Collections Evaluation

Evaluation Guidelines
In order to maintain the health and increase the usability of our collection, we will regularly evaluate our collection to identify materials to be withdrawn, items that need to be replaced, and areas where we have gaps in our collection.

On-Going Evaluation

1. As new editions are added to the collection, librarians will consider if older editions should be retained or removed.

2. When circulation staff notice materials in poor physical condition, librarians will recommend if the item should be repaired, replaced, or withdrawn.

3. When items are missing or lost, librarians will recommend if the item should be replaced.

4. Collection maintenance considers the delivery of departmental curriculum (online, face-to-face, combination) and thus if students would be best served by electronic content, printed content, or a mix of both.

5. Collectons are responsive to the areas of focus in academic departments. In some cases, library materials may be retained or removed in accordance to historic, current, or anticipated topics of departmental teaching and research.

6. Library resource-related accreditation requirements for specific disciplines are considered in collections evaluations.

7. Different subject areas will have different guidelines for determining the relevance and currency of appropriate resources. A common acronym for librarians to use as a general guideline for evaluation is MUSTIE:

• M = Misleading. Does the title in question have information that has since been proven factually incorrect?
• U = Ugly. Is the item in poor physical condition?
• S = Superseded. Has the item been superseded by a newer edition?
• T = Trivial. Is the information appropriate at the appropriate level for our user community?
•  I = Irrelevant. Is the information still relevant to the research and teaching interests of our community?
• E = Extant. Is the title readily available from other institutions within the system or is it unique to UWG?

Systematic Evaluation Projects

At times the library will undergo a more extensive evaluation project often motivated by external pressures or opportunities. These instances will typically require more attention by subject specialists and technical services. Due to the nature of these projects, faculty input will be solicited. In addition to the above guidelines librarians will also focus on:

1. Formats of an item that can be withdrawn. Dying technologies might be replaced with newer technologies (VHS replaced with DVD; print versions of online journals can be removed).

2. Multiple copies of a title that can be withdrawn. When this happens, the copy in the best physical condition should be kept. If possible, the item identified as Copy 1 is the preferred one to keep. When a different copy is in better physical condition, after the superfluous copies are withdrawn, the remaining copy should be renamed "Copy 1" to prevent confusion in future evaluation projects.

3. Circulation statistics as well as research value will be considered on a discipline-by-discipline basis.

4. Consultation with Special Collections for the possible relocation of items from the circulating collection to Special Collections.

5. Consideration of the individual item in its context. For example, numbered items that are part of a set might be better evaluated as a set and not as single titles.

6. Communication with faculty so that the best decisions can be made about our collection.