1 / 31

Best Practices in Peer Reports

Best Practices in Peer Reports. Thursday, Oct. 28, 2004 Bowling Green State University Christen Cardina The University of Akron. 1. Goals of Presentation. Show how to create Peer Group Explain how to run Peer Reports

ace
Download Presentation

Best Practices in Peer Reports

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Best Practices in PeerReports Thursday, Oct. 28, 2004 Bowling Green State University Christen Cardina The University of Akron 1

  2. Goals of Presentation • Show how to create Peer Group • Explain how to run Peer Reports • Show examples for use in collection evaluation for improved collection development 2

  3. How to Determine a “Peer Group” • Your college or university may belong to a consortium, i.e. 5 Colleges of Ohio • Subject Area combined with academic level, i.e. universities that offer Ph.D. in Nursing, or colleges/universities that offer Biomedical engineering programs. • Your “Peer Group” may be made up of true “Peers,” or it could be made up of libraries with collections that you aspire to emulate, thoseknown to be the best in a given subject area. 3

  4. Building a Peer Group • From the GOBI Home Page • Go to Options and then Edit Peer Group 4

  5. 5

  6. Type of Library: I chose “Health Sciences” and clicked the filter 6

  7. Peer Group • University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill • University of Pittsburgh Health Sciences Library 7

  8. Peer Comparison: Identify specific titles to order Generate ideas for refining your approval profiles You can explore not only what other libraries are getting, but how they are getting it, i.e. slips, approval plan, continuations, or firm orders Only one library can be compared with your library at a time Peer Ranking: Generate graphs showing the distribution of titles acquired by each library in your peer group Gives a quick view of the buying patterns within a subject area Two Types of Peer Reports 8

  9. Ways to Use Peer Reports • Good source of bibliographic information related to title choices made by your peers- strengthens Collection Building in established collections, or when developing a new collection for a new curriculum • Justify Budgets by documenting what peers are spending in a given subject area for a given time frame • Accreditation- can compare my collection with the collections of schools accredited in a given curriculum. 9

  10. Peer Reporting Tools are located in the “Library” menu under “Peer Reports” 10

  11. 11

  12. 1. Peer Ranking Generate graphs showing the distribution of titles acquired by each library in your peer group Gives a quick view of the buying patterns within a subject area Click the “Rank” tab to go to the Peer Ranking Screen 12

  13. 13

  14. This report is meant to give a quick overview of the buying patterns of each library. It tells me that we all ordered about the same number of titles last FY, UA: 141; Pitt.: 135; UNC: 123. Report can take about 3 min. to run as it searches for the acquisition history of each of the libraries. 14

  15. Click View/Saved Search to review your report parameters. Saving the report allows you to run it again without reconstructing the search parameters 15

  16. Click “Retrieve Search” to run saved searches 16

  17. 2. Peer Comparison Report • Identify specific titles to order • Generate ideas for refining your approval profiles • Only one library can be compared with your library at a time • Click “Compare” tab 17

  18. Running a Peer Comparison Report between UA and Pitt for Subject “Nursing” 18

  19. 83 of 135 titles purchased by Pitt were not bought by UA (2/3rd’s) 19

  20. 2nd Peer Comparison between UA and UNC 20

  21. 66 out of 123 titles bought by UNCwere not bought by UA. (1/2) 21

  22. It’s interesting to note HOW titles were purchased 22

  23. Another Example Different Subject 23

  24. Biomedical Engineering • Last FY, this fund had very little money and no approval plan. This year, funding greatly increased. I wanted to see what other Biomedical Bibliographers were doing with their collections. 24

  25. Did not use “Peer Group,” which was built for Nursing. Selected Wright State and U. of Cincinnati which have Biomedical Engineering programs. Used LC Ranges which are designated to the Biomedical Engineering fund code at U. of Akron: (note there is no “Interdisciplinary Subject Descriptor” for Biomedical Engineering) Biomedical Engineering Peer Ranking Report 25

  26. Separate by semi-colons 26

  27. Results: U. Cin: 40; Wright State: 22; UA: 11 27

  28. Peer Comparison Report between UA and U Cincinnati Subject: Biomedical Engineering 28

  29. 34 of their titles were not bought by UA 29

  30. We’ve Reviewed • How to Create a Peer Group • How to do a Peer Ranking Report • Generate graphs showing the distribution of titles acquired by each library in your peer group • How to do a Peer Comparison Report • Identify specific titles to order 30

  31. Take some hands on time to create your own reports Questions? 31

More Related