Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
LIB 266-14
Collection Management—Policy Comparison Chart
February 15, 2010
Description of IFPL serves the whole of Bonneville LPL serves a population of about
service County—estimated 80,000 people. 78,000 in East Texas.
area/communit
y Idaho Falls is the main commercial/ *The City of Longview includes three
cultural area for many of the small public school districts serving
towns of Southeastern Idaho approximately 19,000 students. In
(approx. within a 100+ mile radius). addition, there are three university
The town is predominately of one and college campuses within the city
religion (LDS) with a growing and one other in Gregg County.
population of Hispanics due to the
agriculture work for migrant * Approximately sixty percent
families. (61.1%) of the population age 16
and over are in the labor force. Of
With the Idaho Room, IFPL also those, four percent (4.4%) are
offers historians and visitors unemployed. Approximately thirty
interesting information about the (30.3%) of the workforce is
area. employed in management,
professional, and related
occupations; sixteen percent
(15.7%) is in service occupations;
twenty seven percent (27.0%) is in
sales and office occupations; less
than one percent (0.3%) is in
1
farming, fishing, and forestry
occupations; ten percent (9.9%) is
involved in construction, extraction,
and maintenance occupations; and
seventeen percent (16.7%) is
production, transportation, and
material moving occupations.
Nearly sixty percent (54.8%) of
families report that all parents in the
home are working.
Identification Children, young adults, and adults. Children, young adults, and adults.
of service
clientele/patro *often titles are offered in several
ns formats: regular print, large print,
audio and Spanish.
Statement IFPL works to provide patrons a Every subject area has its own
about wide-range of reading materials, parameters, but most of the
collection and understands that the majority parameters rely on what is current
parameters of patrons are using the library for and what the specific patrons of the
entertainment rather than subject area are looking for.
educational pursuits. This is made
plain to us by the types of requests
the patrons make for consideration.
Description of IFPL works to ensure the most “This is the process used to select
the types of popular titles are made available for the materials of interest to library
programs or adult and children patrons—without patrons and to support the
patron needs long waits, as well as offering Library’s roles in the community.
programs that challenge readers to It also includes the process for
that collection expand their reading habits. maintaining the collection through
must meet judicial withdrawal of unneeded
items.”
2
*Reference Materials
*Vertical File Materials
*Young Adult
List patrons by Children, adult, young adult, and Adult, children and young adult
type Latino
Identification FIC (fiction) None listed
of formats NF (non-fiction)
collected LP (large print)
PB (paperbacks)
EASY (easy reading)
DVD / VHS
CDB (CD books)
KIT (cassettes)
ROM (romance)
YA (young adult)
J (for all children’s materials)
Identification Management staff, processing *Adult Non-Fiction (incld’g reference)
of department – Adult Services Unit Leader
persons/selecto *Adult Fiction – Circulation
rs responsible Supervisor
*Juvenile Materials – Children
for collection Services Unit Leader
development *Electronic Materials – Library
System Administrator
3
appropriate. Acceptance of gift
materials does not imply that the
materials will be added into the
collection. Only those materials
that meet selection criteria will be
added.”
Deselection IFPL discards materials based upon “The following should be considered
and discards *circulation stats when selecting items for
*condition withdrawal:
*space *Poor physical condition; not
*subject matter becomes obsolete suitable for rebinding
*Duplicate copies of a title no
longer in demand
*Obsolete content
*No circulation in the last five years
4
following groups: City of Longview
Administrative Team, Friends of the
Longview Public Library, Longview
Public Library Foundation Board of
Trustees, the Library Administrative
staff; and at least one representative
from any of the following groups: an
area college or university, a local
school district, the local print media,
the local clergy, or a local writers’
group. Appeals of Review Board
decisions will be made to a court of
competent jurisdiction. In the event
that a complainant charges that a
particular item is not protected
under the First Amendment to the
Constitution, the onus of proof rests
with the Complainant. Material under
question will remain in the active
collection until such judicial
determination is made.”
Comments/Recommendations:
I chose these two libraries because they are serve similar areas. But that seems to be
the only similarity because of the fact that Longview Public has an extensive collection
policy and Idaho Falls Public Library doesn’t.
Idaho Falls Public Library is my library, and is the whole of what I know in my
librarianship. We have a very loose “vision” of a Collection Policy… if we have one at
all. In my mind—and only in my mind—we purchase almost anything that patron’s
request, but seem to be mindful of selecting materials that aren’t explicitly lewd or
pornographic. I think we do this because of our very conservative religious
community, and don’t want to bring trouble upon ourselves. Then I begin to wonder if
we are censoring what we’re offering the whole of our patrons. However, when faced
with a challenge, our director believes that it’s not the library’s position to censor the
collection based on one person’s opinion—and often we just have one person objecting
to one item.
I was blown away by the specific policies Longview Public Library uses for their
collection development. On one hand, it seems binding and leaves little room for
“creative purchasing.” But then again, the library knows it’s vision and that the
collection policy works toward the vision; as well as, providing a safety net for
questionable requests. This seems like a more “library-minded” way of running a
library, versus the willy-nilly way we order books. I was also impressed that this
information was made available on the internet for anyone to see. All of the
information I provided for IFPL is just the stuff I know from working there. As a
institution of information and knowledge sharing, IFPL could do quite a bit better!
I would like to definitely propose something like this for our library. It would only make
the library stronger and better suited to meet the needs of our community.
5
6