Virginia Bacon amp Patrick Carr East Carolina University A discussion of crossinstitutional costperuse analysis projects within the UNC System Introduction 2011 fourinstitution pilot project ID: 1046942
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Collaborating to Analyze E-J..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
1. Collaborating to Analyze E-Journal Use DataVirginia Bacon & Patrick CarrEast Carolina UniversityA discussion of cross-institutional cost-per-use analysis projects within the UNC System
2. Introduction 2011 four-institution pilot project2012 UNC system-wide projectConclusions and moving forwardQuestionsOutline
3. COUNTER Sets a standard for e-resource use data collection and reportingClear definitions of use measurementsAllows cross-platform comparisonsImperfect but powerful
4. The importance of using this data to measure and evaluate use is growing.
5. Cost-per-use An e-resource’s annual subscription cost divided by the use of the resource over the term of the subscription periodA powerful tool for assessing return on investmentMust be contextualized with qualitative data
6. What might we discover if we compare e-resource use data across institutions?
7. UNC CharlotteECU
8. UNC CharlotteUNC GreensboroUNC WilmingtonECU
9. For additional data: http://hdl.handle.net/10342/3143
10. Now what?
11. UNC system-wide survey
12. Appalachian State UniversityEast Carolina UniversityElizabeth City State UniversityFayetteville State UniversityNC Agricultural and Technical State UniversityNorth Carolina Central UniversityNC State UniversityUNC AshevilleUNC Chapel HillUNC CharlotteUNC GreensboroUNC PembrokeUNC WilmingtonWestern Carolina UniversityWinston-Salem State UniversityUNC system schools* * Two system schools, UNC School of the Arts and North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics, were not included in this project.
13. Table 1
14. Publishers Cambridge University PressElsevierInforma HealthcareKargerLippincott, Williams, & WilkinsMary Ann LiebertNature Publishing GroupOxford University PressSAGESpringerTaylor & FrancisWiley-BlackwellWorld Scientific
15. Table 2
16. Table 3
17. If the libraries are performing well, increases in expenditures should result in increases in access.
18. Metrics for access Increases to the numbers of titles and usesGrowth in cost-per-title (CPT) and cost-per-use (CPU) that is lower than growth in expenditure (as well as decreases in CPT and CPU)Increases in the number of highly used titles (HUTs)
19. Overall findingsFrom 2009-2011, there was a:17% increase in e-journal expenditures10% increase in titles6% increase in CPT18% increase in use1% decrease in CPU25-33% increase in HUTs
20. Elsevier: $7.2 millionWiley-Blackwell: $3.6 millionSpringer: $2.1 millionTaylor & Francis: $1.5 millionSAGE: $1.3 million
21. Nature: $1.15LW&W: $1.61Oxford UP: $1.88World Scientific: $83.08Karger: $33.00
22. UNC System expenditures (+5%)E-Journal price increases (+9%)
23. How do we maintain our lead?
24. 1: Develop an online repository in which UNC libraries can share expenditure and access data
25. 2: Procure purchases of common library products using SciQuest
26. 3: Develop a standard template and checklist for e-journal licensing
27. 4: Evaluate and pursue strategies to promote the publication of the results of UNC research in Open Access venues
28. 5: Develop a system-wide plan to contain expenditures and expand access
29. System-wide plan Give special attention to four “high-risk” publishers: Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Taylor & Francis, and Oxford University Press Reduce annual growth in expenditures to the point that it parallels growth in useLower annual growth in CPU and CPT to the point that it is less than annual growth in expendituresReduce annual changes in CPU or CPT
30.
31. Imperfections Emphasis on number of accessible titles and CPT
32. Cambridge University Press CPT
33. Cambridge University Press CPU
34. Imperfections Emphasis on number of accessible titles and CPTInconsistent data collection methods among system schools
35. Goodenough.
36. Report RecommendationsDeveloping a shared repository of use dataSciQuest procurement softwareDeveloping system-wide licensing guidelinesPromote Open Access publishingDevelop a system-wide plan to contain expenditures and expand access
37. 5: Develop a system-wide plan to contain expenditures and expand access
38. Are these publishers really “high-risk”?
39. Context is everything.
40. LWW CPUSystem Average: $1.61UNC CH: $0.85ECU: $1.56NC Central: $117NC A&T: $287WSSU: $399
41. Oxford University PressCPU 2011: $1.88CPU 2009: $1.70CPU % increase: 10%CPU $ increase: $0.18
42. Taylor & FrancisSystem CPU: $13.31But this high CPU is due to the fact that many of the system libraries only have individual subscriptions and do not subscribe to a T&F ‘big deal’ package.
43. Lower CPU does not always equal a better deal.
44. The larger the school, the lower the CPU.
45. Enrollment by schoolAverage CPU by school
46. Are publishers’ pricing models fair?
47. Enrollment by schoolDownloads per enrolled student
48. SchoolCarnegie Classification2011-2012 Full-text downloadsStudent Enrollment Fall 2011DPESNorth Carolina Central UniversityMaster's18,7767,5872.47UNC PembrokeMaster's18,2335,4773.33Elizabeth City State UniversityBaccalaureate12,6862,7724.58Fayetteville State UniversityMaster's31,1335,1995.99Winston-Salem State UniversityMaster's35,4145,7656.14UNC WilmingtonMaster's105,98012,3218.60Western Carolina UniversityMaster's72,6508,3438.71Appalachian State UniversityMaster's145,87216,6548.76UNC CharlotteResearch223,25822,6309.87NC A&T State UniversityResearch110,02310,06310.93UNC GreensboroResearch214,73816,85512.74UNC AshevilleBaccalaureate67,4643,46619.46East Carolina UniversityResearch484,98424,58819.72NC State UniversityResearch1,248,50430,95040.34UNC - Chapel HillResearch2,350,52226,83787.59Schools by Carnegie Classification
49. Enrollment by schoolDownloads per enrolled studentAverage CPU by school
50. In the future…Establish a working group to act on recommendations5 year expenditure plan4% reduction by year 38% reduction by year 5
51. A tip of the hat.
52. Our Final Recommendations
53. 1: Carry out cross-institutional CPU analyses of e-journal collections to contextualize and maximize ROI
54. 2: Develop consistent calculation guidelines and centralized data collection
55. 3: Avoid and/or sidestep confidentiality clauses in licenses
56. 4: Strive to improve ROI by working to enhance the discoverability of e-journal collections
57. 5: Use cross-institutional analyses to make institution-level assessments rather than system-level assessments
58. 6: Lobby publishers to develop pricing models that factor in research intensiveness as well as enrollment
59. Questions?Virginia Bacon Patrick Carrbaconv@ecu.edu carrp@ecu.edu