Definition of Competency or Understanding of Competency
Collection development (CD), the selection and acquisition of library materials in a “carefully constructed area[s] or subject collections,” emerged in the 1950’s and 1960’s within academia, where librarians began handling the acquisitions work formerly done by faculty (Mosher, 1982, pp 41-42). Due to “increasing expectations and declining resources,” collection management (CM), “the systematic, efficient, and economic stewardship of library resources,” was developed by the American Library Association (ALA) as a concept, around 1974-1977. (Mosher, 1982, pp 44-45). Stewardship is linked to the concept of preservation, which can be applied to the library’s collection as data or objects, but also refers to the “preserving and transmitting of the human record.” (Gorman, 2008, p 18). The idea of collection management as stewardship involves the preparation and maintenance of CD policy (as ‘management’ implies planning, budgeting, and development), selection and evaluation of materials for acquisition, and then the organization of the library collection as a whole (starting from a core library collection)(Mosher, 1982, pp 45-46). CD policies provide guidelines, procedures, and protocol in broad outlines, but they may eventually come to be “supplemented by more detailed policies focusing on subjects, user communities, or special collections (Johnson, 2014, p 108). A slightly more modern definition of collection management has been provided by Disher: “the management-related processes and procedures involved in developing and building the collection such as planning, budgeting, controlling, and evaluating” (2018, p 296).
A collection development policy manual will have selection and evaluation criteria at its core (ALA, 2006; ALA, 2016). Selection is the process by which, hewing to a CD policy, librarians identify physical and digital items that might be relevant for the collection (using various selection tools and resources), evaluate their worthiness, assess whether or not they should be acquired (and/or how access will be provided), and then order them from vendors (Johnson, 2014, p 137). Information professionals selecting library materials need to understand the core values of librarianship, be able to identify their own biases, and then learn to wield the former and lay down the latter (Disher, 2014, p 55). Disher states that selecting library materials is also about keeping two philosophies in balance: giving the public what they demand, versus giving the public quality materials (2014, pp 53-54). Selection criteria might involve identifying demand and usage potential, material quality, whether it is a subject in demand by the community, whether it would fit into the core collection, or whether it would help balance out the collection; author, publisher, format, cost, and timeliness are also factors (Disher, 2014, pp 56-58).
Evaluation, which looks at “item-intrinsic qualities,” or “items on their own merits,” or an item in relation to others in a collection, is about quality; assessment, by contrast, which is about whether or not items “meet local needs,” or how well the item aligns with library goals, needs, or mission, and is more concerned with utility (Johnson, 2014, pp 144-149; pp 297-337). According to Disher, how and why materials are being used are the most important questions raised by evaluation (2014, p. 20). Collection evaluation, or collection analysis, which is a combination of evaluation and assessment, considers a collection’s use and impact, and measures inputs, outputs, and outcomes (Johnson, 2014, pp. 298-300). Evaluative techniques are usually either collection or usage based (Disher, 2014, pp 25-33). Collection evaluation and assessment also involves activities like the collection of statistical data, or the process of weeding materials from the collection (Disher, 2014, pp 39-45; pp 86-100). In collection management, the concept of organization seems mostly to refer to the management of staffing, especially the assigning of roles and responsibilities to anyone involved in the collection development process (Johnson, 2014, pp 29-34).
Library materials (both digital and physical objects as a collection) are understood to be the traditional basis around which much library activity revolves. These materials exist in a myriad forms and formats, and the job of the information professional is to provide access to all users. Materials eventually wear out; formats sometimes change or disappear. Information professionals are charged with keeping materials in good condition, refreshing the collection as necessary, and providing materials in popular formats. The process that leads up to materials being available, collection development and management, needs to be drafted as written policy, in part because the information organization needs to be transparent to the public in how it selects, evaluates, budgets, and acquires materials. Reconsideration policies are a part of collection development policies because the public has to have a means of challenging materials in the collection. Collection management at its core is also about financial responsibility and provides a window into library processes, so that librarians and the library stay accountable to stakeholders. Physical and digital collections like the rest of the library are always in flux, and just as a circulation manual gives direction and guidance to staff on the checking out and checking in of materials, a library collections management policy manual provides CM staff direction and guidance on the selection, evaluation, and preservation of materials, but also gives them an understanding of how planning, budgeting, development, and staffing function together to manage a library collection. Collection management remains an important concept and process for librarians to understand because it is central to the functioning of any healthy library.
Preparation to Understand Competency F: Coursework and Work Experience
I have been able to observe some of the processes of collection management during my ten years of employment in the XX library system (XXXX). I have certainly been involved with weeding the collection, and I regularly evaluate items for either preservation or discarding from the system. I often use computer-generated lists to pull items from the shelves due to condition, low circulation, age, or other factors. Staff have a schedule for weeding certain parts of the collection, like audiobooks; weeding happens at all branches, usually organized by the managers and librarians. Most of the collection management activities at XXXX are centrally managed by Collection Management Services (CMS) and I have had the opportunity to tour their department and see how it is organized by roles, responsibilities, and functions. I particularly enjoyed asking questions of the Selection & Order Department, as I have some experience in this area, having worked in independent bookstores for almost 15 years. The one Selector I spoke with was kind enough to show me how some of the survey and collection analysis ends up on a spreadsheet, and some of the software she uses in vendor relations.
My Information Communities class (INFO 200) gave me insight into the ethic of service to users and introduced me to the concept of stewardship as a core value of librarianship. Intellectual Freedom (INFO 234) gave me a glimpse into how collection development policies are structured, and the important role of reconsideration policies in making policy transparent to the public. Information Retrieval System Design (INFO 202) and Beginning Cataloging and Classification (INFO 248) gave me a peek behind how collections can be managed for access and use. Of course, my Collection Management class (INFO 266) was the single most valuable class I had for understanding collection management; my participation on a team constructing a collection development policy was something I will always carry with me.
Evidence
Resource Selection for Public Libraries
Discussion of Evidentiary Items
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3A64529791-7710-4d6b-bfe3-107b8cca6d23
The first half of this exercise involved me analyzing the resource selection policies for two library systems. While the primary focus of the exercise relates to Intellectual Freedom, I was also tasked with identifying library objectives, selectors, selection criteria, relevant procedures, special areas regarding materials, and who approved the policies.
For point 1 of both policies I describe them as articulating selection criteria and procedures in a language that emphasizes inclusivity and minimizes exclusivity. Point 2 locates those sections of the policy that talk about CM roles, workflow, and the CM environment. I note that second policy actually has sections for Selection Criteria, Selection Sources, Collection Evaluation & Maintenance, and Preservation; in policy 1 I find the ethical underpinnings for selection, selection guidelines, and a mapping out of selection workflow. In Point 3, policy 1, I point out language that identifies a patron-centered collection, and in the second policy language that sounds like patron-driven acquisitions. For Point 4 I identify who approved the CM policy. In policy 1 the board appoints CD staff and acts on budget recommendations. I find policy 1’s objectives follow ALA guidelines regarding collection building. I note that the policy identifies “special interests of our diverse community,” as a specific objective of selection, and that it prioritizes a customer-centered collection. In policy 2 I found detailed selection objectives in a section called Collection Evaluation, that emphasized achieving a modern, balanced, and attractive collection. In both policies I was able to find a person (a Director) responsible for selection, but only in the first did it mention delegating that responsibility to “library professionals. For both Selection Criteria sections of the policies, I contrasted the criteria I could find with ALA suggestions.
In policy 1 I describe a Selection Workflow chart, a Staff Responsibility for Selection section (which mentions CD staff working with pre-selection committees), a section on weeding, and a list of selection aids. Instead of simply having a list of material types (books, audiobooks, DVDs, etcetera), I point out that the policy instead, confuses things by trying to describe how those material types are chosen. In policy 2 I find a Selection Criteria section that maps out a very subjective decision-making process. I identify the strongest aspects of the policy as explanations regarding why the material needs to be collected, and how the criteria and evaluation sections work together with the Intellectual Freedom section. I note a list of selection aids and some details on weeding and preservation. Finally, reading between the lines in the Special Areas section for policy 2, I suggest that because there are staff dedicated to evaluating gifts to the library, and because they house these in an “appropriate” location, that special collections may be a feature of this library.
The two collection development policies in this exercise were very scattered in construction, and both required some effort in order to find and name material that should normally be in such a CD policy. For instance, rather than devoting a section to Types of Materials, and giving a description for each material, the first policy attempts, in a garbled fashion, to describe the formal process by which all those types of materials get selected. Being able to find the information that should be in these policies, and being able to determine when that information is not present, is a valid skill that can I can use whenever I am working with a collection management point of process, and can certainly be of use if I was constructing my own policy with others.
Blog Post: Stewardship and Preservation as an Ethic of the Reference Librarian
Discussion of Evidentiary Items
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xyDi6KMXwyjtRYOMNss-1Z3fJJQh0KLZwCd04w-E-B0/edit?usp=sharing or
https://ischoolblogs.sjsu.edu/info/encyclopediabrawn/2016/07/23/stewardship-and-preservation-as-an-ethic-of-the-reference-librarian/
I wrote this blog post on stewardship and preservation for my Information Communities class (INFO 200). If collection development (CD) and collection management (CM) have only been with us for a little over a half-century (Mosher, 1982, pp 41-45), here I present evidence that the idea of stewardship can be traced to at least the first European university in the 11th century, although preservation of the human record goes back as far back as 1750 B.C.E. (Lynch, 2016, p 13). I link stewardship to the CM concept of preservation, which can be applied to the library’s collection as data or objects, particularly in the format of the codex (or book), still the penultimate information preservation method (Gorman, 2008, p 18; Gorman, 2012, pp 2).
While for the first half of this paper I paint a picture of the history and legacy of stewardship and preservation, in the second half I delve into the present state of preservation and stewardship in a digital age, and give voice to some concerns by those who would continue this stewardship into the future. I describe a digital informational landscape that has achieved almost unlimited storage capacity for communications, but very little coordinated effort to organize or preserve vast swaths of data, let alone establishing value or meaning to that data. I let others describe a situation in which we have the capability to keep preserving our physical collections, but seemingly have lost the will to keep doing so, and where digital archiving has not yet proved to be a secure replacement. I note that digital preservation of both physical and digital items only functions within a globally run physical infrastructure maintained by humans, who also require physical maintenance.
I contrast the need for collaboration on a large scale, with the inability of people to say, agree on how we should preserve the archaeological record. I concede that Wikipedia has become the default modern way of storing our human heritage but underline how fragile this form of “preservation” really is. I spend some time illustrating what digital stewardship might look like, and what would be required for this to become a sustainable model. I highlight how even large, influential informational organizations can find themselves stymied with preservation and stewardship efforts, challenged by both practices and policies that cannot be reconciled. I return to the idea of stewardship as service and let some informed information professionals give their thoughts on how we might be abdicating our duties as preservationists by myopically focusing on number crunching rather than on learning and the passing on of knowledge.
This blog post shows that I have thought deeply about and can discuss the CM concept of preservation in all its complexity. Preservation and stewardship of books and library materials is a key component of what collection managers do, and understanding and be able to articulate the values and history behind those processes is a proper foundation for anyone who would hope to do that kind of work. I show that both physical and digital preservation are “wicked problems” that have become global in scope; by grasping the true scope of the issues surrounding this aspect of CM I can bring at least good and relevant questions to any CM group working on any preservation tasks.
Synthesis and Reflection Paper
Discussion of Evidentiary Items
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Af5f8367f-5d19-4f0b-b1b8-60bac2ee6e5d
This was the paper I wrote to summarize and understand my experience co-constructing a collection development policy manual for my Collections Management class (INFO 266). I begin by explaining that at the beginning of the project I envisioned collection development management (CDM) arising symbiotically out of the social contract that occurs whenever a library is created by a community. I talk about how I came to see how the ideals of Intellectual Freedom (IF) were enshrined within both the concept of CDM and CD policy manuals. I find, to my surprise, that many routine aspects of a policy manual, such as the marshaling of usage and demographic statistics, or developing well-managed budgets, are of extreme importance because they enable librarians to prove to their communities that they are fulfilling their ethical missions. I reveal that the process of community analysis, during the project, helped me understand that without it, nothing else (user assessment, collection assessment, materials selection or de-selection) can take place. I explain that I came to understand that understanding the individuals in the community is the flip side of understanding the money, data, and technology of the library, and how they are entwined makes a CM policy manual a living breathing document that can be used in everyday operations. Understanding both the community and the library system through the CD process, I say, seems to be a precondition for Intellectual Freedom to flourish, and that this more concrete way of thinking about IF, as embodied within a democratically produced document, is new for me. I state that I see IF as the heart of any CD policy manual, and I go on to say that I see preservation as a CM function that ought to be re-examined as a neglected library value, rather than simply a routine process. I bring up some things that were new to me such as “spending to zero” budgeting, and a critique of quantitative approaches to weeding.
In the Reflection section of this paper I mention that over the course of constructing the policy manual, to my surprise, I discovered that I have leadership, literary, and library skills that I could bring to bear to the task. I describe how the process cemented in my mind the steps that were needed to complete the task, step-by-step, decision by decision, and that understanding is something I can take with me wherever I work. I write that I learned that an information professional has a responsibility to be an active rather than a passive force in the world, and that failing to refresh our manuals, to continually re-think and re-engage would be a failure of imagination on our part. I end my reflection with the understanding that I cannot maintain an abstract set of ethics, but it is rather through a “routine” process such as CM, working together democratically with others as a team, that my ethics become embodied in the library itself.
This paper shows that I learn by doing, that the process of working on a CM policy manual, taught me how to apply myself in a more practical and professional way, and that I learned how my ethics can inform my work and vice-versa. Highlighting the importance of CM processes like community analysis or budgeting shows that I know how CM works, but describing how those processes also have meaning reflects my ability to not simply see CM as a rote process that can be understood by rote learning. This ability of mine to see the process of CM as a dynamic process is one that will enable me to work more nimbly than others perhaps, when working on CM projects in the future.
Haunted Hollows Spectral Library Collection Development Policy Manual
Discussion of Evidentiary Items
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:5fd43c89-77ab-46f7-8a3c-dff4d618ea93
I worked on almost every aspect of this collection development (CD) policy manual, which was a group project for my Collection Management (CD) class (INFO 266). Our task was to create a CD policy manual based on a particular theme, and we chose to have our library be situated in a graveyard among the dead, thus the title of the manual. Over 11 chapters I envisioned, planned, organized, researched, and constructed the manual, sentence by sentence, and section by section, in league with three other students. In Chapter 1 I performed a lot of writing and research to both find a location for our library, to be able to understand how our library was situated (within a broader consortium) and making each area and associated function clear and understandable. I performed a lot of number crunching for the appendixes on staffing and collection tools at chapter’s end. Because Intellectual Freedom and library ethics are topics that I reflect on often I wrote most of Chapter 2, which brings up why we perform regular community analyses, and why we have a selection policy. My work on Chapter 3 was multi-fold. On the one hand, as the main writer and editor on the project, it was my duty to provide the interesting, terse, and information laden prose in a proper format. On the other hand, because there was a certain amount of creativity and license involved in imagining and creating a policy manual for the dead, this section offered the team the opportunity to “create” the community from which our CM policy decisions would follow. So, part of my contribution to this section was creating numerous small details about the community and encouraging my teammates to contribute appropriate details. Finally, as with elsewhere in the manual, I did quite a bit of double checking to ensure that our facts and numbers (for instance with the surveys) were accurate and in-line with other statistics mentioned throughout the document.
Chapter 5 was a significant one for me: I did a great deal of work making sure that the selection philosophy and objectives and selection procedures were clearly articulated. I worked on writing all the IF documents so that they could be connected to this chapter. Once I was able to work out with my teammates how staffing would be organized, and what their roles and responsibilities would be, I was able to use that information to complete that part of the chapter. Similarly, we as a group had to do the work of determining formats, collection areas, and define our special collections before I was able to organize and begin describing the general selection criteria to apply to those areas. Chapter 7, Acquisitions, was another section where I did most of the juggling of component parts, as well as writing and structuring, but had to wait until a) we had established staff roles, and b) we had established who all our vendors were. Budgeting, Chapter 8, was very much a group effort, but aside from writing and editing, was instrumental in making sure we were all working on the elements that needed to come together to make this chapter happen. For instance, I performed a lot of number crunching to arrive at our collections budget figure, as well as other collections numbers and percentages that were eventually used to make decisions about this section, including additional funding sources we made up once we understood what our shortfall would be. My earlier conceiving of a consortium of which HHSL was a part, has a helpful contribution in many sections like this one, as it gave us a way to describe many library functions that would not have been possible if we defined ourselves as a small local system.
For the chapter on Evaluation, Preservation, and Weeding I drew heavily from our studies (for instance the Continuous Review, Evaluation and Weeding Method (CREW) transformed into our own DEATH and EEEE! criteria methods), but I drew from my own experience repairing books when describing our in-house materials repair process. Once staff and materials types were identified I was able to write the evaluation procedures and work with my teammates to determine what our weeding schedule would look like. The Censorship and Intellectual Freedom Chapter was once again my purview, and almost all of the writing here is mine. I drew some inspiration here from the very vague collections manuals I looked through in my class on Intellectual Freedom. I made it a point here to be very exhaustive and detailed, clearly covering all policies and procedures, including foundational documents. I am particularly proud of the “example of a successfully challenged book” section because I only saw it in one other collection’s manual, and I thought its inclusion added a powerful element to the whole. I brainstormed a great deal with a teammate on this part, double-checking to be sure that my admittedly rare and exceptional example did not otherwise endanger the usefulness of our reconsideration policy.
The skills I learned constructing this manual are too numerous to mention. Working as a team while piecing together the components of a living document like this, is not something I could have learned from reading a book. I now have an instinctive understanding of the component parts of a CM policy manual, and also a clear understanding of elements that need to be present for the work to move forward (like community analysis, clear staffing roles, and a clear understanding of material types and formats). Working through the various chapters of the manual helped me understand how numbers and concepts come together, and I now know how the data supports the policies, procedures, materials, and services written into the pages. Everything I worked on in this class is 100% applicable to any collection management activity I might perform in the future, for any information organization.
Conclusion
I have seen how a collection management services department for a massive library system functions in terms of roles, responsibilities, policy, and practice. At the same time I have had the opportunity to work on a team that created a complete CM policy manual, and observed all the myriad components that need to come together to make a living document capable of guiding staff through its daily, monthly, and cyclical CM activities. The process of working on such a policy manual showed me that the iterative process involved in its eternal return as a working document is not a rote activity, but rather a deeply meaningful activity that resides at the heart of what it means to be a librarian. I understand preservation and stewardship to be a part of that central focus, and this understanding requires the librarian to actively critique their policy and regularly prune both policy and collection so that it accurately reflects the needs and desires of the present-day community. I see the continuation of providing information services to our community as the duty we are charged with upholding, now and into the future. While the CM process is deeply meaningful, it is also hard work, and yet I learned that I am fully capable of performing that work. It is this practical experience, combined with my awareness of the significance of why information professionals perform this work, that I can bring with me into any information environment.
References
American Library Association. (2006, July 26). Evaluating library collections: An interpretation
of the library bill of rights. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/evaluatinglibrary
American Library Association. (2016, December 8). Selection & reconsideration policy toolkit
for public, school, & academic libraries. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/tools/challengesupport/selectionpolicytoolkit
Disher, W.T. (2014). Crash course in collection development (2nd ed.). Santa Barbara, CA:
Libraries Unlimited.
Disher, W.T. (2018). Collection Management. In Hirsh, S. (Ed.). Information services today: An
introduction. Rowman & Littlefield.
Gorman, M. (2008). Professional ethics and values in a changing world. In Haycock, K. &
Sheldon, B.E. (Eds.). The Portable MLIS: Insights from the Experts. (pp. 15-22). Westport: Libraries Unlimited.
Gorman, M. (2012). The prince’s dream: A future for academic libraries. New review of
academic librarianship, 18(2), 114-126. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michael_Gorman5/publication/271605679_The_Prince's_Dream_A_Future_For_Academic_Libraries/links/5a9c01f6a6fdcc3cbacd3d91/The-Princes-Dream-A-Future-For-Academic-Libraries.pdf
Johnson, P. (2014). Fundamentals of collection development and management (3rd ed.). Chicago,
IL: American Library Association
Lynch, J. (2016). You could look it up: The reference shelf from ancient babylon to wikipedia.
New York: Bloomsbury
Mosher, P. H. (1982). Collection development to collection management: Toward stewardship of
library resources. Collection management, 4(4), 41-48. Retrieved from https://www-tandfonlinecom.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1300/J105v04n04_04?needAccess=true
Collection development (CD), the selection and acquisition of library materials in a “carefully constructed area[s] or subject collections,” emerged in the 1950’s and 1960’s within academia, where librarians began handling the acquisitions work formerly done by faculty (Mosher, 1982, pp 41-42). Due to “increasing expectations and declining resources,” collection management (CM), “the systematic, efficient, and economic stewardship of library resources,” was developed by the American Library Association (ALA) as a concept, around 1974-1977. (Mosher, 1982, pp 44-45). Stewardship is linked to the concept of preservation, which can be applied to the library’s collection as data or objects, but also refers to the “preserving and transmitting of the human record.” (Gorman, 2008, p 18). The idea of collection management as stewardship involves the preparation and maintenance of CD policy (as ‘management’ implies planning, budgeting, and development), selection and evaluation of materials for acquisition, and then the organization of the library collection as a whole (starting from a core library collection)(Mosher, 1982, pp 45-46). CD policies provide guidelines, procedures, and protocol in broad outlines, but they may eventually come to be “supplemented by more detailed policies focusing on subjects, user communities, or special collections (Johnson, 2014, p 108). A slightly more modern definition of collection management has been provided by Disher: “the management-related processes and procedures involved in developing and building the collection such as planning, budgeting, controlling, and evaluating” (2018, p 296).
A collection development policy manual will have selection and evaluation criteria at its core (ALA, 2006; ALA, 2016). Selection is the process by which, hewing to a CD policy, librarians identify physical and digital items that might be relevant for the collection (using various selection tools and resources), evaluate their worthiness, assess whether or not they should be acquired (and/or how access will be provided), and then order them from vendors (Johnson, 2014, p 137). Information professionals selecting library materials need to understand the core values of librarianship, be able to identify their own biases, and then learn to wield the former and lay down the latter (Disher, 2014, p 55). Disher states that selecting library materials is also about keeping two philosophies in balance: giving the public what they demand, versus giving the public quality materials (2014, pp 53-54). Selection criteria might involve identifying demand and usage potential, material quality, whether it is a subject in demand by the community, whether it would fit into the core collection, or whether it would help balance out the collection; author, publisher, format, cost, and timeliness are also factors (Disher, 2014, pp 56-58).
Evaluation, which looks at “item-intrinsic qualities,” or “items on their own merits,” or an item in relation to others in a collection, is about quality; assessment, by contrast, which is about whether or not items “meet local needs,” or how well the item aligns with library goals, needs, or mission, and is more concerned with utility (Johnson, 2014, pp 144-149; pp 297-337). According to Disher, how and why materials are being used are the most important questions raised by evaluation (2014, p. 20). Collection evaluation, or collection analysis, which is a combination of evaluation and assessment, considers a collection’s use and impact, and measures inputs, outputs, and outcomes (Johnson, 2014, pp. 298-300). Evaluative techniques are usually either collection or usage based (Disher, 2014, pp 25-33). Collection evaluation and assessment also involves activities like the collection of statistical data, or the process of weeding materials from the collection (Disher, 2014, pp 39-45; pp 86-100). In collection management, the concept of organization seems mostly to refer to the management of staffing, especially the assigning of roles and responsibilities to anyone involved in the collection development process (Johnson, 2014, pp 29-34).
Library materials (both digital and physical objects as a collection) are understood to be the traditional basis around which much library activity revolves. These materials exist in a myriad forms and formats, and the job of the information professional is to provide access to all users. Materials eventually wear out; formats sometimes change or disappear. Information professionals are charged with keeping materials in good condition, refreshing the collection as necessary, and providing materials in popular formats. The process that leads up to materials being available, collection development and management, needs to be drafted as written policy, in part because the information organization needs to be transparent to the public in how it selects, evaluates, budgets, and acquires materials. Reconsideration policies are a part of collection development policies because the public has to have a means of challenging materials in the collection. Collection management at its core is also about financial responsibility and provides a window into library processes, so that librarians and the library stay accountable to stakeholders. Physical and digital collections like the rest of the library are always in flux, and just as a circulation manual gives direction and guidance to staff on the checking out and checking in of materials, a library collections management policy manual provides CM staff direction and guidance on the selection, evaluation, and preservation of materials, but also gives them an understanding of how planning, budgeting, development, and staffing function together to manage a library collection. Collection management remains an important concept and process for librarians to understand because it is central to the functioning of any healthy library.
Preparation to Understand Competency F: Coursework and Work Experience
I have been able to observe some of the processes of collection management during my ten years of employment in the XX library system (XXXX). I have certainly been involved with weeding the collection, and I regularly evaluate items for either preservation or discarding from the system. I often use computer-generated lists to pull items from the shelves due to condition, low circulation, age, or other factors. Staff have a schedule for weeding certain parts of the collection, like audiobooks; weeding happens at all branches, usually organized by the managers and librarians. Most of the collection management activities at XXXX are centrally managed by Collection Management Services (CMS) and I have had the opportunity to tour their department and see how it is organized by roles, responsibilities, and functions. I particularly enjoyed asking questions of the Selection & Order Department, as I have some experience in this area, having worked in independent bookstores for almost 15 years. The one Selector I spoke with was kind enough to show me how some of the survey and collection analysis ends up on a spreadsheet, and some of the software she uses in vendor relations.
My Information Communities class (INFO 200) gave me insight into the ethic of service to users and introduced me to the concept of stewardship as a core value of librarianship. Intellectual Freedom (INFO 234) gave me a glimpse into how collection development policies are structured, and the important role of reconsideration policies in making policy transparent to the public. Information Retrieval System Design (INFO 202) and Beginning Cataloging and Classification (INFO 248) gave me a peek behind how collections can be managed for access and use. Of course, my Collection Management class (INFO 266) was the single most valuable class I had for understanding collection management; my participation on a team constructing a collection development policy was something I will always carry with me.
Evidence
Resource Selection for Public Libraries
Discussion of Evidentiary Items
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3A64529791-7710-4d6b-bfe3-107b8cca6d23
The first half of this exercise involved me analyzing the resource selection policies for two library systems. While the primary focus of the exercise relates to Intellectual Freedom, I was also tasked with identifying library objectives, selectors, selection criteria, relevant procedures, special areas regarding materials, and who approved the policies.
For point 1 of both policies I describe them as articulating selection criteria and procedures in a language that emphasizes inclusivity and minimizes exclusivity. Point 2 locates those sections of the policy that talk about CM roles, workflow, and the CM environment. I note that second policy actually has sections for Selection Criteria, Selection Sources, Collection Evaluation & Maintenance, and Preservation; in policy 1 I find the ethical underpinnings for selection, selection guidelines, and a mapping out of selection workflow. In Point 3, policy 1, I point out language that identifies a patron-centered collection, and in the second policy language that sounds like patron-driven acquisitions. For Point 4 I identify who approved the CM policy. In policy 1 the board appoints CD staff and acts on budget recommendations. I find policy 1’s objectives follow ALA guidelines regarding collection building. I note that the policy identifies “special interests of our diverse community,” as a specific objective of selection, and that it prioritizes a customer-centered collection. In policy 2 I found detailed selection objectives in a section called Collection Evaluation, that emphasized achieving a modern, balanced, and attractive collection. In both policies I was able to find a person (a Director) responsible for selection, but only in the first did it mention delegating that responsibility to “library professionals. For both Selection Criteria sections of the policies, I contrasted the criteria I could find with ALA suggestions.
In policy 1 I describe a Selection Workflow chart, a Staff Responsibility for Selection section (which mentions CD staff working with pre-selection committees), a section on weeding, and a list of selection aids. Instead of simply having a list of material types (books, audiobooks, DVDs, etcetera), I point out that the policy instead, confuses things by trying to describe how those material types are chosen. In policy 2 I find a Selection Criteria section that maps out a very subjective decision-making process. I identify the strongest aspects of the policy as explanations regarding why the material needs to be collected, and how the criteria and evaluation sections work together with the Intellectual Freedom section. I note a list of selection aids and some details on weeding and preservation. Finally, reading between the lines in the Special Areas section for policy 2, I suggest that because there are staff dedicated to evaluating gifts to the library, and because they house these in an “appropriate” location, that special collections may be a feature of this library.
The two collection development policies in this exercise were very scattered in construction, and both required some effort in order to find and name material that should normally be in such a CD policy. For instance, rather than devoting a section to Types of Materials, and giving a description for each material, the first policy attempts, in a garbled fashion, to describe the formal process by which all those types of materials get selected. Being able to find the information that should be in these policies, and being able to determine when that information is not present, is a valid skill that can I can use whenever I am working with a collection management point of process, and can certainly be of use if I was constructing my own policy with others.
Blog Post: Stewardship and Preservation as an Ethic of the Reference Librarian
Discussion of Evidentiary Items
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xyDi6KMXwyjtRYOMNss-1Z3fJJQh0KLZwCd04w-E-B0/edit?usp=sharing or
https://ischoolblogs.sjsu.edu/info/encyclopediabrawn/2016/07/23/stewardship-and-preservation-as-an-ethic-of-the-reference-librarian/
I wrote this blog post on stewardship and preservation for my Information Communities class (INFO 200). If collection development (CD) and collection management (CM) have only been with us for a little over a half-century (Mosher, 1982, pp 41-45), here I present evidence that the idea of stewardship can be traced to at least the first European university in the 11th century, although preservation of the human record goes back as far back as 1750 B.C.E. (Lynch, 2016, p 13). I link stewardship to the CM concept of preservation, which can be applied to the library’s collection as data or objects, particularly in the format of the codex (or book), still the penultimate information preservation method (Gorman, 2008, p 18; Gorman, 2012, pp 2).
While for the first half of this paper I paint a picture of the history and legacy of stewardship and preservation, in the second half I delve into the present state of preservation and stewardship in a digital age, and give voice to some concerns by those who would continue this stewardship into the future. I describe a digital informational landscape that has achieved almost unlimited storage capacity for communications, but very little coordinated effort to organize or preserve vast swaths of data, let alone establishing value or meaning to that data. I let others describe a situation in which we have the capability to keep preserving our physical collections, but seemingly have lost the will to keep doing so, and where digital archiving has not yet proved to be a secure replacement. I note that digital preservation of both physical and digital items only functions within a globally run physical infrastructure maintained by humans, who also require physical maintenance.
I contrast the need for collaboration on a large scale, with the inability of people to say, agree on how we should preserve the archaeological record. I concede that Wikipedia has become the default modern way of storing our human heritage but underline how fragile this form of “preservation” really is. I spend some time illustrating what digital stewardship might look like, and what would be required for this to become a sustainable model. I highlight how even large, influential informational organizations can find themselves stymied with preservation and stewardship efforts, challenged by both practices and policies that cannot be reconciled. I return to the idea of stewardship as service and let some informed information professionals give their thoughts on how we might be abdicating our duties as preservationists by myopically focusing on number crunching rather than on learning and the passing on of knowledge.
This blog post shows that I have thought deeply about and can discuss the CM concept of preservation in all its complexity. Preservation and stewardship of books and library materials is a key component of what collection managers do, and understanding and be able to articulate the values and history behind those processes is a proper foundation for anyone who would hope to do that kind of work. I show that both physical and digital preservation are “wicked problems” that have become global in scope; by grasping the true scope of the issues surrounding this aspect of CM I can bring at least good and relevant questions to any CM group working on any preservation tasks.
Synthesis and Reflection Paper
Discussion of Evidentiary Items
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Af5f8367f-5d19-4f0b-b1b8-60bac2ee6e5d
This was the paper I wrote to summarize and understand my experience co-constructing a collection development policy manual for my Collections Management class (INFO 266). I begin by explaining that at the beginning of the project I envisioned collection development management (CDM) arising symbiotically out of the social contract that occurs whenever a library is created by a community. I talk about how I came to see how the ideals of Intellectual Freedom (IF) were enshrined within both the concept of CDM and CD policy manuals. I find, to my surprise, that many routine aspects of a policy manual, such as the marshaling of usage and demographic statistics, or developing well-managed budgets, are of extreme importance because they enable librarians to prove to their communities that they are fulfilling their ethical missions. I reveal that the process of community analysis, during the project, helped me understand that without it, nothing else (user assessment, collection assessment, materials selection or de-selection) can take place. I explain that I came to understand that understanding the individuals in the community is the flip side of understanding the money, data, and technology of the library, and how they are entwined makes a CM policy manual a living breathing document that can be used in everyday operations. Understanding both the community and the library system through the CD process, I say, seems to be a precondition for Intellectual Freedom to flourish, and that this more concrete way of thinking about IF, as embodied within a democratically produced document, is new for me. I state that I see IF as the heart of any CD policy manual, and I go on to say that I see preservation as a CM function that ought to be re-examined as a neglected library value, rather than simply a routine process. I bring up some things that were new to me such as “spending to zero” budgeting, and a critique of quantitative approaches to weeding.
In the Reflection section of this paper I mention that over the course of constructing the policy manual, to my surprise, I discovered that I have leadership, literary, and library skills that I could bring to bear to the task. I describe how the process cemented in my mind the steps that were needed to complete the task, step-by-step, decision by decision, and that understanding is something I can take with me wherever I work. I write that I learned that an information professional has a responsibility to be an active rather than a passive force in the world, and that failing to refresh our manuals, to continually re-think and re-engage would be a failure of imagination on our part. I end my reflection with the understanding that I cannot maintain an abstract set of ethics, but it is rather through a “routine” process such as CM, working together democratically with others as a team, that my ethics become embodied in the library itself.
This paper shows that I learn by doing, that the process of working on a CM policy manual, taught me how to apply myself in a more practical and professional way, and that I learned how my ethics can inform my work and vice-versa. Highlighting the importance of CM processes like community analysis or budgeting shows that I know how CM works, but describing how those processes also have meaning reflects my ability to not simply see CM as a rote process that can be understood by rote learning. This ability of mine to see the process of CM as a dynamic process is one that will enable me to work more nimbly than others perhaps, when working on CM projects in the future.
Haunted Hollows Spectral Library Collection Development Policy Manual
Discussion of Evidentiary Items
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:5fd43c89-77ab-46f7-8a3c-dff4d618ea93
I worked on almost every aspect of this collection development (CD) policy manual, which was a group project for my Collection Management (CD) class (INFO 266). Our task was to create a CD policy manual based on a particular theme, and we chose to have our library be situated in a graveyard among the dead, thus the title of the manual. Over 11 chapters I envisioned, planned, organized, researched, and constructed the manual, sentence by sentence, and section by section, in league with three other students. In Chapter 1 I performed a lot of writing and research to both find a location for our library, to be able to understand how our library was situated (within a broader consortium) and making each area and associated function clear and understandable. I performed a lot of number crunching for the appendixes on staffing and collection tools at chapter’s end. Because Intellectual Freedom and library ethics are topics that I reflect on often I wrote most of Chapter 2, which brings up why we perform regular community analyses, and why we have a selection policy. My work on Chapter 3 was multi-fold. On the one hand, as the main writer and editor on the project, it was my duty to provide the interesting, terse, and information laden prose in a proper format. On the other hand, because there was a certain amount of creativity and license involved in imagining and creating a policy manual for the dead, this section offered the team the opportunity to “create” the community from which our CM policy decisions would follow. So, part of my contribution to this section was creating numerous small details about the community and encouraging my teammates to contribute appropriate details. Finally, as with elsewhere in the manual, I did quite a bit of double checking to ensure that our facts and numbers (for instance with the surveys) were accurate and in-line with other statistics mentioned throughout the document.
Chapter 5 was a significant one for me: I did a great deal of work making sure that the selection philosophy and objectives and selection procedures were clearly articulated. I worked on writing all the IF documents so that they could be connected to this chapter. Once I was able to work out with my teammates how staffing would be organized, and what their roles and responsibilities would be, I was able to use that information to complete that part of the chapter. Similarly, we as a group had to do the work of determining formats, collection areas, and define our special collections before I was able to organize and begin describing the general selection criteria to apply to those areas. Chapter 7, Acquisitions, was another section where I did most of the juggling of component parts, as well as writing and structuring, but had to wait until a) we had established staff roles, and b) we had established who all our vendors were. Budgeting, Chapter 8, was very much a group effort, but aside from writing and editing, was instrumental in making sure we were all working on the elements that needed to come together to make this chapter happen. For instance, I performed a lot of number crunching to arrive at our collections budget figure, as well as other collections numbers and percentages that were eventually used to make decisions about this section, including additional funding sources we made up once we understood what our shortfall would be. My earlier conceiving of a consortium of which HHSL was a part, has a helpful contribution in many sections like this one, as it gave us a way to describe many library functions that would not have been possible if we defined ourselves as a small local system.
For the chapter on Evaluation, Preservation, and Weeding I drew heavily from our studies (for instance the Continuous Review, Evaluation and Weeding Method (CREW) transformed into our own DEATH and EEEE! criteria methods), but I drew from my own experience repairing books when describing our in-house materials repair process. Once staff and materials types were identified I was able to write the evaluation procedures and work with my teammates to determine what our weeding schedule would look like. The Censorship and Intellectual Freedom Chapter was once again my purview, and almost all of the writing here is mine. I drew some inspiration here from the very vague collections manuals I looked through in my class on Intellectual Freedom. I made it a point here to be very exhaustive and detailed, clearly covering all policies and procedures, including foundational documents. I am particularly proud of the “example of a successfully challenged book” section because I only saw it in one other collection’s manual, and I thought its inclusion added a powerful element to the whole. I brainstormed a great deal with a teammate on this part, double-checking to be sure that my admittedly rare and exceptional example did not otherwise endanger the usefulness of our reconsideration policy.
The skills I learned constructing this manual are too numerous to mention. Working as a team while piecing together the components of a living document like this, is not something I could have learned from reading a book. I now have an instinctive understanding of the component parts of a CM policy manual, and also a clear understanding of elements that need to be present for the work to move forward (like community analysis, clear staffing roles, and a clear understanding of material types and formats). Working through the various chapters of the manual helped me understand how numbers and concepts come together, and I now know how the data supports the policies, procedures, materials, and services written into the pages. Everything I worked on in this class is 100% applicable to any collection management activity I might perform in the future, for any information organization.
Conclusion
I have seen how a collection management services department for a massive library system functions in terms of roles, responsibilities, policy, and practice. At the same time I have had the opportunity to work on a team that created a complete CM policy manual, and observed all the myriad components that need to come together to make a living document capable of guiding staff through its daily, monthly, and cyclical CM activities. The process of working on such a policy manual showed me that the iterative process involved in its eternal return as a working document is not a rote activity, but rather a deeply meaningful activity that resides at the heart of what it means to be a librarian. I understand preservation and stewardship to be a part of that central focus, and this understanding requires the librarian to actively critique their policy and regularly prune both policy and collection so that it accurately reflects the needs and desires of the present-day community. I see the continuation of providing information services to our community as the duty we are charged with upholding, now and into the future. While the CM process is deeply meaningful, it is also hard work, and yet I learned that I am fully capable of performing that work. It is this practical experience, combined with my awareness of the significance of why information professionals perform this work, that I can bring with me into any information environment.
References
American Library Association. (2006, July 26). Evaluating library collections: An interpretation
of the library bill of rights. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/evaluatinglibrary
American Library Association. (2016, December 8). Selection & reconsideration policy toolkit
for public, school, & academic libraries. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/tools/challengesupport/selectionpolicytoolkit
Disher, W.T. (2014). Crash course in collection development (2nd ed.). Santa Barbara, CA:
Libraries Unlimited.
Disher, W.T. (2018). Collection Management. In Hirsh, S. (Ed.). Information services today: An
introduction. Rowman & Littlefield.
Gorman, M. (2008). Professional ethics and values in a changing world. In Haycock, K. &
Sheldon, B.E. (Eds.). The Portable MLIS: Insights from the Experts. (pp. 15-22). Westport: Libraries Unlimited.
Gorman, M. (2012). The prince’s dream: A future for academic libraries. New review of
academic librarianship, 18(2), 114-126. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michael_Gorman5/publication/271605679_The_Prince's_Dream_A_Future_For_Academic_Libraries/links/5a9c01f6a6fdcc3cbacd3d91/The-Princes-Dream-A-Future-For-Academic-Libraries.pdf
Johnson, P. (2014). Fundamentals of collection development and management (3rd ed.). Chicago,
IL: American Library Association
Lynch, J. (2016). You could look it up: The reference shelf from ancient babylon to wikipedia.
New York: Bloomsbury
Mosher, P. H. (1982). Collection development to collection management: Toward stewardship of
library resources. Collection management, 4(4), 41-48. Retrieved from https://www-tandfonlinecom.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1300/J105v04n04_04?needAccess=true