A Comparative Analysis of Evidence-based Selection, Professional Selection, and Selection by Approval Plan

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.64n1.15

Keywords:

academic libraries, EBS, collection development, collection analysis

Abstract

This study compares three different models for selecting e-books for a research library’s collection. From 2013 to 2018, the University of Oklahoma Libraries contracted with Elsevier for an evidence-based selection (EBS) agreement. The titles in that EBS package were compared to the approval plan parameters to determine which books would have been purchased on approval during those years if Elsevier had been included among the publishers profiled. Subject librarians also made hypothetical selections as though they were placing firm orders from this collection. The approval plan selections and librarians’ selections were compared to usage data to determine how closely each selection model matched patrons’ choices.

Author Biographies

Molly Strothmann, Oklahoma State University

Molly Strothmann (molly.strothmann@okstate.edu) is an Associate Professor and Library Collections Strategist at Oklahoma State University.

Karen Rupp-Serrano, University of Oklahoma

Karen Rupp-Serrano (krs@ou.edu) is Associate Dean, Scholarly Communications and Resources, University of Oklahoma Libraries.

Downloads

Published

2020-01-09

Issue

Vol. 64 No. 1 (2020): January

Section

Features

License

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after it has been accepted for publication. Sharing can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.