SPEC Kit 337: Print Retention Decision Making · 45
characters (Hebrew, Chinese, Korean, etc.) due to problems with online discovery in the catalog. We do not move those
materials to remote storage as a general rule.
Some people felt sense of loss, even if the materials can be requested and delivered in 24 hours.
The arts and humanities communities are less enthusiastic about off-campus storage of materials.
There are still faculty around who get angry about transfer decisions that were made many, many years ago, but in some
cases those were actually bad decisions made without using logical criteria. In more recent years we have repatriated
some of those materials that should not have been sent (a fair amount of work but worth it) and that has helped to
restore trust and lower the aggravation levels.
There has been faculty resistance to shifting material off-campus, in particular from humanities faculty members. They
are concerned about the lost of browsability, serendipitous discovery, and delays in access. They are at times also
concerned about reduction to one last copy.
There have been concerns about policies and procedures, which have not yet been formalized.
There was internal resistance, sense of de-valuing print.
There were some concerns expressed about the loss of the ability to browse, as well as concerns about timely delivery of
materials.
Answered No
The library worked diligently to prepare faculty. The name of the facility did not use the word “storage.” We call it “Ivy
Stacks.” It opened in 1996.
COLLABORATIVE RETENTION AGREEMENT STRATEGY
31. Does your library participate in any collaborative retention agreements (i.e., a commitment by one
partner to retain a specific volume so that another partner may deaccession or store their duplicate
copy) independent of a shared shelving facility agreement? N=61
Yes 40 66%
No 21 34%
If yes, please identify the partners in your collaborative retention agreement(s). N=40
ASERL (3 responses)
ASERL Cooperative Journal Retention
ASERL distributed print archive
ASERL/WRLC Cooperative Journal Retention
ASERL, LOCKSS, but we have not leveraged these partnerships in making decisions for storage.
BALLCO (Boston Academic Law Library Collaborative), Boston Library Consortia
CIC participants of the shared print repository
characters (Hebrew, Chinese, Korean, etc.) due to problems with online discovery in the catalog. We do not move those
materials to remote storage as a general rule.
Some people felt sense of loss, even if the materials can be requested and delivered in 24 hours.
The arts and humanities communities are less enthusiastic about off-campus storage of materials.
There are still faculty around who get angry about transfer decisions that were made many, many years ago, but in some
cases those were actually bad decisions made without using logical criteria. In more recent years we have repatriated
some of those materials that should not have been sent (a fair amount of work but worth it) and that has helped to
restore trust and lower the aggravation levels.
There has been faculty resistance to shifting material off-campus, in particular from humanities faculty members. They
are concerned about the lost of browsability, serendipitous discovery, and delays in access. They are at times also
concerned about reduction to one last copy.
There have been concerns about policies and procedures, which have not yet been formalized.
There was internal resistance, sense of de-valuing print.
There were some concerns expressed about the loss of the ability to browse, as well as concerns about timely delivery of
materials.
Answered No
The library worked diligently to prepare faculty. The name of the facility did not use the word “storage.” We call it “Ivy
Stacks.” It opened in 1996.
COLLABORATIVE RETENTION AGREEMENT STRATEGY
31. Does your library participate in any collaborative retention agreements (i.e., a commitment by one
partner to retain a specific volume so that another partner may deaccession or store their duplicate
copy) independent of a shared shelving facility agreement? N=61
Yes 40 66%
No 21 34%
If yes, please identify the partners in your collaborative retention agreement(s). N=40
ASERL (3 responses)
ASERL Cooperative Journal Retention
ASERL distributed print archive
ASERL/WRLC Cooperative Journal Retention
ASERL, LOCKSS, but we have not leveraged these partnerships in making decisions for storage.
BALLCO (Boston Academic Law Library Collaborative), Boston Library Consortia
CIC participants of the shared print repository
