1 / 31

Circulation Data: Music Library

Circulation Data: Music Library. Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2012. ReCAP Columbia University . Music Library Circulation Data. Looks at Music Library circulation activity Is only one measure of collection usage Presents data both Music specific and system-wide

myrrh
Download Presentation

Circulation Data: Music Library

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Circulation Data: Music Library Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2012 ReCAP Columbia University

  2. Music Library Circulation Data • Looks at Music Library circulation activity • Is only one measure of collection usage • Presents data both Music specific and system-wide • Circulation Desk uses several happening locations: Music, Music Reserves, Butler, BorrowDirect, and HSL • Music Library data is available from the implementation of Voyager, July 2003 • No circulation data for non-circulating collections ReCAP Columbia University

  3. Music Library Happening Location • Data from Music Library Happening Location only (includes Reserves) • Five primary types of circulation activity: charge, discharge, renewal, recall and hold • Renewals and recalls are done in the OPAC Happening Location, dynamically by patrons themselves • Non-Music Offsite collections charged in Butler Happening Location ReCAP Columbia University

  4. ReCAP Columbia University

  5. Observations • Total volume of charges has declined most years since FY04 • Gap between charges and discharges may indicate some books are returned to other departments • 39.4% decline from FY04 to FY12 • Compare to 27.4% decline system-wide) • Volume of discharge predictably mirrors charges • Upswing in FY08-FY09 ReCAP Columbia University

  6. ReCAP Columbia University

  7. Music Circulation by Patron Group • Line charts represent usage by year and month • Patron Group definitions have changed: • Adjunct faculty, in 2008 grad students were given primary group OFF instead of GRD • Pie charts break down data for FY12 only • Bar chart compares patron group charges for each fiscal year ReCAP Columbia University

  8. ReCAP Columbia University

  9. ReCAP Columbia University

  10. ReCAP Columbia University

  11. ReCAP Columbia University

  12. Observations • Almost 1/2 of all charges are to undergraduate students in FY12 • Significant decline for faculty • Increase in graduate charges in FY08-FY10 • Are changing formats affecting usage? • More meaning may be extracted from collection data ReCAP Columbia University

  13. Circ Activity by Collection • Data for all transactions in the Music Happening Location • Non-Music Offsite charges are placed in the Butler Happening Location • Data unavailable for non-circulating collections • Five pie charts: • Collective • GRD = Graduates • OFF = Faculty • REG = Undergraduates • VIS = Visitors ReCAP Columbia University

  14. ReCAP Columbia University

  15. ReCAP Columbia University

  16. ReCAP Columbia University

  17. ReCAP Columbia University

  18. ReCAP Columbia University

  19. System-wide Circulation Data • System-wide circulation statistics are available for both on campus and offsite collections • Circulation data are accessible to all staff • Offsite collections can be identified by CLIO location format off,xxx. • System-wide data is available from July 2003, the date of Ex Libris Voyager implementation ReCAP Columbia University

  20. On Campus vs. Offsite Charges • Comparison of on campus and offsite collection charges by volume • On campus charge volume declined by 27.4%between FY04 and FY12 • On campus charges have declined every year since FY04 • Offsite charge volume increased 121.3%between FY04 and FY12 • N.B. On campus collection size declines each year; offsite collections grow each year ReCAP Columbia University

  21. ReCAP Columbia University

  22. Monthly On Campus vs. Offsite Charges • Monthly charges of both on campus and offsite collections are in phase with the academic calendar • Peaks in the middle of Fall and Spring terms • The pattern of offsite charges is more apparent when viewed alone ReCAP Columbia University

  23. ReCAP Columbia University

  24. ReCAP Columbia University

  25. On Campus vs. Offsite Charges • On campus and offsite charges can be compared using a ratio • The ratio of offsite to on campus increased from FY04 to FY012 • Offsite collections are accounting for proportionally more activity ReCAP Columbia University

  26. ReCAP Columbia University

  27. Charges vs. Renewals • Chart compares total volume of charges to renewals for Offsite collections • Graduate students and Faculty request more Offsite collections than Undergraduates • Graduate students and especially Faculty have higher renewal/charge ratios • Over time, these two patron groups tend to renew more than charge • CUL may expect to see steady or decreasing request volume as a result ReCAP Columbia University

  28. ReCAP Columbia University

  29. ReCAP Columbia University

  30. ReCAP Columbia University

  31. More Data Available • More information about data sets can be found on the ReCAP Data Center website • Primary data categories include: accession, retrieval, delivery and circulation • Tailored data sets and analysis will be provided to staff via the ReCAP Coordinator • Please see the main ReCAP website for general information about CUL procedures and systems ReCAP Columbia University

More Related