RIT Home

Directories

Info Center/SIS

Goals/Objectives

1. Present a picture of the overall circulating print collection (total volume count, age, and usage stats by call # range/discipline)
2. Improve overall physical condition of the collection by pulling relevant damaged material and sending them to the bindery.
3. Weed collection of materials no longer relevant to the curriculum by comparing the material to the individual collection development statements, usage stats, bibliographers knowledge of
   subject area, availability of materials, etc.
4. Identify weak (holes*) and strong areas in the collection to assist in future budget fund allocations.
   

Prioritization Method

1. Prepare a spreadsheet of data by call # range including: total number of volumes, % of total circ collection, # volumes pre-1960, 60-69, 70-79, 80-89, 90-95, 96-00, 01-05, and for each date range: # that have 0 circs, # that have 1-3 circs, # that have 10+ circs.
2. Use spreadsheet to identify first, heavily used areas in each discipline to review to determine why(what are we doing right?) and if we should order more in these areas(multiple copies, etc.?). Also, most likely these will be the areas where we find the most damaged materials. It is also likely that there will be less weeding to be done in these areas.
3. The next target areas will then be those that have a high percent of old materials & low usage. We will try to determine why this is and if we should continue to develop these areas at all or to what degree. We will also weed out materials no longer relevant to the curriculum.
4. Use what we learn from the evaluation to refine collection development statements and make recommendations for fund allocations.

Collection Assessment:
Item-Level Decision-Making Factors

1. Local Needs and Resources (Qualitative)
   • Relevance to our undergraduate mission for local collections
   • Relevance to the curriculum in general, particular courses, faculty curriculum-based requests, or common research problems
   • Age of the material - availability of more current or better-presented items on the same topic in the collection
2. Use of Existing Collection (Quantitative)
   • Number of circulations (date due slips in each item)
   • Number of copies of the title in the collection (Innovative report)
   • Physical condition (examination)
3. Comparison to the Universe of Publications (Qualitative)
   (in conjunction with the above factors)
   • Comparison of library-wide holdings to Books for College Libraries (retrospective)
   • "Classic" titles determined by comparison of major disciplines to standard printed subject bibliographies, core collection lists (retrospective)
   • Key sources determined through comparision of specific subjects to specialized printed bibliographies, accreditation lists (retrospective)
   • Quality of selections: Comparision of subject holdings to Choice books of the year (retrospective, current)
   • Quality of selections: Reputation of the author, publisher
   • Publishing activity: Comparison of subject holdings to publishers' catalogs to determine availability of more current titles on subject (current)
   • Publishing activity: Comparision of subject holdings to equivalent areas in Books in Print to determine availability of more current titles on subject (current)
4. Resource Sharing (Qualitative)
   (particularly for faculty/graduate support)
   • Other local collections' subject strengths and weaknesses
   • Accessiblility of other relevant local collections to use (through interlibrary loan, on-site visits) by RIT students and faculty
   • Availability of specific titles in other local collections (especially expensive reference or hard-to-obtain out-of-print titles)

Schedule (5-year cycle)

Maintained by Sheila Smokey