© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens Deposits & Withdrawals A Survey of Depository Libraries That...
-
Upload
coral-grant -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of © 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens Deposits & Withdrawals A Survey of Depository Libraries That...
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Deposits & Withdrawals A Survey of Depository Libraries That Have Recently Changed Status
Aric Ahrens Illinois Institute of Technology
Luke Griffin Jacksonville State University
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Number of Depository Libraries 1895-2002
300
500
700
900
1100
1300
1500
1895
1898
1901
1904
1907
1910
1913
1916
1919
1922
1925
1928
1931
1934
1937
1940
1943
1946
1949
1952
1955
1958
1961
1964
1967
1970
1973
1976
1979
1982
1985
1988
1991
1994
1997
2000
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Formative Era – FDLP Takes Shape 1895-1922
Number of Depository Libraries 1895-1922
300
350
400
450
500
550
1895
1897
1899
1901
1903
1905
1907
1909
1911
1913
1915
1917
1919
1921
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Selective Depository Era:1922-1962
Number of Depository Libraries 1922-1962
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
1922
1924
1926
1928
1930
1932
1934
1936
1938
1940
1942
1944
1946
1948
1950
1952
1954
1956
1958
1960
1962
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Expansion Era1962-1988
Number of Depository Libraries 1962-1988
300
500
700
900
1100
1300
1500
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Electronic Era1988-present
Number of Depository Libraries 1988-2002
1240
1260
1280
1300
1320
1340
1360
1380
1400
1420
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
1996-2002
1260
1280
1300
1320
1340
1360
1380
1400
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
WHY?
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
1985 Survey of Libraries that Dropped Out of the FDLP
Quantitative Study 1985: Hernon, McClure, & Purcell32 Libraries
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Lack of Use
Proximity to Selective or Regional
Space Limitations
Professional Staff
Support Staff
Cost
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
2002 Qualitative Summary of Libraries that Dropped Out of the FDLP
Reasons for Leaving the FDLP2000-2002
37 Libraries
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Staff or Funding
Internet
Proximity to Selective or Regional
Space
Lack of Use
Diminished Value of program.
Inability to meet GPO Standards
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Surveys and Profile
Survey of FDLP libraries that have dropped out since 1996.
Survey of FDLP libraries that have joined the program since 1992.
Profile of the libraries that have dropped out.
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Survey Response Rates
Drops Survey – FY 1996-2002 78 of 103 surveyed libraries responded 76% Response Rate Addressing Problems
Adds Survey – FY 1992-2002 15 of 29 surveyed libraries responded 52% Response Rate
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Why are Depositories Dropping or Adding?
Survey Results – 1 to 5 Scale Rating of reasons for leaving FDLP Ranking of importance of different costs on
decision to leave FDLP Rating of reasons for joining FDLP Rating of satisfaction level with FDLP
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Rating of Importance of Factors on Decisionto Leave the FDLP
0 1 2 3 4 5
Regional Close by
Selective Close by
Cost
Internet
Average Rating of Importance
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Average Ranking of Importance of Costs
0 1 2 3 4 5
Preservation
Technology
Storage
Maintenance
Staffing
Average Ranking of Importance
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Rating of Importance of Different Factors on Decision to Add Depository Status
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Resources Vital
Status
ElectronicResources
No NearbyDepositories
Rea
son
Rating on a 1 to 5 Scale
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Level of Satsifaction with FDLP - Libraries Adding Depositories FY 1992-2002
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Dissatisfied - Level One
Level Two
Neutral - Level Three
Level Four
Extremely Satisfied - Level Five
Sat
isfa
ctio
n Le
vel
Number of Libraries Responding
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Retain Depository Status in the Future?
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Yes
No
Don't Know
Ans
wer
Number of Libraries Responding
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
What Factors do Dropping Libraries Have in Common?
Selection Rate Low Selection Rate – More Often
Collection Size Small Collection – More Often
Designation Date Post 1961 Designation – More Often
Library Type Public More Often, Law Less Often
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Factor #1: Selection Rate
A Selection Rate of Under 20% corresponds to a Higher Drop Rate
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Libraries by Selection Percentages: Universe and Drops (except Law)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0-9% SelectionRate
10-19% SelectionRate
20-29% SelectionRate
30%+ SelectionRate
Selection Percentage
Num
ber
of L
ibra
ries
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Factor #2: Collection Size
A Collection Size of fewer than 1,000,000 volumes corresponds to a higher Drop Rate
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Libraries by Collection Size: Universe and Drops (except Law)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Under100K
100K-250K
250K-500K
500K-1M 1M-5M 5M-10M 10M+
Collection Size in Volumes
Num
ber
of D
epos
itori
es
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Factor #3: Designation Year
A Designation Year of 1962 or later corresponds to a Higher Drop Rate Law changes in 1962
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Libraries by Designation Date: Universe and Drops
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Pre 1962 Post 1961
Designation Period
Num
ber
of L
ibra
ries
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Factor #4: Library Type
Public Libraries have a higher Drop Rate Law Libraries have a lower Drop Rate
Consistently meet other 3 Factors, yet do not drop much
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Libraries by Type: Universe and Drops
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Academic CourtLibrary
FederalAgency
LawSchool
StateLibrary
PublicLibrary
Other
Library Type
Num
ber
of L
ibra
ries
02468101214161820
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Law Libraries - Theory
Have low selection percentages, small collections, and recent designation dates; yet they don’t drop often
Focused collections mean that small collections are normal, and low selection percentages can address their needs
Exceptions to the formula
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Public Libraries - Theory
Up to eight areas of focus identified in texts when discussing Public Libraries’ Missions. Government Documents extremely relevant in only
2 of 8 areas
Lower selection rate among Public Libraries: May be a normal result of limited need May be necessary result of distribution of
resources due to broader mission
Difficult to determine without focused survey
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Public Libraries
355 Non-Law Libraries do not meet criteria of either less than 20% Selection Rate or less than 1 Million Volume Collection size
The 1 and only drop from this group happened to be a Public Library
Not statistically significant Not a major factor when viewed alone
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Post 1961 Designation Dates - Theory Law changes in 1962
Major increase in open slots Less difficult to join FDLP
Pre 1962 Depositories had to fight for admission Post 1961 Depositories, by comparison, had much
easier time Post 1961 Libraries
Lower Selection Rates than Pre 1962 Libraries Smaller Collections than Pre 1962 Libraries Difficult to establish independence from these
variables
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Post 1961 Designation Dates
355 Non-Law Libraries do not meet criteria of either less than 20% Selection Rate or less than 1 Million Volume Collection size
No libraries from this group who dropped were designated after 1961
Not a major factor when viewed alone
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Factor Summary
Exclusionary Factor: Library Type Law Libraries
Primary Factor #1: Selection Rate Less than 20%
Primary Factor #2: Collection Size Less than 1 Million volumes
Secondary Factor #1: Library Type Public Libraries
Secondary Factory #2: Designation Date Post 1961
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Primary Factors
Selection Rate and Collection Size Nearly Universal Application Factors under control of Library to some
degree Exclude Law Libraries
Formula doesn’t work; they don’t drop often
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Secondary Factors
Designation Date: Post 1961 Not significant by itself May increase likelihood of dropping, but
only when combined with Primary Factors Library Type: Public Library
Not significant by itself May increase likelihood of dropping, but
only when combined with Primary Factors
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Combining the Primary Factors
Venn Diagrams Selection Rate Under 20% Collection Size under 1M Volumes Meet both criteria Meet neither criteria Law Libraries Excluded
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
37 High Risk Libraries
27 Responded to our Survey Average importance of Internet
availability was 4.19 on a 5 Scale Compared to an average of 4.05 on a 5
scale for all libraries surveyed Internet availability had a bigger impact
on decision to drop of High Risk Libraries
© 2003- Luke Griffin & Aric Ahrens
Overall Picture
Small libraries dropping faster Low Selection Rates, Small Collection
Dropping libraries cite Internet Major factor in decision to drop
Internet satisfying small libraries’ needs Depository status becoming less appealing
Libraries Joining FDLP Cite high level of satisfaction with FDLP Statistically resemble those leaving FDLP