The Assessment of Patron-Initiated Collection Development via Interlibrary Loan at a Comprehensive University

Effective Selectors? Interlibrary Loan Patrons as Monograph Purchasers: A Comparative Examination of Price and Circulation-Related Performance

“…Of course, most POD programs have criteria in place to ensure that purchased items meet their libraries' standards (Carlisle Fountain & Frederiksen, 2010), so results reported in the literature are not indicative of what might happen were patrons left entirely to their own devices. They do suggest, though, that, with some brief guidelines in place (see Appendix C for an example), patrons did very well at selecting collection-appropriate books of comparatively wide interest (Hussong-Christian & Goergen-Doll 2010b;Tyler et al 2010;Way 2009). …”

“…Although there has been some slight evidence that topically inappropriate books and not collected material types have been purchased via POD, (Chan, 2004;Gee & Shirkey, 2010;Hussong-Christian & Goergen-Doll, 2010a;Stowell Bracke, 2010), in the main, librarians reviewing the requested and/or purchased POD items have found them to be worthy of purchase (Allen, Ward, Wray, & DebusLópez, 2003;Anderson et al, 2002;Anderson et al, 2010;Cornell University Library, 2007;Gee & Shirkey, 2010;Ruppel, 2006;Stowell Bracke, 2010;Ward et al, 2003;Zopfi-Jordan, 2008). Librarians reviewing POD acquisitions at a greater remove have found that POD books were purchased primarily for collection-appropriate subject classifications (Chan, 2004), for subject classifications that experienced locally higher-than-average levels of use (Tyler et al, 2010), or had also been purchased by peer institutions (Way, 2009). Not surprisingly, most patrons reviewing their selections after receipt have found the POD books to be useful and/or worthwhile additions to their libraries' collections (Foss, 2007;Hussong-Christian & Goergen-Doll, 2010a, 2010bWard, 2002;).…”

“…The numerous usage studies that the authors were able to locate, most of which focused specifically on ILL POD, reported that POD items circulated or were otherwise used more frequently than items acquired through traditional channels, effecTive SelecTorS? inTerlibrary loan PaTronS a S MonograPh PurchaSerS 59 experienced comparatively higher amounts of multiple use, or both (Anderson et al, 2002;Bombeld & Hanerfeld, 2004;Brug & MacWaters, 2004;Campbell, 2006;Gibson & Kirkwood, 2009;Hodges, Preston, & Hamilton, 2010;Houle, 2003Houle, , 2004Hussong-Christian & Goergen-Doll, 2010a;Nixon & Saunders, 2010;Perdue & Van Fleet, 1999;Reynolds et al, 2010;Stowell Bracke, 2010;Tyler et al, 2010;Ward, 2002;Way, 2009;Zopfi-Jordan, 2008). In fact, one recent study even reported that ILL POD books maintained a significant circulation advantage over traditionally acquired books a decade after their having been added to the collection, even when the initial circulation to the requesting ILL patron was controlled for (Nixon & Saunders, 2010).…”

“…At the time that the authors reviewed the program (December 2008), it had been in operation for 5.5 fiscal years. Over this period, UNL enrolled an average of 22,221 students, of which an average of 4,731 were in graduate and professional programs, and employed an average of 1,954 faculty members (University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2005-2009). The UNL University Libraries system, comprised of the Don L. Love Memorial Library, the Marvin and Virginia Schmid Law Library, six branch libraries, and a remote storage facility, housed slightly more than three million print volumes and maintained about 39,000 current serial subscriptions (University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, 2009a) 1 During the interval under review (2003/2004-2007/2008), the UNL University Libraries' ILL department handled an average of 50,902 transactions (borrowing and lending combined) per year (2009b).…”

Just How Right Are the Customers? An Analysis of the Relative Performance of Patron-Initiated Interlibrary Loan Monograph Purchases

“…Several earlier studies indicated that at larger institutions, graduate students or faculty made most of the filled purchase requests and that most of these requests came from patrons affiliated with the arts and humanities or the social sciences (Anderson et al 2002;Ward 2002;Bombeld and Hanerfeld 2004;Houle 2004;Foss 2007;Way 2009 …”