Objective collections evaluation using statistics at the mit libraries
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 21

Objective Collections Evaluation Using Statistics at the MIT Libraries PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 54 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Objective Collections Evaluation Using Statistics at the MIT Libraries. Mathew Willmott MIT Libraries ACS National Meeting and Exposition August 22, 2010. Overview. Introduction/Background Data Gathering Data Analysis Decision Process Applications Future Work. Introduction: Statistics.

Download Presentation

Objective Collections Evaluation Using Statistics at the MIT Libraries

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Objective collections evaluation using statistics at the mit libraries

Objective Collections Evaluation Using Statistics at the MIT Libraries

Mathew Willmott

MIT Libraries

ACS National Meeting and Exposition

August 22, 2010


Overview

Overview

  • Introduction/Background

  • Data Gathering

  • Data Analysis

  • Decision Process

  • Applications

  • Future Work


Introduction statistics

Introduction: Statistics

  • “There are three kinds of lies…”

  • Shortcomings of anecdotal evidence

  • New technology for dissemination enables new technology for evaluation


Introduction financial issues

Introduction: Financial Issues

  • In the world

  • At MIT

  • In the MIT Libraries


Introduction library collection

Introduction: Library Collection

  • Size of collection

  • Focus of collection

  • Cancellation project feasibility


Data gathering what data

Data Gathering: What data?

  • Cost

  • Usage

  • Impact Factor/Subject ranking

  • Papers published by MIT researchers

  • MIT-affiliated editors

  • Citations from MIT-authored papers


Data gathering from where

Data Gathering: From where?

  • Our budget commitments database

  • Publisher-distributed reports

  • Journal Citation Reports

  • Licensed databases

  • Journal web pages

  • Local Journal Utilization Report


Data gathering how

Data Gathering: How?

  • Mostly manual

  • Some selective

  • Small team gathering for all librarians


Data analysis

Data Analysis

Based analysis on four main data categories:

  • Cost per use

  • Average subject ranking

  • Papers published by MIT researchers

  • Presence of MIT-affiliated editors


Data analysis1

Data Analysis

  • Ranked journals in each category of data

  • Assigned a “point” to the lowest performing journals in each category:

    • Lowest 50% by cost per use

    • Lowest 33% by subject ranking

    • Lowest 50% by papers published

    • No MIT-affiliated editors

  • Each journal ended up with a score of 0 (high-performing) to 4 (low-performing)


Data analysis2

Data Analysis

Data presented to librarian staff in Excel workbook:

  • All raw data

  • Sheets analyzing each category of data

  • Sheet assigning a score to each journal, with changeable criteria


Example of spreadsheet

Example of spreadsheet


Example of spreadsheet1

Example of spreadsheet

Lowest 50%: Cost per use > $20


Example of spreadsheet2

Example of spreadsheet

Lowest 50%: Cost per use > $20

Lowest 20%: Cost per use > $50


Example of spreadsheet3

Example of spreadsheet

Change the $20 per use criteria value…


Example of spreadsheet4

Example of spreadsheet

…to a $50 per use criteria value.


Decision process

Decision Process

  • NOT used to make final cancellation decisions; important to note that there are other factors to be taken into account.

  • Used to identify candidates for cancellation that subject librarians would then examine more carefully.


Applications

Applications

  • Faculty and other stakeholders are very data-driven; this process allows for clearer explanations and communications

  • Process encourages a big picture view across all disciplines

  • There are some caveats: can’t cancel much from one publisher, society packages aren’t comparable…


Future work other data

Future Work: Other data

  • Trends from year to year

  • Eigenfactor/Article Influence Score

  • More LJUR data


Future work

Future Work

Can be of use when not in cancellation mode:

  • Evaluate collections

  • Identify where money could be better spent

  • Identify which parts of the collection need better promotion


Thank you

Thank you!

Contact:

[email protected]

(photo credit: Flickr user neilio)


  • Login