Carol Hasegawa                                                                                                February 27, 2004

Collection Development Policy                        A Critique           

I accessed five academic library web sites on February 23, 2004, two from the East (Brandeis and Wellesley), two from the West (University of California Berkeley and Stanford University) and one in between (University of Wyoming). All had varying elements of collection development policy statements for public view online. This critique highlights comprehensiveness, best practices, style and tone conveyed. In this Oscar season, the categories are:

LCSH Award for Most Headings and Subheadings: University of Wyoming

An epic of biblical proportion, UW’s Collection Development Policy table of contents, more than three pages in length, consists of seven major headings, sub, sub-sub and sub-sub-sub headings, all linked to text. Adult language: festschriften gets a line, as does Wyomingana. Brief scenes of Variant Editions. Suitable for librarians of all ages.

Patron Friendly Favorite:            Wellesley College Library

Wellesley provides an online form which makes it easy for faculty, students and staff members to suggest purchase of library materials. More importantly, the short (mostly 1-2 pages) policy descriptions for acquisitions, selection criteria for electronic resources, periodicals, serial publications, audiovisual materials, and gifts are written in straight forward vernacular. Notably, there are dates provided for creation, modification and expiration for each section. Some expired in June 2002.

Particular attention was given to the gift policy. This section addresses the major situational questions raised in the Evans chapter including guidelines, goals, process for accepting and evaluating and disposition.

Attributed author genre:            Brandeis University Libraries

One can learn a lot about the Brandeis curriculum and library holdings simply by scanning its collection development policies for individual subject holdings, currently 35. The date and author’s name and title are prominently featured at the top of each statement. The Fine Arts policy compiled by Darwin F. Scott, Creative Arts Librarian, dated March 6, 2001 is a model that addresses key Evans elements: purpose and scope including geographic, period and language coverage; formats of materials; collecting levels; and cooperative agreements.

Activist & Topical                        University of California Berkeley Library, of course

The UC Berkeley Collections Management page begins with a description of their budget deficit, the immediate problem. Longer term, this Highlights section proposes consortial agreements and cooperative programs, particularly with the California Digital Library, with a focus on electronic access. I could not locate policies. If indeed a collections management policy does exist, this “treatise” suggests that a major overhaul is due to resolve print versus electronic, the Library and the campus, scholarly publishing and collection priorities.

Short Story and Longest Title                        Stanford University Libraries

The Categories of Rare Art & Architecture Materials Collected Regularly by Stanford University Libraries is a list of 10 types of format (guidebooks and travel accounts, publications of ancient monuments, etc.) with a brief description and two examples of each (author, title, date and LC number). A non-art major would be enlightened about Stanford’s holdings and the types of art documentation produced and collected. I especially enjoyed the artists’ books description:

“During the 1960s artists such as Lawrence Weiner and Ed Ruscha began producing a type of literature, often cheaply published in a limited publication run, which by its existence indicated the artist had engaged in an artistic activity or intellectual process.”

Summary

I found it difficult to find collection development policies online for many libraries. I found two viewpoints expressed in those I located: organizational intent to comply with requirements and informational to invite participation. The more successful policies combined content and tone to communicate both aspects.

Citations

Brandeis University Libraries. (2003, March 4) “Collection Development Policy Statement: Fine Arts.” Retrieved from http://library.brandeis.edu/collmgt/policies/finearts.html

Stanford University Libraries. (not dated) “Art & Architecture Collections: Categories of Rare Art & Architecture Materials Collected Regularly by Stanford University Libraries.” Retrieved from http://library. stanford.edu/depts/hasrg/art/rarecat.html

University of California Berkeley Library. (Updated 2003, October 1) “Collections Management. “Retrieved from http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/Collections/

University of Wyoming Libraries. (Revised 2000, March 21) “Collection Development Policy: Detailed Table of Contents.” Retrieved from http://www-lib.uwyo.edu/cdo/cpolicy/cp0b.htm

Wellesley College Library.(Modified 2003, August 19) “Library Collections Management.” Retrieved from http://wellesley.edu/Library/collections.html