Strategies for Developing Digital Collections

Strategies for developing digital collections. Draft report of a meeting held on 10 July 2000 in Chicago, Il to discuss the publication series

D Greenstein

14 July 2000

1. Summary of actions

1.1 Immediate actions (to 24 July)

Authors to prepare and circulate by 21 July outlines for their reports including working titles, statement about preferred methodology, indication of any research support that may be required

Conference call to be held on 24 July 5pm EDT (to be confirmed) to discuss outlines, and identify common ground and local variation, and to review methodologies, support requirements etc.

DG to invite individuals named below to join an advisory panel

DG to circulate survey instrument for user needs study (see framing document by clicking use and users from the DLF home page – - then go to the framing document described under investigation into user behavior. The survey instrument is described under Next Steps, Step 2.)

1.2. Medium-term actions (24 July – end 2000)

DG to develop consolidated series outline including detailed outlines as developed for each report. This will be circulated to advisory group for review and comment

DG to develop promotional plan for the series for discussion by the authors

Authors to convene by conference call end-August to discuss report structure (e.g. length, use of case studies, etc

Authors to submit comprehensive drafts for their own internal review 1 Nov 2000

Authors to submit initial public drafts 1 Jan 2001

1.3. Long-term actions (from Jan 2001)

Press release encouraging public review and comment and other promotional activities as planned

Review by advisory board

Face-to-face meeting of authors, advisory board and invited others to discuss broader implications of reports for library collection policies more general

2. Detailed points arising from the meeting

2.1. Amendments to the outline and methodology

Reports will provide an introduction setting the collection development activity in question in the context of the library’s overall mission both historically and as that mission has changed through the introduction of online information services and resources. Introductory materials could also reflect on the pressures and motivations that shape the library’s activity in the particular collection development areas in question, as well as the threats or competitions it faces from other information suppliers that have moved into area

Issues discussed include:

the need for the library to promote itself on campus as a natural provider of high quality online information services - to defend its position against commercial suppliers of information services that have moved into this area encroaching on an area once almost exclusively monopolized by the library;

the need for the library and the university to understand the value that the library adds to information content as it develops high quality on line collections and services – the place occupied by the library in the market for such collections and services

the need for the library to tie digital collection development activities to local mission and imperatives which are not necessarily clearly articulated

In sum, if the publications in this series are going to inform policy and influence practice, than the introduction is the place to assert their importance, and, indeed, the importance of the collection development activity on which they reflect.

Other amendments to the outline circulated for the Chicago meeting include:

a further section on organizational and cost issues associated with the collection development activity.

The section on user support and user services might be extended to address issues surrounding the importance of promoting a library’s collection development activities.

Further amendments will be made during a conference call scheduled for 5pm EDT on 24 July 2000.

Methodologically, research will be based on existing practice as documented in library collection development policies, etc., and may benefit from interviews (development of more detailed case studies) with selected professionals

Action: authors to circulate outlines for their own reports by 21 July and to discuss these in a conference call on 24 July. Outlines should include titles, a brief description of the methodology proposed, and indication of any research or other support that may be required

2.2. Audience for the reports

The series is intended to inform policy and influence practice.

Audiences are as follows:

Library professionals involved directly in the collection development activities in question or whose work is impacted in some way by those activities. An essential goal of the reports in this series is to ensure there is greater understanding of the impacts across the library that any collection development decisions will have.

Academic and student communities, in part because they are amongst the most important consumers of the library’s collection development activities and as such the greatest advocates for or detractors from those activities. A further purposes of the series is to help libraries to stake a credible claim as the natural place on campus to develop high quality online educational information services

Senior library and university administrators who need to respond strategically to the practices identified in these reports whether through resource allocation or stratetic and other organizational decisions

Different sections of a report may attract attention from or be targeted at different audiences. Sections adopting a life cycle approach in evaluating how collection development decisions impact horizontally across library staff and longitudinally across time are likely to be of particular interest to library professionals. A section on cost and organizational implications is likely to attract attention from senior administrators and librarians; a section on user support and user services may be written with an academic user community in view. Introductions will need to appeal to each of these communities signposting for each what sections they may find to be of particularly interest.

2.3. Promotion and evaluation of reports

The aim is to inform policy and influence practice. To succeed here we will want to generate buy-in to and endorsement of the practices that are recommended in the reports for example by:

Surrounding the activity with an advisory panel consisting of influential members of the library and other communities from which we hope to gain some endorsement (e.g. ARL, DLF, some consortia – CIC, Ohio-Link) as well as influential members of the library community

A period of public review and comment after the initial publication of the reports

A meeting, scheduled for March 2001 for review of the reports and their implications on library collection development strategies more generally

A press release

etc.

Action: DG to prepare a promotional plan after conference call on 24 July

2.4. Advisory Group

An advisory group will be invited to inform the development of the reports at various stages and to help encourage their adoption/endorsement by the broadest possible community. Input from the group would be sought when fuller outlines are developed for the series as a whole and for its individual reports (early August 2000) and when reports become available for public review and comment (1 Jan 2001). Members of the advisory group would also be invited to any meeting held to discuss the reports and their implications for library collection policies more generally (March 2001)

Although not considered a closed list, the following individuals should be approached Bonnie McKeown (Penn State), Kimberley Parker (Yale), Paula Watson (Illinois), Janet Gertz (Columbia), John Ober or Beverlee French (CDL), John Sanville (OhioLink), Heike Kordish (NYPL), Anne Okerson (Yale), representative from the ARL Research Committee (Joe Branin?)

Actions:

DG to invite individuals named above to join an advisory committee

Authors to recommend names of additional advisory committee members

2.5. Production timescale

21 July outlines (including working titles, brief review of methodology and any support requirements) circulated by authors

24 July conference call to agree series and report outlines and methodological approaches

August – overview of the series, including series and report outlines prepared (by DG) and circulated to advisory board members for review and comment

end August – conference call with authors to discuss organization, structure, presentation of reports

1 November – comprehensive first drafts circulated amongst authors for their internal review and comment

1 Jan 2001 – final public drafts submitted to DLF for “publication”

2.6. Research support

DLF will supply research support where possible e.g. by identifying appropriate collection guidelines and checklists.

Action: Authors to indicate any research support requirements they may have by 21 July in circulated outlines.