OhioLINK Collection Analysis Project

1. OhioLINK Collection Analysis Project 2nd OhioLINKOCLC Workshop April 13, 2009 Preliminary Analysis Julia A. Gammon, University of Akron Ed O’Neill, OCLC Research

2. The Overview

3. Project Goals To reduce unnecessary duplication To increase local collection development activities To expand the amount spent on cooperative acquisitions To strengthen the collective collection For the book collection:

4. Research Project Joint study by OhioLINK, OhioLINK members, OhioLINK Collection Building Task Force (CBTF) and OCLC Research This project is distinct from OCLC’s collection analysis service Much of the planned analysis is new and untested; not all of the analysis will be successful Thank You: OCLC and OhioLINK especially Celeste Feather; CBTF members and Lead Imps

5. Distinctive Aspects Size and scope of collections Use of local holdings and circulation information Number and variety of institutions FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) New metrics (Audience Level, Comprehensiveness, …)

6. Past Year’s Activity • Collected the second set of circulation data. • Compared the two sets of data to determine the annual circulation. • Identified (with extensive help) which items can circulate. • Revised the library organizational structure.

7. The project is still “in progress” and further data analysis is planned. Some results are still preliminary; your help and insight is essential to identify errors and inconsistencies and to determine what additional analysis would be beneficial. Caution!

8. The Data i25878591 45207959 The infinite / A.W. Moore 00051722 bc - 5 1 8/3/2001 8/23/2004 0415252857 (pbk.) Akron Item No.: OCLC No.: Title: LCCN: Location Code: Status Code: Circulation: Renewals: Accession date: Date of Last Use: ISBN: Source:

9. WorldCat Linking Obsolete OCLC numbers were replaced, Unique LCCNs or ISBNs were used to identify an OCLC number, Records lacking any standard number were excluded from the study, Records from the 2007 & 2008 circulation files were paired to determine annual circulation, Approximately 93% of the records were validated; many of the unvalidated records were for non-book materials. The OCLC Number is used to link the circulation records to the corresponding bibliographic record in WorldCat

10. The Circulation Data

11. Types of Analysis • Institution focused • The Collective collection • Subject based

12. Institution Focused Analysis • Detailed holdings • General Statistics • Languages • Age • Subjects

13. University of Akron University of Akron University of Akron University Libraries University Libraries Bierce Library Multi Level Structure Top level units: Individual campus, depositories, and external organizations (Museums, Centers, Hospitals) Third level units: Distinct library units. Second level units: Separate administrative units [university libraries, law, medicine, etc.) or distinct library units. Location codes : The codes used within OhioLINK to identify the location of the individual items. Over 4,200 different location codes are used. bccco, bccct, bccir, bccm, bcgd, bcgdo, bcmu, …

14. Three Level Structure for Akron

15. General

16. Age

17. Languages

18. Subjects

19. Collective Collection: What Do We Have? • How many items do we have? • What languages do we have? • How old are they? • How many are unique? • In what subjects? • How many copies do we need?

20. Most Used Total Circulation 2007-2008: 796

21. Most Widely Held Held by 69 Institutions (95%)

22. Distribution of Resources Manifestations

23. OhioLINK Resources (FRBR View)

24. 4.5 Duplication Rate Average No. of Copies Publication Date

25. Subject Distribution

26. Annual Circulation Rates by Subject

27. Obsolescence Rates

28. Circulation Rate vs. Age

29. Annual Non-English Circulation Rates Average Circulation Rate: 0.109

30. Usage Distribution Annual Circulation 455,000 6.5% Number of Manifestations

31. Duplication by Subject

32. Metrics

33. Simple Metrics • Age • Mean (Average) • Median • Percent English • Collection size (FRBR View) • Number of items • Number of Manifestations • Number of Works • Circulation • Annual circulation (Count \ rate) • Total circulation (Count \ rate) • Active Proportion

34. Coverage The percent of all OhioLINK manifestations held in a given collection. • Example: The University of Akron’s Ethics collection • Collectively OhioLINK libraries hold 13,308 different manifestations classified as Ethics, • 1,560 of these manifestations are held by the University of Akron, • Coverage = 1,560 / 13,308 = 12%

35. Comprehensiveness The proportion of all OhioLINK circulations that could have been met by the manifestations in a given collection. • Example: The University of Akron’s Ethics collection • All Ethics manifestations in OhioLINK libraries circulated 8,817 times last year, • Collectively the Ethics manifestations held at the University of Akron accounted for 3,060 circulations, • Comprehensiveness = 3,060 / 8,817 = 0.347

36. Phylogeny and systematics of the treehopper subfamily Audience level: 0.96 Octopusses and squid Audience level: 0.06 Fundamentals of entomology Audience level: 0.51    Audience Level 0 (Juvenile) (Scholarly) 1

37. Subjects

38. View within Institutions

39. View across Institutions

40. Conclusions • Preliminary conclusions: • Duplication rates are steady, • The 80/20 rule may be closer to 80/6, • Limited use of non-English materials, • Unique resources widely distributed, • Circulation rates vary greatly by subject, institution, … • Next Steps • What information is helpful; what isn’t? • What did we get wrong? • What did we miss?