jan05book.indb
Web Communications and
Collections Outreach to Faculty
Karla L. Hahn and Kari Schmidt
A library’s Web site can provide a powerful forum for communicating
with users about changes occurring in local collecting practices and their
relationship to larger issues of scholarly communication. This survey
of SPARC member Web sites examines how information on collection
changes and scholarly communication issues is presented. Although a
few institutions use their Web sites to inform users and connect the local
and the global, most present little or no informationon these topics.When
collections information is present, it usually appears on either dedicated
collections pages or faculty services pages. Typically, collections pages
focus on largely static information describing services and policies. Infor-
mation on changes in collection building is uncommon. Scholarly com-
munication information is even scarcer and is rarely linked to information
on local collection development or management.
s the pace of change in the
scholarly publishing sys-
tems accelerates, academic
and research libraries are
transforming their collections. As librar-
ies cancel serials, move formerly print
subscriptions to electronic-only format,
construct institutional repositories, and
support open-access initiatives, the need
to communicate with users about these
changes is growing. Many of the changes
in the journal publishing marketplace
have been documented in the regular
periodical pricing surveys published
in Library Journal. In recent years, these
articles have increasingly noted the rapid
development of electronic publishing, the
move to electronic-only subscribing be-
havior, and the increasing volatility in the
publishing marketplace with deepening
concerns over price pressure on library
collections.1–3
These changes in the journal market-
place are undoubtedly affecting library
collections. As long-standing local collec-
tion management practices are undergo-
ing fundamental revisions, clear com-
munication with library users becomes
vital. Faculty members are a particularly
important segment to reach because they
tend to be especially dependent on access
to the latest scholarly publications. Many,
if not all, of these local shi s are related
to a constellation of systemic changes
in scholarly communication. Two major
library organizations have developed
initiatives to foster outreach to faculty by
libraries on the issues relating to scholarly
Karla L. Hahn is Collection Management Team Leader at the University of Maryland Libraries; e-mail:
khahn@umd.edu. Kari Schmidt is a Electronic Resources Librarian at the University of Maryland Librar-
ies; e-mail: schmidtk@umd.edu.
28
mailto:schmidtk@umd.edu
mailto:khahn@umd.edu
Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 29
communication. Since 1997, the SPARC
initiative, sponsored by the Association of
Research Libraries (ARL), has developed
resources, programs, and competing non-
profit publishing initiatives.4 The more re-
cent establishment of the Scholarly Com-
munication Section of the Association of
College and Research Libraries (ACRL)
indicates an even broader sense of shared
urgency within the library community.5
SPARC has worked in conjunction with
the ARL Scholarly Communication office
and the ACRL to promote a program of
faculty and researcher education under
the rubric “Create Change.”
There is a growing body of literature
examining how faculty and researchers
are responding to the rapid changes in
scholarly publishing and how they are
using electronic publications, but rela-
tively li le a ention has focused on how
libraries are communicating with their
users about these changes. Randall Ward
et al. surveyed SPARC member libraries
about their sponsorship of formal speak-
ing events aimed at promoting dialog
with faculty on scholarly communication
issues.6 Lance Lugar and Kate Thomes
surveyed ARL member Web sites and
noted how many included information
on the scholarly communication crisis on
their home page and how such informa-
tion was presented.7
As a founding member of SPARC, the
University of Maryland Libraries have
explored various avenues for engaging
faculty in dialog about recent develop-
ments in scholarly communication. A
recent reevaluation of the libraries’ col-
lection management pages suggested that
this prominent user interface was not be-
ing used to promote awareness of recent
collection changes nor was it addressing
the relationships between changes in
collection building and changes occur-
ring across the scholarly communica-
tion system. It became clear that local
Web site design and design practices in
the academic library community could
benefit more broadly from a systematic
effort to identify best practices in this
arena, particularly with regard to faculty
communication, and to determine how
frequently libraries are using their Web
sites to communicate about changes in
their collections and collection manage-
ment practices. To answer these ques-
tions, the authors undertook a survey of
SPARC member Web sites to assess their
use in support of faculty communication
with regard to changes in library collec-
tions and collection management.
Surveying the SPARC Member Sites
The survey of SPARC member Web sites
was an unobtrusive survey of all mem-
ber Web sites and applied a qualitative
research design for data gathering and
analysis. Similar survey techniques have
been used by a small number of studies to
address questions related to presenting e-
journals to users, presenting information
on library services, developing scholarly
communication pages, and publishing
collection development policies.8 These
studies have focused on links on either
a Web site’s home page or anywhere on
the site.
SPARC members were chosen as the
study population because these institu-
tions provide a diverse library popula-
tion that has chosen to engage in actively
seeking solutions to the scholarly com-
munication crisis. SPARC members range
from small liberal arts institutions to large
research libraries. Only full-member
libraries were included to maintain the
focus on institutions with a substantial
investment in addressing scholarly com-
munication challenges. Member libraries
are all located in the United States or
Canada.
To assess the frequency with which
SPARC member sites were providing
30 College & Research Libraries
information on local collections changes,
all member ’s library Web sites were
surveyed between October 2003 and
February 2004 using the membership
list posted on the SPARC Web site. The
authors performed content analysis
of each library’s home page with site
review focused on the top two levels of
each site on the assumption that links oc-
curring deeper in the site were unlikely
to be accessed by library users. When
information was present, however, the
pages linked in were considered in their
entirety. Coding was developed initially
on the basis of the research questions but
then deepened by an iterative process
commonly referred to as the constant
comparative method.9
Initially, twenty SPARC members were
selected randomly from the full-member
list of 149 libraries and their Web sites
were analyzed and coded independently
by both authors. The coding of the first
twenty sites was compared through an
intercoder check. Initial agreement on
coding was 88 percent on all codes. Both
coders then resolved all coding conflicts.
In the process, the code definitions were
refined to enable more consistent code
application. All remaining SPARC mem-
ber sites were then coded by one or the
other author. In total, Web sites of the full
SPARC member list of 149 libraries were
reviewed.
Although this survey focused on fac-
ulty pages and collection management
pages, the researchers recognized that
presentation of collections and scholarly
communications issues could be handled
in other ways. Even though these pages
provide the most promising forum for
presenting information on changes in col-
lection management and scholarly com-
munication, the Web sites were assessed
with an eye to other options. Initially, the
authors hypothesized that electronic re-
source pages and digital collections pages
January 2005
might offer similar opportunities for pre-
senting information on these topics, but
it quickly became obvious that research
libraries are not using these pages for
such purposes, although these pages were
evaluated for every site.
For the pilot survey, codes were cre-
ated in four categories: the presence or
absence of pages discussing collection
development or management, the pres-
ence or absences of pages aimed at a fac-
ulty audience, the presence or absence of
pages describing local digital collections
or local electronic publishing efforts,
and the nature of information presented
on electronic resources pages. Subcodes
were developed within each coding
category to reflect the content presented
with the page structure. As new classes of
information were observed, appropriate
codes were developed and defined. The
codes included categories for the presence
or absence of scholarly communication
information.
After the initial review of the pilot
group of twenty, it became clear that in
a small number of cases, libraries were
creating freestanding groups of pages
discussing scholarly communication. To
capture these in the research design, an
additional coding category was added.
The final coding structure is presented
in appendix A.
Findings
Pages Addressing Collection Management
A significant collection management
section is found on 73 (49%) of the 149
SPARC member sites analyzed. Typically,
the content on these sections provides
contact and procedural information for the
department, collection descriptions, and
collection management policies. Of the
seventy-three collection management sites
found, 82 percent offer collection manager
contact information; 64 percent provide
directions for requesting the purchase of
Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 31
TABLE 1
Pages Addressing Collection Management
% of All
Sites
% of Sites
With Section
Significant section on collection management or development
activities
49% N/A
List of collection managers 40% 82%
Form to request a purchase 32% 64%
Descriptions of collections 29% 59%
Collection development policy 24% 49%
Info on the structure of the collection development department 24% 49%
Info on gifts 23% 48%
Info on special collections 18% 37%
Info on journal cancellations or serials review 15% 32%
Info on digital collections 14% 29%
Info for staff 13% 26%
Info on scholarly communication issues 10% 21%
Info on approval plan 10% 19%
Info on materials budget 9% 19%
Info on preservation 9% 18%
Lists of new books 8% 16%
Info on discontinuing print versions of journals 7% 14%
Usage statistics 7% 14%
Copyright information 5% 11%
Current trials 5% 10%
Info on intellectual freedom 3% 5%
Serials committee 2% 4%
Support for accreditations 2% 4%
a book or journal; 59 percent give a gen-
eral description of the collection, with 37
percent providing information on special
collections and 29 percent explaining the
institution’s digital collection projects; 49
percent outline the department’s structure;
and 49 percent post collection manage-
ment policies.
Collection management pages less
frequently include information on major
shi s in collections. Collection manage-
ment policies are rarely enriched with
specific project information, such as
updates on recent journal cancellations
or explanations of ongoing serial review
processes. Only twenty-three libraries
(32%) offer journal cancellations or serial
review information, and only ten (14%)
discuss the discontinuation of print ver-
sions of journals. Fourteen libraries (19%)
include information on their materials
budget. (See table 1.)
Of the seventy-three sites with collec-
tion management sections, only fi een
(21%) contain any mention of the crisis
in scholarly communication. All fi een
32 College & Research Libraries
provide links to other sites for scholarly
communication. In some cases, this linking
is to local programs, but there seems to be a
primary focus on national and internation-
al scholarly communication partnerships
and initiatives. Bibliographies and men-
tion of an institution’s SPARC membership
are found on six (8%) of the pages, whereas
pathfinders and topic pages for scholarly
communication are found on five (7%) of
the collection management pages.
Overall, collection management pages
emphasize relatively static information on
January 2005
the procedures of the local program rather
than on broad collection management
matters facing the library community.
More dynamic content concerning ongo-
ing changes to the collections and schol-
arly communication is not a standard part
of these sections. The findings suggest a
failure to associate local collections work
with issues affecting the library and schol-
arly community at large, such as shrink-
ing materials budgets, perpetual journal
inflation, and the demand for electronic
scholarly material.
TABLE 2
Pages Addressing Faculty
% of All
Sites
% of Sites
With Section
Section for faculty 43% N/A
List of collection managers 34% 79%
Form to request a purchase 32% 76%
Info on digital collections 21% 49%
Info on special collections 14% 33%
Info on gifts 12% 29%
Descriptions of collections 12% 29%
Info on scholarly communication issues 9% 22%
Lists of new books 9% 22%
Copyright information 9% 22%
Info on the structure of the collection development department 7% 17%
Collection development policy 7% 16%
Info on journal cancellations or serials review 4% 10%
Info on materials budget 3% 8%
Info on preservation 3% 8%
Info on approval plan 3% 6%
Info for staff 2% 5%
Faculty newsletter 2% 5%
Info on discontinuing print versions of journals 1% 3%
Current trials 1% 3%
Usage statistics 1% 3%
Serials committee 1% 2%
Support for accreditations 1% 2%
Info on intellectual freedom 1% 2%
Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 33
Collections Information on Pages Address-
ing Faculty
Of the 149 sites analyzed, sixty-three (43%)
host Web pages specifically tailored to
faculty that contain a significant section
on collection management. Within this
group, the information included focuses
mainly on departmental contacts in terms
of requesting and receiving information
from the library as well as descriptions of
the library’s collections. A list of selectors is
most frequently included, with 79 percent
posting these lists. A standard part of these
pages is a form or procedure on how to
request or recommend the purchase of a
book or journal, with 76 percent including
this information. Collection descriptions,
whether about specific or general collec-
tions, are less prominent. Descriptions
of digital collections are included on 49
percent of the pages, special collections
on 33 percent of the pages, and general
collections on 29 percent of the pages. In
addition, 29 percent contain information
on the library’s giving programs. Beyond
these basic categories of faculty outreach,
information pertaining to local collection
policies and projects is minimal. Collec-
tion management policies are available
on only ten of the pages targeting faculty.
Half the categories the authors analyzed
are included less than 10 percent of the
time on faculty pages. These categories are
related to specific collection management
work such as journal cancellations, usage
statistics, current electronic resource trials,
and serials commi ee work. (See table 2.)
Scholarly Communication Information on
Faculty Pages
Of the sixty-three libraries with faculty
pages, only fourteen (22%) include con-
tent regarding the crisis in scholarly com-
munication. Although some of the institu-
tions providing this information use the
same structure for both collections and
faculty pages, many institutions provide
scholarly communication information in
only one context. The pa erns in page
structure are similar whether the informa-
tion appears on a faculty-oriented page or
a collection management page. The type
of information presented ranges from
basic to quite detailed: twelve (19%) post
links to other sites for scholarly commu-
nication; eight (13%) include topic pages
for scholarly communication; seven (11%)
have pathfinders; and six (10%) provide
bibliographies. Only three (5%) mention
membership in the SPARC initiative, but
all include a link to SPARC’s Web site.
Those institutions providing particular-
ly rich scholarly communication outreach
to faculty highlight how the present state
of affairs in scholarly publishing affects
collections at the local level in terms of
serial reviews, journal cancellations, and
publisher negotiations. These libraries
construct a contextual framework for
faculty to understand current issues in
scholarly communication by providing
links to national and international organi-
zations, suggesting important writings on
the topic, and encouraging action through
participation in initiatives such as SPARC,
institutional repositories, and open-access
projects. Relatively few faculty pages pres-
ent this connection dynamically, however.
As with the collection management pages,
the findings suggest faculty pages are
underused as a forum for creating a link
between substantive collections manage-
ment work at academic libraries and the
effect changes in the creation, acquisition,
and dissemination of scholarly material
are having on the collections, and conse-
quently, the scholar. (See table 3.)
Scholarly Communication Information on
Other Library Web Pages
In addition to studying sites for the ap-
pearance of collection management and
faculty pages, the authors paid close at-
tention to home pages, digital initiative
34 College & Research Libraries
TABLE 3
Scholarly Communication
Information
% of
All Sites
Any information on scholarly
communication issues
23%
Links to other sites for
scholarly communication
19%
Topic pages for scholarly
communication
10%
Scholarly communication
bibliography
9%
Scholarly communication
pathfinder
8%
Mention of SPARC
membership
7%
pages, and electronic resources pages,
surmising these might provide forums for
scholarly communication information. Al-
though scholarly communication content
is found on a small number of home pages
and digital initiative pages, it is not posted
on any library’s electronic resources por-
tals. Not surprisingly, 149 (99%) maintain
electronic resources pages. Libraries may
be missing an important avenue for out-
reach on these pages.
Home Pages
Only two (1%) of the 149 sites studied
maintain a freestanding scholarly com-
munication section on the home page.
This study’s findings are compatible with
Lugar and Thomes’s findings in that their
investigation revealed that only four per-
cent of the 123 ARL institutions surveyed
posted any scholarly communication in-
formation on the main library site.10 Four
other sites in this survey offered scholarly
communication links on the home page,
but these institutions listed the informa-
tion under the heading “news,” suggest-
ing that the links are not meant to be
persistent. For this reason, they are not
January 2005
included in this study as freestanding
scholarly communication sections found
on a home page.
Digital Initiatives Pages
Of the sites analyzed, seventy-two (49%)
devote Web pages to the institution’s
digital initiatives, but only eleven (15%)
of these pages include scholarly commu-
nication information. Typically, links to
other sites on scholarly communication
are included, with topic pages, pathfind-
ers, and bibliographies found on less than
four percent of the pages. Interestingly,
none mention the library’s membership
in SPARC. As with effective collection
management and faculty pages, digital
initiative pages successfully integrating
scholarly communication issues with
local digital projects explain why these
initiatives are taking place and how
they relate to national and international
projects. Many pages link to prominent
electronic publishing programs and
encourage faculty participation in insti-
tutional repository and digital collections
programs. There is pointed recognition
that what is done locally is connected to
what is being done on a wider scale, with
information presented to demonstrate
the causal links between new frontiers
in electronic dissemination of scholarly
material and issues affecting scholarly
communication in general. The frequency
with which this is done, as with the col-
lection management and faculty pages,
is low.
Discussion
Perhaps the most obvious question
arising from the study’s findings is: Do
libraries need to do more to use their Web
sites to communicate about the changing
nature of library collections and the cur-
rent crisis in scholarly communication?
Collection management pages are slightly
more common than faculty-focused
http:information.Al
Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 35
pages. However, it is clear that separate
collection management pages are the
preferred vehicles for presenting infor-
mation about changes in the collections.
Faculty-focused pages rarely presented
any significant information about collec-
tions beyond lists of collection managers
and purchase request forms. Both types of
pages were used infrequently to present
information on scholarly communication,
suggesting that efforts to tie together in-
formation about systemic scholarly com-
munication issues and changes in local
collection development and management
are relatively uncommon.
This study does not assume that li-
braries need to have Web pages devoted
to collection management or to faculty
audiences. Yet, 74 percent of SPARC
member Web sites have either or both
types of pages. One could conclude that
most SPARC libraries have a natural
forum for presenting scholarly commu-
nication information via their Web site.
However, only nine percent of SPARC
libraries are using faculty pages to present
information on scholarly communica-
tion and only 10 percent are presenting
scholarly communication information
on collection management pages. Only
one library used its digital collections
pages to present this information, none
used their electronic resources pages for
this purpose, and only two libraries had
such information linked to their home
page. Some forward-thinking institutions
have, in fact, made substantial use of their
Web sites as communications vehicles for
informing their users about a wide range
of issues, actions, and resources. Presum-
ably, they are acting to assist those users
in understanding and adapting to the
rapidly changing collections librarians
are managing.
For libraries inspired to explore the
possibilities for creating pages that dis-
cuss collection changes and scholarly
communication issues, it is helpful to
identify some Web sites that could serve
as models of best practices in this arena.
Four institutions that are using collection
management pages effectively to relate
local collections issues to global scholarly
communication concerns are East Caro-
lina University, the University of Texas,
North Carolina State University, and the
University of California, Davis.11 Models
of the alternative approach of using fac-
ulty pages to present information on the
local effects of scholarly communication
are Boston College, the University of Cali-
fornia-Los Angeles, Cornell University,
and the University of Washington.12
Although li le previous work has been
done in this area, two earlier surveys of
library Web sites provide some points of
comparison for this research. Lugar and
Thomes surveyed ARL libraries for links
to scholarly communication information
from their home pages.13 They found that
52 percent of ARL members in 2001 in-
cluded such links anywhere on their Web
sites and only four percent mentioned
scholarly communication on their home
page. The more recent survey presented
here found an even lower rate (1%) of
home page links to similar information
when news items were excluded. How-
ever, this study documented that some
institutions (19% of those surveyed) are
linking to such information from pages
gathering information specifically for
faculty (9%) or from pages providing
information on collection management
(10%). The two studies surveyed different,
though overlapping, sets of sites and re-
viewed the Web sites somewhat different-
ly. Lugar and Thomes seemed to assume
that any access other than via the home
page was largely unnoticeable for users.
The current study looked at a somewhat
different question, documenting that
scholarly communication information,
where present, is frequently offered in the
http:pages.13
http:Washington.12
http:Davis.11
36 College & Research Libraries
context of faculty or collections informa-
tion. However, it is likely that there has
been li le change in the development of
scholarly communication pages on library
Web sites in the interval between the two
studies. This is disappointing given the
significant investments that major library
organizations are making to promote
awareness of these issues both inside the
profession and in outreach to researchers.
One might expect that the special commit-
ment of SPARC member libraries to foster
this outreach would be reflected in the
development of their Web sites.
A second point of comparison for this
study is earlier work by Joseph Straw,
which looked at ARL members’ posting
of collection development policies on
their Web sites.14 Straw does not indicate
when he reviewed the ARL Web sites and
does not describe how he reviewed each
site’s pages. From the publication date of
the article and the number of ARL mem-
bers reported, it can be inferred that the
examination took place perhaps in 2000;
and from the outline of his research ap-
proach, it appears that he a empted to
review all pages on a Web site. Again,
this study focused on a somewhat differ-
ent, but largely overlapping, population.
Straw reported that 71 percent of ARL
members had collection management
pages at the time of his survey. He also
assessed the collection management
pages for the presence of collection de-
velopment policies, finding policies on
30 percent of the collection management
pages. This study found that 49 percent
of SPARC members had collection man-
agement pages linked within the top two
levels of their Web sites, with 24 percent
of those with such pages including col-
lection development policies on their
pages. It is unclear what might account
for the decreased frequency of collection
management pages observed in the cur-
rent study. It is possible that collection
January 2005
management pages are being removed
from Web sites, perhaps in streamlining
efforts. It also is possible that the ARL
contingent is merely slightly more likely
than the broader SPARC membership to
have such pages. Finally, it is possible that
Straw was performing a more compre-
hensive review of each Web site, counting
pages that were more deeply buried than
those considered in this survey.
This project paints a picture of librar-
ies’ use of one communication venue
at a particular moment in time. As an
unobtrusive study, it documents the
frequency with which the study popula-
tion is using this venue to communicate
about collection changes and scholarly
communication issues, but it cannot an-
swer many questions. For instance, it is
unclear what motivates some libraries to
take advantage of their Web site for this
communication whereas others fail to
use it or perhaps choose to focus on other
communication venues. In the authors’
initial survey of the pilot group of Web
sites, it was incidentally observed that,
in many instances, libraries are using
library newsle ers to communicate with
their users about scholarly communica-
tion issues. These venues fell outside the
scope of the current study, but future
analysis could explore more broadly how
SPARC members are communicating
with their user communities about these
issues and why they choose particular
communications approaches over other
options. At a presentation at the SPARC
forum at ALA’s annual meeting in 2003,
Ward et al. reported that 49 percent of
SPARC member institutions surveyed
reported sponsoring on-campus speak-
ers to present on scholarly communica-
tion issues.15 It also would be helpful to
explore more fully the benefits of using
the library’s Web site instead of, or in
conjunction with, other communication
venues.
http:issues.15
http:sites.14
Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 37
Notes
1. Lee Ketcham-van Orsdel and Kathleen Born, “E-Journals Come of Age.” Library Journal
123, no. 7 (Apr. 1998): 40–45.
2. ———, “Doing the Digital Flip.” Library Journal 127, no. 7 (Apr. 2002): 51—55, and “Search-
ing for Serials Utopia,” Library Journal 126, no. 7 (Apr. 2001): 53–58.
3. ———, “Big Chill on the Big Deal?” Library Journal 128, no. 7 (Apr. 2003): 51–56.
4. Sarah C. Michalak, “The Evolution of SPARC.” Serials Review 26, no. 1 (Apr. 2000):
10–21.
5. Ray English, “The ACRL Scholarly Communication Initiative.” C&RL News 65, no. 8 (Sept
2004): 450–53; Ray English, “Scholarly Communication and the Academy: The Importance of
the ACRL Initiative.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 3, no. 2 (Apr. 2003): 337–40; Ray English
and Deborah Dancik, “ACRL’s New Scholarly Communication Initiative: Addressing a Growing
Crisis.” C&RL News 63, no. 5 (May 2002): 356–58.
6. Randall Ward, David Michaelis, Robert Murdoch, Brian Roberts, and Julia Blixrud, “Wide-
spread Academic Efforts Address the Scholarly Communication Crisis: The Results of a Survey
of Academic Institutions.” C&RL News 64, no. 6 (June 2003): 382–84.
7. Lance Lugar and Kate Thomes, “Access to Scholarly Communication Information on ARL
Member Library Websites.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 2, no. 1 (Jan. 2002): 59–67.
8. For two surveys examining e-journal presentation, see Linda A. Rich and Julie L. Rabine,
“The Changing Access to Electronic Journals: A Survey of Academic Library Websites Revisited.”
Serials Review 27, no. 3/4 (Dec. 2001): 1–61 and “How Libraries Are Providing Access to Electronic
Serials: A Survey of Academic Library Web Sites.” Serials Review 25, no. 2 (June 1999): 35–46. A
survey of presentation of library services is reported in Barbara I. Dewey, “In Search of Services:
Analyzing the Findability of Links on CIC University Libraries’ Web Pages,” Information Technol-
ogy and Libraries 18, no. 4 (Dec. 1999): 210–13. As mentioned earlier, Lugar and Thomes surveyed
seeking scholarly communication pages. For a survey of collection development policies, see
Joseph Straw, “Collection Management Statements on the World Wide Web,” Acquisitions Librarian
30 (July 2003): 77–86.
9. Strauss and Corbin describe this technique of coding development. The texts involved (in
this case, the initial twenty sites visited) were used to develop coding categories. For details on
this technique, see Anselm L. Strauss and Juliet M. Corbin, “Coding Procedures: Open Coding,”
in Basics of Qualitative Research (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1990).
10. Lugar and Thomes, “Access to Scholarly Communication Information on ARL Member
Library Websites.”
11. The four model sites for collection management pages can be reviewed at East Carolina
University (h p://www.lib.ecu.edu/cdpgs/), the University of Texas (h p://www.lib.utexas.
edu/admin/cird/), North Carolina State University (h p://www.lib.ncsu.edu/colmgmt/), and the
University of California, Davis (h p://www.lib.ucdavis.edu/info/jrnltrans/index.html).
12. The four model sites for faculty outreach are available at Boston College (h p://www.
bc.edu/libraries/services/faculty/), the University of California, Los Angeles (h p://www.library.
ucla.edu/support/index_f.html), Cornell University (h p://campus.gwlibrary.cornell.edu/services/
facultyserv.html), and the University of Washington (h p://www.lib.washington.edu/services/
faculty.html).
13. Lugar and Thomes, “Access to Scholarly Communication Information on ARL Member
Library Websites.”
14. Straw, “Collection Management Statements on the World Wide Web.”
15. h p://www.arl.org/sparc/SPARC_Forum_Talk.ppt.
38 College & Research Libraries January 2005
APPENDIX A
Coding Categories
1.0 No section for collection development or management activities exists on first
two levels of Web site (home page or one link down)
1
1.1 Significant section on collection management or development activities appears
on either of the first two levels
1.11 Information on approval plan
1
1.12 Information on gi s
1
1.13 Collection development policy(ies)
1
1.14 Information on materials budget
1
1.15 Information on a serials commi ee
1
1.16 Descriptions of collections
1
1.17 Information on scholarly communication
1.171 Scholarly communication pathfinder (organized list of key topics)
1
1.172 Scholarly communication bibliography (list of citations or links to resources for
further reading)
1
1.173 Links to other sites for scholarly communication (pointing off of the local site)
1
1.174 Individual topic pages for scholarly communication issues
1
1.175 Mention of the library’s SPARC membership
1
1.18 List of selectors, collection managers, or library staff liaisons
1
1.19 Information on how to request a purchase
1
1.20 Information on special collections
1
1.21 Information on digital collections (besides databases, commercial full-text
sources, etc.)
1
1.22 Listing of new books
1
1.23 Information on discontinuing print versions of journals
1
1.24 Information on the structure of the collection development/management unit
1
1.25 Information for staff
1
1.26 Information on current trials for electronic resources
1
1.27 Information on journal cancellations or serials review
1
1.28 Copyright information/Intellectual property
1
1.29 Faculty newsle er
1
1.30 Information on preservation program or activities
1
1.31 Support for accreditations
1
1.32 Information on intellectual freedom
1
1.33 Usage statistics
1
2.0 No section for faculty exists on first two levels of Web site (home page or one
link down)
1
2.1 Section for faculty on either of the first two levels includes significant informa-
tion on collections
1
2.11 Information on approval plan
1
2.12 Information on gi s
1
2.13 Collection development policy(ies)
1
2.14 Information on materials budget
1
2.15 Information on a serials commi ee
1
2.16 Descriptions of collections
1
Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 39
2.17 Information on scholarly communication
1
2.171 Scholarly communication pathfinder (organized list of key topics)
1
2.172 Scholarly communication bibliography (list of citations or links to resources for
further reading)
1
2.173 Links to other sites for scholarly communication
1
2.174 Individual topic pages for scholarly communication issues
1
2.175 Mention of the library’s SPARC membership
1
2.18 List of selectors, collection managers, or library staff liaisons
1
2.19 Information on how to request a purchase
1
2.20 Information on special collections
1
2.21 Information on digital collections (besides databases, commercial full-text
sources, etc.)
1
2.22 Listing of new books
1
2.23 Information on discontinuing print versions of journals
1
2.24 Information on the structure of the collection development/management unit
1
2.25 Information for staff
1
2.26 Information on current trials for electronic resources
1
2.27 Information on journal cancellations or serials review
1
2.28 Copyright information/Intellectual property
1
2.29 Faculty newsle er
1
2.30 Information on preservation program or activities
1
2.31 Support for accreditations
1
2.32 Information on intellectual freedom
1
2.33 Usage statistics
1
3.0 No section for local digital initiatives exists on first two levels of Web site (home
page or one link down)
1
3.1 Significant section on local digital collections appears on either of the first two
levels
3.11 Descriptions of local digital collections
1
3.12 Preprint server or institutional archive
1
3.13 Archive of e-journals
1
3.14 Electronic publishing initiative
1
3.15 Information on scholarly communication
1
3.16 Scholarly communication pathfinder (organized list of key topics)
1
3.17 Scholarly communication bibliography (list of citations or links to resources for
further reading)
1
3.18 Links to other sites for scholarly communication
1
3.19 Individual topic pages for scholarly communication issues
1
3.20 Mention of the library’s SPARC membership
1
4.0 No dedicated pages for electronic resources exist on first two levels of Web
site
1
4.1 Significant sections on electronic resources on home page
1
4.11 Search functions embedded in pages
4.12 Descriptions of resources
1
4.13 Trials for new e-resources
1
4.14 New e-resources identified
1
4.15 Cancelled e-resources identified
1
40 College & Research Libraries January 2005
4.16 Information on access from off campus
1
4.17 Information on citation management so ware (reference works)
1
4.18 Information on SFX linking
1
4.19 Copyright information
1
4.20 FAQs or help documents
1
5.0 No freestanding section for scholarly communication exists on home page of
Web site
1
5.1 Free-standing section labeled “scholarly communication” exists on home page
of Web site
1
5.11 Scholarly communication pathfinder (organized list of key topics)
1
5.12 Scholarly communication bibliography (list of citations or links to resources for
further reading)
1
5.13 Links to other sites for scholarly communication (pointing off of the local site)
1
5.14 Individual topic pages for scholarly communication issues
1
5.15 Mention of the library’s SPARC membership
1
5.16 Information on open access
1
5.17 Copyright information/Intellectual property
1
5.18 Institutional repository
1
5.19 Local events information/announcement