Previous | Contents | Next | ||
Issues in Science and Technology
Librarianship |
Spring 2001 |
|||
DOI:10.5062/F4P848WJ |
URLs in this document have been updated. Links enclosed in {curly brackets} have been changed. If a replacement link was located, the new URL was added and the link is active; if a new site could not be identified, the broken link was removed. |
Laurel Kristick
Physical Sciences Coordinator
laurel.kristick@orst.edu
Collection Development Department
OSU Libraries
Oregon State University
Oregon State University Libraries are committed to increasing electronic access to information. The catalog, myriad databases, and a small collection of e-books are accessible over the Internet. OSU Libraries are now focusing attention on access to primary science journals. Using an existing library liaison network, we conducted an informal e-mail poll of science faculty. We asked them for lists of the "top ten" journals that they would like to access electronically. These faculty lists have been compiled into an Excel spreadsheet for analysis. Other data added to the spreadsheet include the publisher, whether or not the Libraries have a current subscription (print or electronic), cost of the subscription, licensing conditions and the ISI impact factors and rankings. We are using this information to set priorities for the allocation of staff time and available funding to develop the online science journal collection.
OSU Libraries have also been developing a collection of electronic journals in a piecemeal fashion. The first paid subscription to an electronic journal was to the Journal of Biological Chemistry in 1996. Since then the Libraries have added electronic access to journals through the purchase of publisher packages (e.g., Project Muse and the American Chemical Society), titles that are "free with print" (e.g., American Institute of Physics and the American Mathematical Society), and aggregator databases from commercial vendors (e.g., EBSCO and the Gale Group). As the Collection Development Department became aware of "free with print" titles, links were placed in catalog records and in an alphabetical electronic journals list on the Libraries' web site. When some publishers began to charge for electronic access, OSU Libraries were forced to give up the web versions of many valuable titles (e.g., American Society for Microbiology publications).
Development of an electronic journal collection is expensive both in terms of the dollar cost of subscriptions and in the use of staff resources to negotiate licenses, verify URLs and provide access via cataloging and web page links. Libraries must deal directly with publishers making it a time consuming process. Subscription agents have yet to define and establish their role in this arena. Charles Hamaker described these issues a few years ago (Hamaker 1997) and little has changed since then. Given the costs of acquiring and processing electronic resources, the Collection Development Department decided to concentrate on those journals most in demand by faculty.
Table 1. Students and Faculty at Oregon State University | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
College | Undergraduates | % of Total | Graduates | % of Total | Faculty | % of Total |
Business | 1,796 | 13.04% | 75 | 2.50% | 41 | 3.25% |
Graduate School* | 0 | 0.00% | 601 | 20.04% | N/A | |
Home Economics & Education | 914 | 6.64% | 413 | 13.77% | 131 | 10.38% |
Liberal Arts | 2,608 | 18.94% | 82 | 2.73% | 210 | 16.64% |
University Exploratory Studies* | 998 | 7.25% | 0 | 0.00% | N/A | |
Social Sciences & Humanities Subtotal | 6,316 | 45.86% | 1,171 | 39.05% | 382 | 30.27% |
Agriculture | 1,072 | 7.78% | 290 | 9.67% | 283 | 22.42% |
Engineering | 2,890 | 20.98% | 448 | 14.94% | 127 | 10.06% |
Forestry | 378 | 2.74% | 146 | 4.87% | 100 | 7.92% |
Health & Human Performance | 872 | 6.33% | 130 | 4.33% | 45 | 3.57% |
Oceanic & Atmospheric Sciences | 0 | 0.00% | 78 | 2.60% | 65 | 5.15% |
Pharmacy | 231 | 1.68% | 189 | 6.30% | 32 | 2.54% |
Science | 2,013 | 14.62% | 470 | 15.67% | 193 | 15.29% |
Veterinary | 0 | 0.00% | 77 | 2.57% | 35 | 2.77% |
Science Subtotal | 7,456 | 54.14% | 1,828 | 60.95% | 880 | 69.73% |
Total | 13,772 | 100% | 2,999 | 100% | 1,262 | 100% |
*Some of these students may be science majors; not counted in science subtotal |
Seventy percent of the faculty is in the sciences and, according to statistics from OSU's Research Office, 92% of the research funds generated from outside sources in 1999/2000 was awarded to science faculty. Despite its relatively small size and the lack of a medical school, OSU has an impressive record in attracting outside research grants and is currently ranked 64th in federal funding (Chronicle of Higher Education March 16, 2001). OSU Libraries' current materials budget is approximately $4 million; serials account for $2.6 million and 80% of this is spent on science serials. There is little flexibility in the budget for decreasing the amount spent to support the social sciences and humanities collection. A recent citation study conducted by Hurd et al. (1999) at the University of Illinois, Chicago showed that for faculty in molecular biology 6% of the journals used accounted for 56% of articles cited. These factors prompted us to focus on science journals. We reasoned that we would make the best use of the serials budget by adding electronic access to journals already well used and highly cited by OSU faculty rather than by applying available money entirely to the purchase of new print subscriptions.
We conducted an informal e-mail poll of the science faculty in January 2001. The science librarians sent e-mail either to their departmental library representatives or directly to faculty e-mail lists. The message asked faculty members to submit a list of the "top ten" journals to which they would like to have electronic access (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Sample E-mail Message The library is investigating the possibility of providing increased electronic access to journals. In most cases we would have to pay extra for our paper subscription to a journal in order to have a site license to give you access to the electronic version as well. The advantage of electronic access is that it is available off-site (e.g., in faculty offices) and if the paper copy happens to be missing from the shelves electronic access is still available. We are polling faculty to determine which journals it would make "economic" sense to try and obtain electronically. Please send me your "Top Ten" list of journals that you would like to access electronically -- these should be journals which you use often and refer your students to regularly. In some cases, an electronic version may not yet be available -- don't let that stop you from suggesting a title. Please reply by Friday, February 2.
|
We did not ask faculty to check whether the print journal was in our collection or whether electronic access was already available before submitting their lists. We also did not ask them to verify titles on their lists. We wanted to make this exercise as easy as possible for them. We gave faculty a two-week deadline to reply. Some librarians sent a reminder message to departments where there was little response. The reminders generated an immediate reaction and a flurry of lists.
Table 2: Elements of Spreadsheet Data | |
---|---|
Column | Element |
A | Title of journal |
B | Publisher |
C | Number of requests per title |
D | Departments requesting |
E | OSU print subscription |
F | OSU electronic access linked from OASIS |
G | OSU electronic access linked from e-journals list |
H | Cost of electronic access - free with print, electronic not free, |
I | Cost of print subscription |
J | Cost of print + electronic |
K | Comments (licensing conditions, etc.) |
L | ISI category |
M | ISI ranking within category |
N | Number of journals within ISI category |
O | ISI impact factor |
Creating the spreadsheet and adding titles as the e-mail lists were received took approximately 15 hours spread over three weeks. Two additional hours were needed for bibliographic verification and consolidating duplicate entries.
OSU Libraries' serials vendor's database was used to determine publishers and availability of electronic access. Requested titles were checked against the online catalog and the alphabetical listing of electronic journals. This checking took 15 hours (spread among four people) and a further eight hours for the Collection Development Assistant to enter the information into the spreadsheet.
The 1999 ISI Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports was used to gather the ISI ranking information. This took the two of us working together about six hours to collect. Eight hours were needed to add the data to the spreadsheet.
Compiling the data required a total of about 54 hours. The data can be sorted in the spreadsheet in a variety of ways (e.g., by number of requests per title, by publisher, by impact factor). For a relatively small investment of time, we have created a useful tool to help in making decisions about which electronic titles to pursue.
The bulk of the responses were from faculty in the biological sciences. This was no surprise since the campus already has access to many titles in the physical sciences (e.g., American Physical Society and the Royal Society of Chemistry), making readily available respected journals that the faculty both publish in and cite. The journals listed by biological sciences faculty reflect areas in which OSU has strong research programs: forestry, fisheries and marine biology, ecology, and molecular biology.
Of these 711 requested titles, 61 were requested by five or more faculty, and a further 152 were requested by three or more faculty. This is evidence that our strategy of focusing on electronic access to key scientific journals was on target. The most requested journals (ten or more requests) are listed in Table 3.
Table 3. Most Requested Titles | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Title | # Requests | OSU Electronic | Availability | ISI Rank | ISI Impact |
Nature | 61 | no | Additional cost for online | 1 | 29.491 |
Science | 47 | yes | Additional cost for online | 2 | 24.595 |
Ecology | 38 | no | Additional cost for online | 8 | 3.573 |
Cell | 24 | no | Additional cost for online | 2 | 36.242 |
Oecologia | 21 | no | Free with print | 22 | 2.159 |
Ecological Applications | 20 | no | Additional cost for online | 15 | 2.784 |
Canadian Journal of Forest Research | 19 | no | Additional cost for online | 6 | 1.058 |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences | 19 | yes | Free with print | 3 | 10.260 |
Marine Ecology Progress Series | 18 | yes | Free with print | 6 | 2.781 |
Journal of Geophysical Research | 14 | no | Not available online | 6 | 2.781 |
Ecological Monographs | 13 | no | Additional cost for online | 4 | 4.447 |
Forest Science | 13 | no | Not available online | 7 | 1.034 |
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology & Ecology | 13 | yes | Free with print | 21 | 1.348 |
Trends in Ecology and Evolution | 12 | no | Additional cost for online | 2 | 7.621 |
American Naturalist | 11 | no | Free with print | 6 | 3.928 |
Forest Ecology and Management | 11 | no | Additional cost for online | 9 | 0.962 |
Marine Biology | 11 | no | Free with print | 16 | 1.534 |
Oikos | 11 | no | Additional cost for online | 17 | 2.566 |
Water Resources Research | 11 | no | Not available online | 9 | 2.061 |
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science | 10 | no | Additional cost for online | 2 | 1.963 |
Journal of Biological Chemistry | 10 | yes | Additional cost for online | 22 | 7.666 |
Of these journals, OSU Libraries provide electronic access to five titles. For two of these five titles, electronic access had been purchased before the e-mail poll was conducted.
Table 4. Requested Titles Ranked #1 in Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Title | OSU Subscription | Electronic Availability | # Requests | ISI Category | Impact Factor |
Advanced Materials | yes | extra cost | 1 | Materials Science | 5.415 |
Annual Review of Biochemistry | yes | extra cost | 2 | Biochemistry & Microbiology | 37.111 |
Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences | yes | extra cost | 1 | Geosciences | 5.333 |
Annual Review of Entomology | yes | extra cost | 2 | Entomology | 5.759 |
Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology | yes | extra cost | 1 | Pharmacy | 21.175 |
Endocrine Reviews | yes | extra cost | 1 | Endocrinology | 20.250 |
Global Biogeochemical Cycles | yes | not available | 6 | Environmental Science | 4.309 |
Health Affairs | yes | free with print | 1 | Health | 5.079 |
Journal of Avian Biology | no | extra cost | 1 | Ornithology | 1.532 |
Journal of Dairy Science | yes | free with print | 3 | Agriculture-Dairy & Animal | 1.674 |
Journal of Quality Technology | yes | not available | 2 | Engineering-Industrial | 1.133 |
Mass Spectrometry Reviews | no | free with print | 1 | Spectroscopy | 6.885 |
Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews | yes | extra cost | 1 | Microbiology | 17.773 |
Nature | yes | extra cost | 61 | Multidisciplinary Science | 29.491 |
Nature Genetics | yes | not available | 6 | Genetics | 30.693 |
Neural Computation (MIT Press) | no | free with print | 1 | Computer Science-Artificial Intelligence | 2.829 |
New England Journal of Medicine | yes | free with print | 5 | Medicine-General | 28.857 |
Operations Research | yes | free with print | 1 | Operations Research | 1.268 |
Paleoceanography | yes | not available | 1 | Oceanography | 3.967 |
Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries | yes | extra cost | 1 | Fish & Wildlife | 4.444 |
Soil Science Society of America Journal | yes | free with print | 7 | Agriculture-Soil Science | 1.604 |
Tree Physiology | yes | free with print | 7 | Forestry | 2.042 |
OSU Libraries have explored the "Big Deal" as a means of increasing electronic access to science journals with little success. Oregon State University is a member of Orbis, a consortium of Oregon state-supported university libraries and private college libraries in Oregon and Washington. In 1998, Orbis pursued a consortial subscription to Academic IDEAL but was unable to negotiate a price that members could support. As the bulk of OSU Libraries' science journal subscriptions are held with one major publisher, Elsevier, the Libraries investigated a consortial subscription in cooperation with the largest academic libraries in Oregon. The goal was to reduce the extensive overlap between print collections and potentially increase access to titles that none of these libraries currently own. So far, this negotiation has not been fruitful.
The concept of the "Big Deal" has important implications for the further development of OSU Libraries' electronic journal collection. At least 21% of the requested titles are tied into these "Big Deal" packages. Should OSU Libraries hold out against the "Big Deal" and the resulting financial ramifications in anticipation of changes in the scholarly communication process? Oregon State University firmly supports alternative avenues for scholarly and electronic journal publishing and is a foundation member of the {Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition} (SPARC). OSU Libraries has subscribed to SPARC sponsored journals and the next purchase will be BioOne. However, by not taking on the "Big Deal," are we hampering our faculty and their ability to succeed? Or, by holding out, are we staying in control of local collection management decisions and furthering the cause for new directions in scholarly publishing?
Frazier, K. 2001. The Librarians Dilemma: Contemplating the Costs of the "Big Deal." D-Lib Magazine 79(1) Available: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march01/frazier/03frazier.html [March 19, 2001].
Hamaker, C. 1997. Chaos - Journals Electronic Style. Against the Grain 9(6):90-91.
Hurd, J.M., Blecic, D.D & Vishwanataham, R. 1999. Information Use by Molecular Biologists: Implications for Library Collections and Services. College and Research Libraries 60(1):31-43.
Kleiner, J.P. & Hamaker, C.A. 1997. Libraries 2000: Transforming Libraries Using Document Delivery, Needs Assessment, and Networked Resources. College and Research Libraries 58(4):355-374.
Montgomery, C.H. 2000. Measuring the Impact of an Electronic Journal Collection on Library Costs. D-Lib Magazine 6(10) Available: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/october00/montgomery/10montgomery.html [April 3, 2001].
Top Institutions in Federal Research-and-Development Expenditures, 1998 and 1999. 2001. Chronicle of Higher Education (March 16) 47(27):A26.
We thank Sue Goodson and Judith Langridge in Collection Development for their work on this project. Our colleagues, Bonnie Allen, Richard Brumley and Janet Webster, provided valuable editorial advice.
Previous | Contents | Next |