "editorial board"
• Q13: What about Endnote and other citation management packages?
• Should there be a question on known-item vs. browsing?
• Should there be a question on whether the respondent is using the material to compare/contrast?
• Should there be a direct question to use as a "litmus test," e.g., "how would you feel if this material were available in print only from storage?"
• Should there be a question on turnaround time: what's acceptable?

Surveys given to library users requesting experimental journals - how to improve the return rate - Gary Lawrence (15 minutes)

Johns reported that she had consulted with the campuses with the lowest response rates about actions that could be taken.

Lunch (45 minutes)

Round Robin - campus experiences with the project, user comments, anecdotes, observed change in behavior of users, etc. (45 minutes)

• UCLA - After consultation with library staff, there are no indications of any concerns with the study. Engineering will keep 5-6 computer science titles in storage after the study; other titles will be evaluated in light of the study's use data.
  
  
• UCSF - Confirms that the study has been a "non-event" there. The campus can provide prior use data for bound volumes (in III cumulative use registers). During planning for UCSF's new Mission Bay facilities, the Library has discovered that faculty and students to be located there strongly desire a print collection at that location.
  
  
• UCR - Indicates that it could gather statistics for prior print use, but it would be a manual process.
  
  
• UCSD - "Non-event." Will keep experimental titles in storage, with one or two exceptions. Can provide prior use data (III).
  
  
• UCD - Notes that one Experimental title is no longer available online; will be going to manual data collection for print use beginning around 6/1/02, with the implementation of a new ILS.
  
  
• SRLF - notes that no requests were received for recall of study titles during the second study quarter (Winter 2002).
  
  
• UCI - "Non-event." An email to the library management council and public service librarians soliciting instances of user comment got only one response. The campus is considering keeping its experimental titles in SRLF after the study, but has made no decision. Prior use data is available (III). Noted one anecdotal situation - an astronomy professor with visual handicaps (NOTE: might make a good interviewee).
  
  
• UCSC - Has prior use data (III).
  
  
• UCSB - "Non-event."
  
  
• UCB - "Non-event." Little discussion as yet about keeping material in storage after the study, will begin consultation. Have print use data from 2/97 in sciences, with cumulatives and monthly reports; business may have earlier data.
  
  
• NRLF - Activity has been slow. The major workload has been processing deposits of unbound issues of study titles.

Consultation Survey results - Gary Lawrence (30 minutes)

This discussion was deferred pending additional analysis of the survey results.

Cost Taxonomy for Phase 1 - Gary Lawrence (30 minutes)

It was noted that having a designated copy of a particular title in storage allows campuses to avoid the considerable costs of intercampus consultation when making storage and cancellation decisions, and that it might be possible to quantify this benefit in the analysis.

Additional Items

1. Analysis of study title characteristics. Lawrence and Fosbender distributed the latest CMI team working document on data to be collected on the characteristics of study titles. It was suggested that information on whether the title were indexed in an A&I database licensed and linked for UC be added. Johns indicated that assistance would be welcome on this project, both in terms of suggesting characteristics to be analyzed and methods to acquire and code information about them, and of assisting in the gathering of these data, particularly for print titles. Johns will survey the groups after the end of Spring Quarter to see if a subgroup can be assembled to support this effort. Lawrence noted that any substantial contribution by the campuses toward this effort could be compensated from the grant.
   
   
2. Upcoming presentations. Johns will present at the CARL Annual Conference. Andrews and Hightower will present at the annual conference of the American Society for Engineering Education.