![Two Main Problems ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Mehr von Association of University Presses
Mehr von Association of University Presses (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Anderson AAUP
- 1. Making the Most of the Crisis Rick Anderson Associate Director Scholarly Resources & Collections
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Total cut to library was 19% -- pretty much the same around campus Materials budget took the largest hit, but also got the lion’s share of the backfill. Future “soft” help is promised. Technical Services took the biggest personnel hit – 20% of staff laid off; consolidated Monographs and Serials, laid off all copy catalogers. Most of the cut to the book budget is in firm orders; firm orders cut by half. There is little or no reason to believe that these numbers will grow to pre-2008 levels in the foreseeable future.
- The opportunity in this crisis is the chance to cut back drastically on speculative book purchasing and buy only those materials that are demonstrably wanted by patrons. We can do this partly by just cutting the budget; since about half of our purchases never circulate, that’s not the end of the world. We can also do it by using patron-driven acquisition models. What this means philosophically is interesting; it means rethinking the wholeconcept of the library collection. Why DO we buy books that we aren’t sure anyone wants, when we now have the option of waiting until we know someone wants it before we buy? Before ebooks, before Bookfinder.com, before print-on-demand became a viable option, we had no choice. But increasingly, we do have other options now. The EBM offers an incredibly exciting new model for acquisition, because it allows us (in theory) to expose huge amounts of non-acquired content to our patrons and then provide it to them only if and when needed. This turns the traditional library collection on its head, but it needed to be turned on its head – because it never worked very well to begin with, and we can’t afford to continue the old way in any case.