1 / 11

Evaluating the Risks & Benefits of Going E-only

Evaluating the Risks & Benefits of Going E-only. UNY Science Librarians Meeting Oct. 21, 2005 A. Ben Wagner, Sciences Librarian abwagner@buffalo.edu Science & Engineering Library UB Arts and Sciences Libraries. E-only journals – The Issues. Print-electronic version equivalence

amethyst-webster
Download Presentation

Evaluating the Risks & Benefits of Going E-only

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. Evaluating the Risks & Benefits of Going E-only UNY Science Librarians Meeting Oct. 21, 2005 A. Ben Wagner, Sciences Librarian abwagner@buffalo.edu Science & Engineering Library UB Arts and Sciences Libraries

  2. E-only journals – The Issues • Print-electronic version equivalence • Continuing access/archival rights • Fair use/’walk in’ use/ILL • Cost savings • Reliability/Backup (mirror sites, 3rd party archive, escrow arrangements)

  3. Approach 1 – Semi-Quantitative Form 1 • Quick Screen Form • Two “show stoppers” • Does publisher offer e-only option? • Is there at least a small cost savings? • Ownership of content options • Assurance of continued access to content (esp. if subs. cancelled at future date)

  4. Approach 1– Semi-quantitative Form 2 • Column 1: 13 criteria • Column 2: Point weights for criteria • Column 3-5: Safe, ‘Iffy’, Unsafe • Each institution/librarian should customize weights to their situation.

  5. Approach 2 - Descriptive 1-2 page document for each publisher • Content • Quality • License/Vendor/Publisher/Tech Requirements • Access • Archiving • Notes

  6. Approach 2 - Descriptive • Discussed at an ASL-wide meeting. • General decision - go e-only or not. • Subject selectors could select specific titles to “opt-out” of going e-only. • A brief justification required to “opt-out”.

  7. Reference - Going E-only • Generally same criteria, but different weights. • Continuing access less important – most reference works become dated. • Ease-of-use/navigation/search tools for work much more important. • Use restrictions more important. • Upfront vs. annual pricing models.

  8. The Rock and the Hard Place Given library budgets: • Going to e-only reference means wider access/more use of fewer works, versus • Staying with print means more resources, but less use/access.

  9. One more tool - Analyze • SciFinder, Web of Knowledge, & EI Village II – analyze by journal name • Identify journals your dept./organization publishes in. • For a given subject, what journals your library should have. • What journals you can cancel.

  10. SciFinder Analyze 2004-05Carbon Nanotubes • Jpn. Kokai Tokkyo Koho 344 • Carbon 289 • Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mat. 272 • Los Alamos Prepr. Arch. Cond. Matt. 215 • J. Phys. Chem. B 201 • U.S. Pat. Appl. Publ. 184 • Appl. Phys. Lett. 183 • PCT Int. Appl. 156

  11. SciFinder Analyze 2004-05Carbon Nanotubes 9) Chem. Phys. Lett. 147 10) Abstracts, 227th ACS Nat. Mtg 146 11) Abstracts, 229th ACS Nat. Mtg 126 12) Nano Lett. 122 13) Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 14) Diamond Relat. Mater. 100 15) J. Am. Chem. Soc. 100 16) AIP Conf. Proc. 98

More Related