A Comparison of Two Methodologies for Counting Current Periodical Use

Naylor, Maiken

doi:10.1080/00987913.1993.10764121

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Following the example from periodical use studies (use the subject heading "Use studiesserial publications" in Library Literature to gather pertinent citations, and see issues of The Serials Librarian (Edelman, 1994) and Serials Review (Naylor, 1993), we counted everything in the reference collection that was used, that is, those items that we had to reshelve or refile. By breaking the collection into three discrete parts, we were able to focus our efforts and methods into reasonable time frames and in conjunction with our regular daily duties.…”

Section: Use Countmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the functionality of the reference collection

Sendi

1996

Collection Building

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After several weeding excursions into the reference collection at the University of Toledo's Carlson Library, reference librarians realized that the collection had outgrown not only the available shelving space, but possibly also its usefulness to patrons. With the approval plan acquisitions and purchase requests coming from all academic areas on campus, including the library, materials were constantly added to the 30,000+ volume collection. We were experiencing "crisis weeding" (Engeldinger, 1990) where the subject areas with high-use items were weeded and subject areas with less perceived use were left undisturbed. Unfortunately, there was nothing but anecdotal evidence on whether those materials were needed and used by our clientele. In addition, the collection development policy for the reference collection seemed vague and passé. In 1994, the reference staff decided to gather information systematically on the use and the users of the reference collection, with the goal in mind to formulate a viable collection management policy.

show abstract

Section: Use Countmentioning

confidence: 99%