Final Project
Weeding School of Nursing Specialty Area
Fairfield University DiMenna-Nyselius Library
Upon hearing of my final project
requirement to assess fifty non-fiction book titles in a collection, Suzanne
Campbell PhD, WHNP-BC, IBCLC,
Associate Dean for Academic Programs,
Associate Professor & Graduate Program Director at Fairfield UniversityÕs
School of Nursing, asked me to weed her specialty area, RG940 – RG95, of
the DiMenna-Nyselius Library (DNL). In preparation of my visit, Dr. Campbell
asked Keith R. Stetson, M.L.S. Collection Development Librarian, to forward
DNLÕs collection development guidelines. DNL subscribes to The CREW
(Continuous, Review, Evaluation, and Weeding) Method and uses the updated and
revised CREW: A Weeding Manual for Modern Libraries by Jeannette Larson (2008). DNLÕs Collection
Management PolicyÕs mission is to select new materials, evaluate gifts, and
replace and dispose of dated or superseded materials to serve the general
research and informational need of the students and faculty. DNL librarians
work with faculty to select materials to purchase based on a number of criteria
including, but not limited to, bibliographies, reviews in Choice, and circulation statistics. The ultimate purchase
decision rests with the University Librarian (Collection Management Policy,
July 2001).
The CREW Method integrates all
parts of a collection development policy into one on-going process and endorses
routinely removing outdated and unused material by reversing the selection process:
inventory, collection evaluation, collection maintenance, weeding, and
discarding. CREW maintains that items have a useful life cycle typically
illustrated by peak activity during the initial acquisition period and then
dropping off as the material is superseded by new information or formats. CREW
uses circulation data, publication date, and a unique Òrules of thumbÓ
subjective assessment tool based on Dewey classes (Larson, 2008). The
assessment tool is comprised of three parts. Position One equals the number of
years since copyright date. Position Two is the suggested maximum time allowed
without usage based on the Dewey class. The Third Position is comprised of six
negative elements to warrant weeding: M = Misleading, U = Ugly
(worn out), S = Superseded, T = Trivial, I = Irrelevant to your needs, and E = Elsewhere available (Larson, 2008). Based on Dewey class 601 (Medical
and Health) under which the fifty book titles in RG940 – RG95 fall, CREWÕs
weeding code is 5/3/MUSTIE. This means that books with a copyright date greater
than five years prior to the assessment date, that have not circulated in the
past three years, and that have one or more of the MUSTIE factors are to be
considered for weeding (Larson, 2008). CREW recommends weeding ruthlessly in
Dewey class 601, especially when the material includes information about AIDS,
cancer, or fertility, in order to have the most current information available
for research needs (Larson, 2008). By analyzing this section of the School of
NursingÕs (SON) collection, I hope to provide a tool to the Associate Dean so
the department can continue their collection assessment process as well as an
opportunity to acquire more up-to date items that will enable SONÕs area be
more appealing for research and learning.
The CREW Method breaks down the weeding process into
a Ten Step Process. Step 1: DNL already satisfied this criterion by having
weeding part of their Collection Management Policy. Step 2: Gather statistics.
When I asked Stetson for circulation statistics, he said that DNLÕs SirsiDynix
ILS has a notoriously difficult reports module and wonÕt be able to run the
information (K. Stetson, personal communication, November 5, 2009). Therefore I
went ahead to Step 6 and used the physical assessment of each book to collect
usage data. Step 3: Again, DNL has already satisfied this step by Building
Weeding into their Yearly Calendar. Step 4: Prepare for the hands-on analysis. In
order to facilitate my work, I created the Weeding Project Fall 2009 spreadsheet
incorporating DNLÕs selection criteria, CREWÕs Checklist of Weeding Factors,
and CREWÕs Ten Step Process (Larson, 2008). The spreadsheet includes DNL Call
Number, Title, Author, Publisher, Copyright date to satisfy Position One of
5/3/MUSTIE, Edition, DNL barcode number, Accession date, Number of times book
circulated in three years, Last circulation date to satisfy Position Two of
5/3/MUSTIE, and the Number of copies. I also created a scale for Condition and
Currency from 1 to 5 whereby 1 is very poor and 5 is excellent to satisfy the Ugly and Superseded factors of MUSTIE. Step 5: Look at weeding area as a whole.
Dr. Campbell and I conducted an initial visual assessment of the stacks and Dr.
Campbell realized that there were books that were dated and in poor condition
that could easily be weeded while some other titles were of historical
significance and would need further evaluation. Step 6: Touch all 50 books.
Using my spreadsheet as a guide, I made a visible assessment of the items for
poor or dated content, exterior appearance, and if there were markings by
students in the books. Step 7: Check the pulled books against any standard
index or bibliographic records in the libraryÕs reference collection or in
databases available. I searched CONSULS, WorldCat, and reQuest for the availability
of more suitable material that could be obtained at other institutions. I
searched Books Index with Reviews, CINAHL Plus Full Text, Medline and
Academic Search Primer databases as well as
Choice and Books in
Print for reviews, citations, and possible
replacement books. On StetsonÕs recommendation, I also searched Rittenhouse
Book Distributors, Inc.Õs website as it is the major book dealer for Nursing
& Medical books and used the ÒAdvanced SearchÓ and ÒBrowse CategoriesÓ to
ensure I captured recently published or upcoming book titles. My spreadsheet
includes the CREW Disposal Slip options of Bind, Mend / Preserve, Discard,
Promote / Keep, Book sale or Replace according to CREW Step 8: Treat the book
according to its disposal slip.
Although I attempted to satisfy the first part of
Step 9: Replacement checking by including replacement titles and their reviews
if available, many of my suggested book title replacements have not been
reviewed while others are simply updated editions of DNLÕs current holding. As
CREW suggests that 5% of a collection be weeded every year (Larson, 2008), DNL
will have to determine how much of the current collection shall be de-selected
in relation to the second part of Step 9: Ordering. In the specialty area RG940
– RG951, 5% of the titles equal two books however 25 titles, or 50%, are
candidates for weeding now. Below are the suggested replacement titles, some of
which are suitable to replace multiple titles as detailed in the Weeding
Project Fall 2009 spreadsheet:
Title |
Cost |
The Midwife and the Witch |
$ 28.00 |
Spiritual Midwifery |
$ 20.00 |
Maternity Nursing |
$ 85.00 |
Clinical Practice
Guidelines for Midwifery and WomenÕs Health |
$ 82.00 |
Clinical Decision Making
Case Studies in Maternity / Pediatric Nursing |
$ 58.00 |
Maternal Child Nursing
Care: Text and E-Book Package |
$175.00 |
Contemporary Maternal
Newborn Nursing |
$109.00 |
Manual of High Risk
Pregnancy & Delivery |
$ 54.00 |
Maternal & Child Health
Nursing: Care of the Childbearing and Childrearing Family. |
$115.00 |
Olds' Maternal-newborn
Nursing & Women's Health Across the Lifespan |
$ 96.00 |
Essentials of Maternity,
Newborn, & Women's Health Nursing. |
$ 95.00 |
Estimated Total
Replacement Cost |
$917.00 |
The Associate Dean together with the DNL Collection
Development department and University Librarian are encouraged to review my
suggestions and decide the best action to take for each book title. One item
that needs research and may influence de-selecting decisions is if Fairfield
University has a Discarded Materials Policy whose requirements may dictate how
property acquired with university funds, and or patron or donor monies, shall
be disposed. Prior to taking any action, it is recommended that the School of
Nursing prepare for the likelihood that empty or less populated shelves could
draw questions or criticism from the administration. Given current budgetary
constraints, the SON may not be able to justify replacing 25 titles in this
specialty area, or theoretically 50% of the entire SON collection, especially
as the recommended 5/3/MUSTIE CREW timeline for medical materials could
possibly result in the newly purchased books being discarded in five years. Alternatively,
the SON may determine that suggested titles could fill many more gaps in this
section than originally proposed so the overall estimated cost could be lower.
Another option to consider is using the New Faculty policy which provides each
new tenure-track full-time faculty member a one-time allocation (currently
$1,000) to purchase library materials (Collection Management Policy, July
2001). The SON could consider reviewing and possibly re-allocating the New
Faculty balance to a one-time purchase of new titles. The SON may determine there
is more current and less expensive material available in e-books, e-journals or
through other consortiums that will meet the Electronic Resources policy (Collection
Management Policy, July 2001). Lastly, DNL may opt to store the dated material
in a lower cost storage unit to preserve research material, save funds or to
adhere to the universityÕs Discarded Materials Policy, if required. In the
meantime, the SON could promote low circulating; high quality books per CREWÕs
Step 10 and offer web-based professional organizational literature in
anticipation of favorable book reviews of the suggested titles while slowly
building the collection to meet the future educational and research needs of
the School of Nursing.
References
American Library Association (2009). Association of College & Research Libraries. Choice Reviews Online. Retrieved from http://www.cro2.org/default.aspx.
Fairfield University. (2001). DiMenna-Nyseliusn Library. Collection Management Policy. Retrieved from http://www.fairfield.edu/library/lib_collmgt.html
Larson, Jeanette. (2008). CREW: A weeding manual for modern libraries. Texas State Library and Archives Commission. Retrieved from http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ld/pubs/crew/
Rittenhouse
Book Distributors, Inc. (2009).
Advanced
Database Search. Retrieved from http://www.rittenhouse.com//search/Advancedsearch.asp?mscssid=PD57BW8EC6X98GJMJ17Q6HRNPABEDSL3
Browse
Categories. Retrieved from http://www.rittenhouse.com//Search/search-cat.asp?mscssid=PD57BW8EC6X98GJMJ17Q6HRNPABEDSL3
R.R.
Bowker, LLC. (2009). Books in Print Professional. Retrieved from http://0-www.booksinprint.com.www.consuls.org/bip/default.asp