Collection evaluation Module 5

Involves evaluating the collections ability to meet curriculum and user needs and enable the library to achieve its goals
·         Kennedy (2006) and Bishop (2007) provide useful overviews of collection evaluation purpose and methods
·         when judging the value of the collection, TLs need to determine the criteria for evaluation and decide
o   what quantitative and qualitative data will be collected and used,
o   who will collect data,
o   what will data be used for and
o   who will results be reported to.

·         Barriers to evaluation include
o   the perceived lack of tangibility of the process eg weeding as opposed to acquisition,
o   time pressures,
o   lack of experience of data collection or interpretation or
o   fear of what the results of evaluation may uncover and what this will mean for future planning decisions.

·         A range of methods for evaluating the collection are possible. TL must decide which one or combination is most appropriate for particular school situation. Techniques include:

o   Collection centred measures including
§  checking the size and scope of the collection against recommended lists. OPAC is used for determining current collection. Benefit of recommendations include increasing TL knowledge of potential titles may not be aware of however, need to ensure lists are compiled for local not overseas users and be sure that titles listed are available and the best source of required information.

§  Direct examination of the collection – physically checking shelves for condition and scope of what is there. Does it still meet selection criteria? Are there evident gaps? Gives a good picture of individual titles, however titles may be out at time of inspection and is time consuming. May miss getting picture of entire collection.

o   Use centred measures

§  Determining who is using materials and frequency of use eg through circulation studies, in-house use, surveys

§  Benefit is focus on users, however disadvantage is that doesn’t address non-users, why are they not using the collection?

o   Collection mapping – creating a graphical representation of the strengths and weaknesses of the current collection. Identified strengths can be promoted and may be limited in future resource selection until more balanced collection results. Identified weaknesses become priorities. Check curriculum to identify if gaps in supporting exist. Developing a balanced collection is difficult. Selection bias can occur due to personal likes or dislikes and being aware of this assists overcoming issues. Engaging assistance of teaching staff can assist in achieving balance.

Some examples of online sources in this area are:

• A guide to the collection assessment process http://www.nla.gov.au/libraries/help/guide.html
• The School Library Media Specialist – Collection mapping http://eduscapes.com/sms/program/mapping.html
• Collection assessment http://www.lib.az.us/cdt/collass.aspx

Weeding

An important element of evaluation is weeding what no longer meets user needs or selection criteria. As the aim of the collection is to serve users, material that fails to achieve this outcome should not be part of the collection and should be removed.

A useful weeding guide is available at National Library of New Zealand Services to Schools (2012). 'Collections 5: Weeding Guide'.

·         Weeding ensures that the collection remains current, appealing, accurate and supports curriculum and user needs. Outdated material is removed and current ideas are represented. Areas of weaknesses are easily identified and can be addressed and strengths can be promoted.

·         Ensures valuable resources are not obscured by old or misleading ones. 

·         Weeding can be difficult to achieve as it is time consuming and may be difficult to justify removing titles.

·         Involving subject teachers in reviewing their areas and using general selection criteria to justify removing resources can assist weeding decisions.

·         LIS can be utilised for data on usage, including materials that are not being issued.

·         Selection criteria also apply to weeding. Further criteria include physical condition, usage, whether more up-to-date materials exist online, publication date if advancements in thinking have occurred, curriculum relevance, appropriateness of reflection of current attitudes and level of difficulty.

·         Resources that are no longer supported by existing technology should also be removed.

·         Discarded titles should be clearly labelled and removed from the OPAC.

·         Gaps that are identified provide priorities for future collection development

·         Remember that weeding must also extend to e-books, digital and online resources curated as part of the collection

·         Ongoing weeding assists manageability however may occur across entire collection or rotate through sections.

·         Disposal methods of weeded resources outlined in the collection policy assist justification.

·         The acronym MUSTIE provides a useful basis for weeding decisions

The collection exists to support the curriculum and meet user needs.  If it is not evaluated regularly against predetermined criteria it may fail to meet this goal.

The TL must evaluate all sections of the collection to ensure they provide current, accurate information that is free from bias.  Weeding is as important as developing collections, as if materials that no longer meet criteria or user needs are not removed, users may access incorrect or misleading information or have difficulty locating useful resources, resulting in frustration.