SPEC Kit 337: Print Retention Decision Making ยท 57
For monographs: suggested 10 years or older with fewer than 3 checkouts with a last circulation date 8 years ago,
subject to bibliographer criteria revision. For serials: UC/JSTOR project.
Journal back files purchased electronically, then print is deaccessioned.
Journal back files that are also in JSTOR.
Journals with electronic availability and/or duplicate holdings in consortium (OhioLINK) if local demand is low.
Lists based on usage and age of materials, and whether digital surrogates were available.
Lists generated by two processes: 1) print equivalents for JSTOR collections we own 2) print titles included in the
Council of Prairie and Pacific University Libraries Shared Print Archive Network. Titles then reviewed for storage, keep, or
deaccesion.
Lists of government documents and lists of print journals now available in electronic form (JSTOR, specific publisher
packages)
Lists were created of duplicate (copy 2) books and journals and these were then compared at the shelf to pick the one in
better condition to retain, and the worse was discarded. It was really a one-time effort.
Online availability
Our largest print deaccessioning projects have been in withdrawing print serials back files when stable, perpetual online
access was available to the content. In terms of monographs, our largest project has been removing duplicate copies
of titles from our general stacks. Smaller weeding projects focused on the reference collection and pockets of material
where stable e-book versions of the content were available have also been undertaken.
Print and micro materials readily available online
Print journals that are available online and that are in secure archive (e.g., JSTOR)
Publication date, acquisition date, circulation/use history, electronic surrogate
Reports are sometimes created based on LC ranges where material may no longer fit the campus needs. Reports are
created for zero-use items that have been in the collection for over 20 years, and are then reviewed by the liaison
librarians. The library has also run publisher reports for textbooks, which are then reviewed by selectors. The library
developed a report for government ephemera (e.g., pamphlets).
Serials held in JSTOR, CRL, other repositories, duplicate monographs
Shelf list with usage
The nature of the list criteria can vary by subject area and/or library. Type of collection may include age of publication,
specific format, circulation, date of last circulation, or preservation quality.
This is very much the same as the criteria for sending materials to the shared off-site storage facility. We have employed
a number of strategies to select materials to send to this facility. It has included supplying serial lists to subject selectors
so they can designate materials to send to the depository. There are no specific criteria we employ per se other than
our practice to automatically transfer serial runs that overlap with online access we make available to users, for
example, JSTOR, American Chemical Society, IEEE, etc. More recently, we have output lists that indicate collection
overlap between the storage facility and in our on-campus collection. Our collection deaccessioning strategy outlines
a process to identify and withdraw overlapping volumes. This applies to primary serials as they have been our primary
focus to date. We have also outlined a strategy for sending monographs to the facility that includes looking at the age
of the material, circulation over the past decade, availability within the Five Colleges, Boston Library Consortium, and
For monographs: suggested 10 years or older with fewer than 3 checkouts with a last circulation date 8 years ago,
subject to bibliographer criteria revision. For serials: UC/JSTOR project.
Journal back files purchased electronically, then print is deaccessioned.
Journal back files that are also in JSTOR.
Journals with electronic availability and/or duplicate holdings in consortium (OhioLINK) if local demand is low.
Lists based on usage and age of materials, and whether digital surrogates were available.
Lists generated by two processes: 1) print equivalents for JSTOR collections we own 2) print titles included in the
Council of Prairie and Pacific University Libraries Shared Print Archive Network. Titles then reviewed for storage, keep, or
deaccesion.
Lists of government documents and lists of print journals now available in electronic form (JSTOR, specific publisher
packages)
Lists were created of duplicate (copy 2) books and journals and these were then compared at the shelf to pick the one in
better condition to retain, and the worse was discarded. It was really a one-time effort.
Online availability
Our largest print deaccessioning projects have been in withdrawing print serials back files when stable, perpetual online
access was available to the content. In terms of monographs, our largest project has been removing duplicate copies
of titles from our general stacks. Smaller weeding projects focused on the reference collection and pockets of material
where stable e-book versions of the content were available have also been undertaken.
Print and micro materials readily available online
Print journals that are available online and that are in secure archive (e.g., JSTOR)
Publication date, acquisition date, circulation/use history, electronic surrogate
Reports are sometimes created based on LC ranges where material may no longer fit the campus needs. Reports are
created for zero-use items that have been in the collection for over 20 years, and are then reviewed by the liaison
librarians. The library has also run publisher reports for textbooks, which are then reviewed by selectors. The library
developed a report for government ephemera (e.g., pamphlets).
Serials held in JSTOR, CRL, other repositories, duplicate monographs
Shelf list with usage
The nature of the list criteria can vary by subject area and/or library. Type of collection may include age of publication,
specific format, circulation, date of last circulation, or preservation quality.
This is very much the same as the criteria for sending materials to the shared off-site storage facility. We have employed
a number of strategies to select materials to send to this facility. It has included supplying serial lists to subject selectors
so they can designate materials to send to the depository. There are no specific criteria we employ per se other than
our practice to automatically transfer serial runs that overlap with online access we make available to users, for
example, JSTOR, American Chemical Society, IEEE, etc. More recently, we have output lists that indicate collection
overlap between the storage facility and in our on-campus collection. Our collection deaccessioning strategy outlines
a process to identify and withdraw overlapping volumes. This applies to primary serials as they have been our primary
focus to date. We have also outlined a strategy for sending monographs to the facility that includes looking at the age
of the material, circulation over the past decade, availability within the Five Colleges, Boston Library Consortium, and
