We too have similar problems , usually are brought to our notice by endusers. the various renewal dates (periods), agents for diffierent contents, and such other matters make it more difficult to keep a tab on accessibility. however recently , we proacitvely check the availability and accessibility at regular intervals. we check e-contents from group of publsihers at a time and maintain a log of findings, which are then marked to IT Dept./publishers / vendors for support. the titles ar e randomly checked.
but i guess this is simpler and doable when collection is niche and focused on a subject. i beileve as we grow, it is going to be difficult.
medha
Dr (Ms) Medha Joshi
Head Dept of Lib Scs, Digital Library
Tata Memorial Hospital
Dr E BOrges Road,
Paerl,
Mumbai 400012
INDIA
[log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Taylor, Sarah" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, March 9, 2010 9:48 pm
Subject: Re: [LIS-E-RESOURCES] E-journals Management
To: [log in to unmask]
> I would agree with this too.
>
> With the best will in the world, there is no way we can check all
> of our
> electronic holdings: there just are not enough hours in the day,
> and we
> do tend to be a more reactive than proactive. Unfortunately, there are
> minor errors here and there and when we spot them, or they get pointed
> out to us, we get them sorted as soon as we can. It may not sound like
> the best service but what I am finding, however, is that it isn't
> necessarily our students who worry about the accuracy of holding
> information, but colleagues in the library.
>
> I think part of the issue is that it's relatively straightforward
> to see
> what's involved with getting a print journal into circulation, but
> theredo seem to be many more factors involved with e-copies:
> authentication,link resolver capability, concurrent users etc.
> Also, depending on what
> sort of agreement you have with a publisher, you may find that
> once you
> stop paying for a title/package or a title is removed from a package,
> you'll lose access to anything you have previously had access to.
> It can
> then be hard to try to communicate to all parties - library
> colleagues,students, academic staff - what has happened.
>
> Sarah
>
>
>
> Sarah Taylor
> Electronic Resources Librarian
> Library
> University of Bolton
> Deane Road
> Bolton
> BL3 5AB
>
> 01204 903099
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: An informal open list set up by UKSG - Connecting the
> InformationCommunity [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Mike
> Poulin
> Sent: 09 March 2010 16:05
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [LIS-E-RESOURCES] E-journals Management
>
> I agree.
>
> We periodically will go through holdings of some publishers who
> have had
> problems in the past and if they have visual holdings indicators -
> checkthose - but actually testing - in many cases requires either
> testing or
> going into an admin module to see how the rights are set.
> Bringing up
> test
> copies inflates use stats and for some of these - the testing
> might be
> the
> only use. Use of the admin module does not lead to using student
> laborto
> do the work due to security concerns. (I really like visual
> indicatorsof
> activation and wish all publishers would include that on their sites).
>
> Even if one does check each issue - you would never know if each
> actualarticle within was accessible. But that is not much
> different than
> check-in
> - you would have looked to see if you got the correct issue but
> probablydid
> not look within to see that all the articles were actually there. I
> have no
> idea where one would find the time to actually do this checking as I
> think
> one needs to trade the staff time for check-in with the added work for
> activation and maintenance.
>
> We have moved well over 50% of our subscriptions to online only.
> We use
> a
> criteria where we convert titles which have archival content
> stored in
> secure archives - we use Portico but sometimes rely on Jstor.
>
> The main driver for us in conversion to online is use - print = no
> use |
> online = used (slight exaggeration) . We posted over 350,000 full
> textviews for the online titles we can garner Counter stats last
> year. For
> the
> same period - the entire use of all of our print volumes, current and
> backfile, was about 6,000. Since our humanities and social sciences
> journals have to be pulled from our in house storage system which is
> very
> convenient to use (more so than having to go to the shelves) - we
> haveaccurate counts for those titles - they were 3,000 of the
> 6,000 uses of
> print. We canceled 230 titles last year and the bulk of them were
> printonly. They were just not getting any use sometimes for 2 or
> 3 years
> which
> made them targets.
>
> Publishers which don't keep the access running well actually are
> hurtingthemselves as much as us. Those titles which are inactive
> do not get
> used
> and many patrons don't go to the trouble of contacting us. So those
> titles
> come up for review with few use stats - high costs per use. Even
> if we
> did
> not have access, we might likely determine - since no one
> complained -
> it is
> probably not needed and onto the next cancellation list it goes.
> I am
> not
> sure that all publishers see keeping the access rights accurate as a
> matter
> of survival but I would encourage them to do so.
>
> Mike
>
> ---------------------------------------
> Mike Poulin
> Digital Resources Librarian & Coordinator of Digital Initiatives
> Colgate University Libraries
> 13 Oak Drive
> Hamilton, NY 13346
> 315-228-7025
> fax: 315-228-7934
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Mitchell Dunkley
> <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
> > Trudi
> >
> > It is very difficult to monitor missing electronic issues, just
> as it
> is
> > keeping tabs on inactive/broken URLs. Library users, academic and
> > library staff are the 'eyes' of the operation - whether
> searching an
> > eJournals A-Z List or library catalogue. Most of the amendments made
> by
> > libraries tend to be reactive, rather than proactive...
> >
> > Mitchell Dunkley
> > Kimberlin Library, De Montfort University
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: An informal open list set up by UKSG - Connecting the
> Information
> > Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Trudi
> > Pledger
> > Sent: 09 March 2010 15:06
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: [LIS-E-RESOURCES] E-journals Management
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > We are in the process of reviewing our serials section with the move
> > towards e-only. With the print journals we currently subscribe
> to we
> > have clear procedures on how to manage these - processing, check
> -in
> > /receipt, claiming outstanding issues ... it is less clearcut
> with the
> > e-journals to we subscribe and we are only aware of a problem
> when a
> > student tells us they are unable to access a particular issue or
> title.
> > How do other institutions deal with e-journal management? Do you
> have> ways of monitoring access? Do you have a way of "checking
> in" an
> > e-journal or a "claims" procedure?
> >
> > Also, if you have gone (predominantly) e-only for journals what has
> the
> > response been from users?
> >
> > Thank you in advance, any thoughts /advice gratefully rec'd.
> >
> > Trudi
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Trudi Pledger
> > Serials Librarian
> > Kenrick Library, Birmingham City University, B42 2SU
> > 0121 331 5287
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >
> > lis-e-resources is a UKSG list - http://www.uksg.org/serials
> > UKSG groups also available on Facebook and LinkedIn
> >
> > lis-e-resources is a UKSG list - http://www.uksg.org/serials
> > UKSG groups also available on Facebook and LinkedIn
> >
>
> lis-e-resources is a UKSG list - http://www.uksg.org/serials
> UKSG groups also available on Facebook and LinkedIn
>
> lis-e-resources is a UKSG list - http://www.uksg.org/serials
> UKSG groups also available on Facebook and LinkedIn
>
lis-e-resources is a UKSG list - http://www.uksg.org/serials
UKSG groups also available on Facebook and LinkedIn
|