Allan G. Scherlen

Open Access to Criminal Justice Scholarship: A Matter of Social Justice

The paper argues that criminal justice scholarship disseminated through the traditional journal subscription model is not consistent with social justice. Adoption of “open access” principles in publishing benefits both authors and readers through broader and more egalitarian dissemination of criminal justice literature. Moreover, when viewed in light of social justice theory, open access is a more just method of scholarly communication. After providing a brief outline of the history and basic aspects of open access, the paper uses the framework of the social justice theories of John Rawls and David Miller to argue why open access is more just than traditional subscription models of publishing and why criminal justice scholars and their associations must consider the importance of supporting open access initiatives and promoting the dissemination of scholarship as widely as possible if they are concerned about attaining justice for criminal justice scholarly literature.

Weeding with Wisdom: Tuning Deselection of Print Monographs in Book-Reliant Disciplines

ABSTRACT As university libraries transition to digital collections and new services, their book deselection projects often lead to the adoption of cross-discipline quantitative weeding criteria (such as age and low circulation) in the interest of speed and presumed fairness. Cross-discipline quantitative rubrics, however, can have unintended negative consequences when applied to disciplines such as history and literature that rely on older books with low circulation statistics. The authors argue for a discipline-differentiated approach to weeding academic library collections that can employ quantitative criteria for disciplines, such as in the sciences, that are more reliant on current materials and qualitative criteria for disciplines, such as in the humanities, whose scholars benefit from ready access to older and low-use books.

NUC, Quo Vadis? Have Mid-Size Academic Libraries Retained the National Union Catalog Pre-1956 Imprints?

Mid-size academic libraries face limited funding and space but are expected to provide the tools their students and faculty need to compete in research. A resulting concern is whether to weed potentially useful paper finding aids of the pre-online era. One example is the National Union Catalog Pre-1956 Imprints (NUC). Has the content and current use of the NUC justified its retention? The authors provide historical background of the NUC and the results of a survey of librarians from mid-size academic institutions that explores their perspectives on the tools continued utility and their institutions’ ultimate decisions on its fate.

The Print Book Purging Predicament: Qualitative Techniques for a Balanced Collection

At previous Charleston Conference meetings, there was much discussion about how to massively and efficiently weed collections across disciplines using quantitative criteria. The presenters recently published an article in Collection Management entitled “Weeding with Wisdom: Tuning Deselection of Print Monographs in Book‐ Reliant Disciplines” in which they argue for the importance of retaining some print materials in areas such as history and literature where scholars are dependent on older, lesser‐ used materials for their research and teaching. Presenters offered suggestions and invited discussion on ways to improve the deselection process through the use of qualitative techniques for weeding book‐ reliant disciplines in an attempt to maximize the quality of a monograph collection.

Libraries in a Bind: Practical Solutions and Human Responses to a Weeding Mandate

Many university libraries are currently engaged in major weeding projects as they reduce their print book collections to make room for new space configurations to accommodate emerging library trends such as makerspaces and transitioning toward a predominately e‐book collection.To address such a deselection project effectively requires both practical solutions and tact in dealing with faculty who seriously value their collections of print books. Librarians from two universities will share practical approaches to managing a large weeding project and for dealing diplomatically with book users affected. Representatives for deselection project services will also offer insights into their logistic support for handling weeding projects. Ample time will be provided for discussion where collection librarians can candidly discuss both the practical problems and user concerns faced when sandwiched between the demands of a major weeding project and the needs of faculty and students in book‐reliant disciplines.

Librarians Connecting Scholars Through The American Culture Center Program In China

This article describes and discusses the changing roles of librarians in internationalization of higher education; how librarians lead the program of the American Cultural Center in China sponsored by the U.S. Department of State; and the benefits and challenges for leading an international project.

Are Midsize Academic Libraries on the Right E-Book Train?

Librarians and their vendors were invited to a lively lunch discussion of the fate of books in midsize academic libraries. Do the monograph acquisition models advocated by many R-1 librarians at recent Charleston Conferences fit the needs of midsize academic libraries? These radical new models appear to assume almost full migration to e-books and include such strategies as wholesale movement to e-book-only approval; large leased e-book packages; and expansive DDA offerings of e-books in the catalog. Should midsize academic libraries, which are more often faced with unpredictable budget cycles, limited resources, and a different set of priorities, follow the R-1’s lead, or should they find monograph acquisition models better suited to their needs? Participants had the opportunity to explore these issues with the moderators’ guidance and to offer ideas on blending the best of the emerging R-1 models with the differing needs of midsize academic libraries. Background for the Discussion The presenters had attended an impressive number of Charleston sessions in 2012 that professed the importance of shifting academic libraries away from print books and toward ebooks in dramatic new ways. Some of these sessions were led by librarians from major Research-1 (R-1) institutions where they were embracing these dramatic changes both in the format of their books and in the way they were acquired. These models included such strategies as wholesale movement to e-book only approval; large leased e-book packages; and expansive DDA offerings of e-books in the catalog. It seemed to us the whole congregation at Charleston, including many librarians from institutions with very different missions and budgets when compared to the R-1s, were jumping on board the e-book train without much question, concern, or thorough consideration for the needs and interests of their own academic users. Therefore, the presenters saw a need to host a discussion session at the 2013 Charleston Conference specifically for librarians from midsize academic libraries to voice their concerns about hastily boarding the fast moving e-book train in the same way as those daring R-1 library advocates. But before continuing, it is important to define midsize academic library as determined by the presenters. “Midsize” is not a measure of the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) students, but rather is better estimated by monographic budget expenditures, in this case. For our purposes, midsize libraries are those with an approximate annual monograph budgets between

National Union Catalog: Asset or Albatross?

150,000 and

Part I: Columns and Blogs: Making Sense of Merging Worlds

600,000 and which generally include universities most often classified in the Carnegie class Masters/L. Libraries at Midsize Universities Are Different from Those at Research-1s At the heart of the presenters’ concerns is the difference between the needs of library patrons in midsize academic institutions and the needs of those in R-1 institutions. Librarians at midsize libraries are increasingly aware of these differences both in terms of their missions and in terms of their operations. Unlike R-1 flagship libraries, midsize academic libraries are more often constrained by unpredictable budget cycles and limited resources. They generally do not have luxury of buying the same range of e-resources as R-1s nor the possibility of purchasing both print and e-versions to accommodate users of different preferences. Midsize libraries, which are generally smaller institutions than their R-1 counterparts, may feel more often a greater urgency to respond to the specific wishes of their faculty and students, particularly when they express ambivalence about being moved to new formats. It feels particularly important to librarians at these more intimate institutions to get a clear understanding from their faculty and students regarding their resource preferences.

Responsible Internet Use

Summary of Conference Presentation: Midsize academic libraries face many unique challenges, particularly in the greyer areas of collection management. This presentation addresses these challenges faced by libraries in midsize institutions and how they differ from those at larger research institutions. It focuses on the presenters’ study of midsize library attitudes toward retaining or weeding the iconic National Union Catalog, Pre-1956 Imprints and the reasoning behind each. The generations of librarians who used the NUC and other analog sets are passing from the scene in academic libraries, and the incoming digital native librarian knows little or nothing about them. The fate of the NUC is examined. The example of de-selection decisions regarding voluminous paper sets of pre-digital finding aids is also discussed. Ultimately, the presentation aims to discuss the ways in which midsize libraries can find in building midsize library collections, which will balance out the research needs against the demands of limited space and budgets.