Research Article
Assessment of the Library
Collection of the Central Luzon State University Library: Basis of the
Collection Development Program
Camia Abergos Lasig
College Librarian
University Library and
Information Services
Central Luzon State
University
Science City of Muñoz, Nueva
Ecija, Philippines
Email: cma_lasig@cslu.ed.ph
Roselyn M. Madia
College Librarian
University Library and
Information Services
Central Luzon State
University
Science City of Muñoz, Nueva
Ecija, Philippines
Email: roselynmadia@clsu.edu.ph
Nuelah SJ. Reyes
University Librarian
University Library and
Information Services
Central Luzon State
University
Science City of Muñoz, Nueva
Ecija, Philippines
Email: nuelahsj@clsu.edu.ph
Vanessa B. Morales
College Librarian
University Library and
Information Services
Central Luzon State
University
Science City of Muñoz, Nueva
Ecija, Philippines
Email: vbmorales@clsu.edu.ph
Richie N. Garabiles
College Librarian
University Library and
Information Services
Central Luzon State
University
Science City of Muñoz, Nueva
Ecija, Philippines
Email: rngarabiles@clsu.edu.ph
Received: 5 Oct. 2023 Accepted: 11 Jan. 2024
2024 Lasig, Madia, Reyes,
Morales, and Garabiles. This is an Open Access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
DOI: 10.18438/eblip30458
Abstract
Objective – The collection
assessment project of the University Library is significant in determining
whether the quantity of the collection meets the regulatory standard of the
Commission on Higher Education (CHED) for academic libraries. This study
specifically sought to find the level of library collection compliance in terms
of major subject courses, to determine the curricular programs that are
compliant with the standard or have a high rate of compliance, and to identify
the curricular programs that should be prioritized in acquiring additional book
titles.
Methods – The assessment was conducted using an action research
model of iterative reflection and improvement. It follows the four steps for
carrying out the research: plan, act, observe, and reflect, as proposed by
Davidoff and Van den Berg (1990). Furthermore, we employed CHED Memorandum
Order (CMO) No. 22, Series of 2021, Section 4 (b.4-5) to analyze the
collection's compliance based on its quantity. The data was presented using a
table and percentage.
Results – There are 32 undergraduate curricular programs offered
at Central Luzon State University, which include 1,055 major subject courses.
More than half of major subject courses (57.3%) on various curricular programs
are non-compliant with CHED criteria, including 17.63% of major subject courses
with zero titles copyrighted within the last five years. Findings also reveal
that only 6 (18.75%) of the total programs were able to reach above 70%
compliance with CHED standards, and there are 23 curricular programs with title
gaps of 50% or higher that need to be prioritized in the acquisition of book
titles.
Conclusion – The library collection assessment technique is crucial
for identifying gaps in the collection and determining areas where additional
resources may be required. As the findings indicate that more than half of the
major subject courses do not meet the requirements set by CHED, the librarians
have been investigating ways to acquire additional academic sources to fill
this gap. However, their current efforts are not yet enough to meet the
requirements. A long-term plan for gradually building up the collection has
been devised.
Introduction
Collection development is a fundamental activity of every library in
order to expand their library collection in various formats and meet the needs
of all clients. In an academic library, a collection assessment is a systematic
method of examining the library's collection of materials to determine its
efficacy, relevance, adequacy, and alignment with the institution's aims and
the needs of its users. As the collection grows in any library, it is crucial
to identify what is necessary and relevant. The Central Luzon State University
(CLSU) library's Collection Development Policy governs collection development
and weeding. However, collection assessment has not been common practice for
many years. Collection assessment necessitates a regular evaluation of the
collection to determine whether the quantity and quality of the collection are
relevant, adequate, and well-balanced.
It assists with determining budget requirements by focusing attention on
how well the library’s collections in specific areas support the needs of the
users and the needs of the institution. It also points out whether the
institution’s investment in the collection is being managed responsibly (Henry
et al., 2008). Being wise with the library budget is critical because, while
prices are high, the library budget, which is primarily funded by student
library fees, is a fixed amount that costs only 200 pesos per undergraduate
student. By providing relevant and sound data, librarians can
ascertain which resources should be acquired to optimize the budget so that
effective collections can be built (Finch & Flenner, 2017 as cited in Lim Li Min & Casselden,
2021).
The Central Luzon State University Library is constantly acquiring
library materials in various formats to meet the research needs of its patrons.
The collection has grown over the years since its inception in 1907, though
some of the collection was damaged and lost when the library building collapsed
because of the 7.8 magnitude earthquake that struck in the Northern and Central
parts of Luzon in 1990. The library management continues to acquire books based
on recommendations from faculty, students, and accreditors, as well as
curricular program requirements. Currently, the library houses a total of
20,985 titles and 30,968 volumes from the reference collection, fiction
collection, Filipiniana collection, and professional printed book collection in
various sections and electronic books. To remove books from the collection,
weeding is done in accordance with the weeding policy. However, no assessment
based on its quality and quantity has been conducted since the new library
building was built in 1993. Currently, the university offers 32 undergraduate
degree programs. Our goal as an academic library is to enhance and expand our
collection of information resources that are suitable for each level of the
curriculum. This will enable us to effectively meet the learning preferences
and educational requirements of the academic community. We also conform to the
rules set by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) regarding the minimum
requirements for libraries in higher education institutions. CHED governs tertiary
and graduate education. It is composed of a policy-making body that formulates
plans, policies, and strategies relating to higher education and the operation
of CHED. One of its mandates is to promote relevant and quality higher
education (i.e., to ensure higher education institutions and programs are at
par with international standards, and graduates and professionals are highly
competent and recognized in the international arena); and to ensure that
quality higher education is accessible to all who seek it, particularly those
who may not be able to afford it. Moreover, one of CHED’s powers and functions
is to monitor and evaluate the performance of programs and institutions of
higher learning for appropriate incentives as well as the imposition of sanctions
such as, but not limited to, diminution or withdrawal of subsidy,
recommendation on the downgrading or withdrawal of accreditation, program
termination, or school course (Commission on Higher Education, n.d.). CHED
Memorandum Order (2021, No. 22, Section 4 b. 4-5), states that for each
undergraduate program offering, the library shall provide five relevant book
titles for each major subject published within the last five years, in
combination of print and purchased electronic formats, the ratio of which shall
be determined by the institution. For subjects that do not normally come out
with new editions or book titles, the requirement of publication within the
last five years may be waived. Curricular programs are the names of the
degrees, while major subject courses are one of the components of the program
offering that focus on developing professional competencies. Further,
accrediting bodies have advised the CLSU library to maintain its book
acquisition efforts as a means to satisfy the academic community's requirements
and ensure compliance with quantity standards. The University Library serves
around 11,000 college students enrolled in various courses offered by the
institution. Thus, we were eager to conduct the collection assessment in order
to improve our collection development program, which will
benefit our clients and the institution while also ensuring compliance with
CHED.
Literature Review
According to Reitz and the definition in the Online Dictionary of
Library and Information Science (2013), collection development is defined as “…
the process of planning and acquiring a balanced collection of library
materials over a period of years, based on an on-going assessment of the
information needs of the library's clientele, analysis of usage statistics, and
demographic projection.” Collection assessment is a prerequisite for better
resource management and provides the library administration with written
evidence of the library's effective stewardship (Henry et al., 2008). Henry et
al. (2008) state that practical collection assessment gives quantitative and
qualitative data for evaluating a library's holdings. Collection assessment can
be used to determine how well the emerging collection adheres to established
guidelines. Collection assessment can also help with strategic planning in the
library by identifying strengths and limitations in the collection, especially
in emerging areas of interest. It can also assist in identifying areas that may
require greater funding to sustain the level of support previously provided to
an area (Johnson, 2016). Different libraries use various collection assessment
methodologies. Although there is no single perfect way to evaluate collections,
general capacity, utilization, users, subject-specific standards, academic
publication, and environmental considerations are now the most commonly
utilized or weighted indicators (Murphy, 2013). Rama et al. (2022) used the Philippine
National Bibliographies (PNB) as an evaluation instrument to examine their
library's print collection on Philippine languages. Henry et al. (2008)
collected data on total holdings, interlibrary loan statistics, publication
dates, comparisons of e-book and print book collections, comparisons of print
collections using books for college libraries and Choice Outstanding Titles,
and comparisons of print collections to selected peer institutions for their
collection analysis.
As the 21st century arrived, many libraries began to assume that
acquisitions should be driven by what users needed, and the Patron-Driven
Acquisition Approach (PDAA) grew more widespread (Nixon et al., 2010). Checking
the citations in publications against the library's holdings also allows the
librarian to assess how well the collection supports the user's research needs
(Edwards, 1999). Citation analysis is a bibliometric tool used to uncover
patterns in scholars' publication habits, such as how frequently an author or
publication is mentioned, or to find scholarly communication networks (White,
2019). Citation analysis, on the other hand, has limitations, one of which is
that a reference list may not include all of the resources studied. The author
may have mentioned the materials for reasons other than their relevance to the
research (White, 2019). Collection assessment may also be conducted through a
mixed-methods approach. Lim Li Min and Casselden (2021) conducted a study on
the collection of Singapore Management University libraries. They utilized the
patron-driven acquisitions process, publications’ references from the Scopus
database, a library service quality survey, and interviews with selected
undergraduate and postgraduate students. Additionally, Yang et al. (2022)
developed a computing tool to measure the suitability of the overall collection
and user intention, while Duncan and O'Gara (2015) used a collection assessment
model to evaluate subject collections in their libraries. Hence, methodologies
can adopt a qualitative approach by focusing on the user's subjective
perspective, a quantitative approach by focusing on quantities and numerical
data, or a combination of both (Johnson, 2009).
Aims
The collection assessment project of the University Library is
significant in determining whether the quantity of the collection meets the
regulatory standard of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) for academic
libraries. The initial
phase of the study focuses solely on the quantity of the collection that is
pertinent to undergraduate programs. It
seeks to answer the following questions:
- What is the level of library collection compliance in terms of
major subject courses?
- Which undergraduate curricular programs are compliant or have a
high percentage of compliance?
- What undergraduate curricular programs should be prioritized to
supplement the relevant titles?
Methods and Findings
This study devised an assessment based on an action research model of
iterative reflection and improvement. This will follow Sue Davidoff and Owen
van den Berg’s (1990) suggested four steps in conducting the study: plan, act,
observe, and reflect. Additionally, we
used the CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 22, Series of 2021, Section 4 (b. 4-5)
to assess the compliance of the collection based on its quantity. Percentage
was employed to present the data.
Plan
As suggested by Davidoff and
Van den Berg (1990), steps in planning include identifying the problem area,
narrowing it down so that it is manageable, investigating the problem, thinking
about what might be causing the problem, thinking about a solution and how to
implement it, and thinking about what evidence you will collect to decide
whether your action is successful or not. To identify the problem area, the
librarians held a meeting on February 10, 2021, to plan the collection
assessment that will serve as the basis for the buying plan. Accreditors have
recommended that the acquisition of materials for the programs under review be
continued because there are subject courses that do not meet the criteria
established by the Commission on Higher Education. The data was gathered using
the previous subject course bibliography prepared by the librarian cataloger
for each curriculum program used for Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges
and Universities in the Philippines (AACCUP) accreditation and International
Standard Organization (ISO) audit. The subject course bibliography is the list
of available references for every subject course prescribed for a particular
curricular program. This was initially created as one of the requirements of
the CHED for proposing a new curriculum to be offered. As time passes, when the
program is viable and subjected to accreditation, this list be used again to
check if the number of references meets the CHED criteria. Then the references
included for each subject course will be verified against the library
management system to ensure their accuracy and identify any available
references that were omitted. We
compiled the data into a spreadsheet and added a column to determine whether
the number of references met the CHED's criteria. The collection's assessment
is limited to the bibliography as of April 2022.
Table 1
Summary of Updated Subject Courses Per College for Undergraduate
Programs
|
Colleges |
Total No. of
Curricular Programs |
Total No. of Major
Subject Courses |
Standard No. of Titles (total number of major courses multiplied by five
(5) titles copyrighted in the last five years is the
standard requirement of CHED) |
Total No. of Major
Subject Courses with 0 titles copyrighted in the last 5 years |
Percentage (%) of
Compliance by Major Subject Courses to CHED Requirements |
|
|
Compliant |
Non-Compliant |
|||||
|
College of Agriculture |
2 |
46 |
46
(5) =230 |
5 |
17 (36.9%) |
29 (63.1%) |
|
College of Arts and
Social Sciences |
5 |
101 |
101
(5) = 505 |
39 |
30 (29.7%) |
71 (70.3%) |
|
College of Business
Administration & Accountancy |
4 |
160 |
160
(5) = 800 |
15 |
71 (44.4%) |
89 (55.6%) |
|
College of Education |
6 |
278 |
278
(5) = 1,390 |
64 |
111
(39.9%) |
167 (60.1%) |
|
College of Engineering |
4 |
121 |
121
(5) = 605 |
35 |
35 (28.9%) |
86 (71.1%) |
|
College of Fisheries |
1 |
32 |
32
(5) = 160 |
6 |
11 (34.4%) |
21 (65.6%) |
|
College of Home Science
and Industry |
4 |
123 |
123
(5) = 615 |
17 |
50 (40.7%) |
73 (59.3%) |
|
College of Science |
5 |
143 |
143
(5) = 715 |
2 |
106
(74.1%) |
37 (25.9%) |
|
College of Veterinary
Science and Medicine |
1 |
51 |
51
(5) = 255 |
3 |
20 (39.3%) |
31 (60.7%) |
|
TOTAL |
32 |
1,055 |
5,275 |
186 (17.63%) |
451 (42.7%) |
604 (57.3%) |
Table 2
Summary of Undergraduate
Curricular Programs, Available Titles Copyrighted in the Last Five Years and
the Percentage of Compliance and Non-Compliance to CHED Standard Requirements
|
Curricular Programs |
Standard No. of Titles (total number of major
courses multiplied by five (5) *5 titles copyrighted in the last five years is
the standard requirement of CHED for each major subject courses |
Available titles copyrighted in the last 5 years |
Percentage of Compliance to CHED requirements |
Percentage of Non-Compliance to CHED requirements |
|
Bachelor of Science in Mathematics |
20
(5) = 100 |
125 |
18
(90.0%) |
2
(10.0%) |
|
Bachelor of Science In Environmental Science |
45
(5) = 225 |
343 |
38
(84.4%) |
7
(15.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Information Technology |
19
(5) = 95 |
120 |
16
(84.2%) |
3
(15.8%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Technology & Livelihood
Education (2 majors) |
64
(5) = 320 |
362 |
52
(81.25%) |
12
(18.75%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Psychology |
14
(5) = 70 |
101 |
11
(78.6%) |
3 (21.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Biology |
38
(5) = 190 |
206 |
29
(76.3%) |
9
(23.7%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Business Administration |
40
(5) = 200 |
233 |
26
(65.0%) |
14
(35.0%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Statistics |
22
(5) = 110 |
110 |
14
(63.6%) |
8
(36.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Agriculture |
23
(5) = 115 |
110 |
13
(56.5%) |
10
(43.5%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Accountancy |
51
(5) = 255 |
180 |
25
(49.1%) |
26
(50.8%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management |
35
(5) = 175 |
168 |
17
(48.6%) |
18
(51.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Development Communication |
18
(5) = 90 |
80 |
8
(44.4%) |
10
(55.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Food Technology |
37
(5) = 185 |
154 |
15
(40.5%) |
22
(59.5%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Fashion & Textile Technology
(2 majors) |
37
(5) = 185 |
143 |
14
(37.8%) |
23
(62.2%) |
|
*Doctor of Veterinary Medicine |
51
(5) = 255 |
202 |
20
(39.2%) |
31
(60.8%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Chemistry |
18
(5) = 90 |
67 |
7
(38.9%) |
11
(61.1%) |
|
Bachelor of Elementary Education |
29
(5) = 145 |
130 |
10
(34.5%) |
19
(65.5%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Fisheries |
32
(5) = 160 |
132 |
11
(34.4%) |
21
(65.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Arts in Social Science |
26
(5) = 130 |
79 |
8
(30.8) |
18
(69.2%) |
|
Bachelor in Physical Education |
23
(5) = 115 |
40 |
7
(30.4%) |
16
(69.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Management Accounting |
48
(5) = 240 |
160 |
14
(29.2%) |
34
(70.8%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Tourism Management |
14
(5) = 70 |
36 |
4
(28.6%) |
10
(71.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Entrepreneurship |
21
(5)=105 |
74 |
6
(28.6%) |
15
(71.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Secondary Education (5 majors) |
99
(5) = 495 |
203 |
27
(27.3%) |
72 (72.7%) |
|
Bachelor of Early Childhood Education |
31
(5) = 155 |
74 |
8
(25.8%) |
23
(74.2%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering |
36
(5) = 180 |
116 |
9
(25.0%) |
27
(75.0%) |
|
Bachelor of Culture and Arts Education |
32
(5) = 160 |
90 |
7
(21.9%) |
25
(78.1%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Agribusiness |
23
(5) = 115 |
52 |
4
(17.4%) |
19
(82.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Meteorology |
36
(5) = 180 |
68 |
6
(16.7%) |
30
(83.3%) |
|
Bachelor of Arts in Literature |
22
(5) = 110 |
40 |
3
(13.6%) |
19
(86.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Agricultural & Biosystems
Engineering |
30
(5) = 150 |
80 |
4
(13.3%) |
26
(86.7%) |
|
Bachelor of Arts in Filipino |
21
(5) = 105 |
12 |
0
(0.0%) |
21
(100.0%) |
*This program is among the undergraduate offerings at the institution;
however, it has a duration of six years, as compared to the standard four-year
duration of other programs. Although it carries the title of Doctor of
Veterinary Medicine, under the Philippine educational system, it is considered
an undergraduate curriculum.
Table 3
Summary of Number of Titles Per-curricular Programs that Must Be
Prioritized in the Acquisition of New Titles Copyrighted in the Last Five Years
to Fill in the Gaps
|
Curricular
Program |
Standard
No. of Titles (total number of major courses multiplied by five
(5) *5 titles copyrighted in the last five years is
the standard requirement of CHED for each major subject courses) |
Total
No. of Major Subject Courses with 0 titles copyrighted in the last 5 years |
No.
of Major Subject Courses Non-Compliant to CHED Requirements |
|
Bachelor of Arts in Filipino |
21
(5) = 105 |
21 |
21
(100%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Agricultural & Biosystems
Engineering |
30
(5) = 150 |
8 |
26
(86.7%) |
|
Bachelor of Arts in Literature |
22
(5) = 110 |
12 |
19
(86.4% |
|
Bachelor of Science in Meteorology |
36
(5) = 180 |
17 |
30
(83.3%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Agribusiness |
23
(5) = 115 |
4 |
19
(82.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Culture and Arts Education |
32
(5) = 160 |
5 |
25
(78.1%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering |
36
(5) = 180 |
9 |
27
(75.0%) |
|
Bachelor of Early Childhood Education |
31
(5) = 155 |
9 |
23
(74.19%) |
|
BSE (5 majors) |
99
(5) = 495 |
31 |
72
(72.7%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Entrepreneurship |
21
(5)=105 |
2 |
15
(71.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Tourism Management |
14
(5) = 70 |
6 |
10
(71.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Management Accounting |
48
(5) = 240 |
13 |
34
(70.8%) |
|
Bachelor in Physical Education |
23
(5) = 115 |
16 |
16
(69.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Arts in Social Science |
26
(5) = 130 |
5 |
18
(69.2%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Fisheries |
32
(5) = 160 |
6 |
21
(65.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Elementary Education |
29
(5) = 145 |
3 |
19 (65.5%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Fashion & Textile Technology
(2 majors) |
37
(5) = 185 |
2 |
23
(62.2%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Chemistry |
18
(5) = 90 |
0 |
11
(61.1%) |
|
*Doctor of Veterinary Medicine |
51
(5) = 255 |
3 |
31
(60.7%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Food Technology |
37
(5) = 185 |
6 |
22
(59.5%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Development Communication |
18
(5) = 90 |
0 |
10
(55.6%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Accountancy |
51
(5) = 255 |
0 |
27
(52.9%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management |
35
(5) = 175 |
3 |
18
(51.4%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Agriculture |
23
(5) = 115 |
1 |
10
(43.5%) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Statistics |
22
(5) = 110 |
0 |
8
(36.4) |
|
Bachelor of Science in Business Administration |
40
(5) = 200 |
0 |
14
(35%) |
Table 1 shows the names of
the 9 university colleges, the 32 curricular programs offered by the
university, the 1,055 major subject courses, the 5,275 major courses multiplied
by 5 (5 titles for the standard requirement by CHED) for each major subject
course, 186 or 17.63% major subject courses with 0 titles copyrighted in the
last 5 years, 451 or 42.7% major subject courses that are compliant with the
CHED requirement, and 604 or 57.3% major subject courses that are non-complaint
to the CHED requirements. Findings also indicate that of the 9 colleges, the
College of Education has the most major subject courses (278), implying the
greatest curricular offers, while the College of Fisheries has the fewest major
subject courses (32), indicating the fewest curricular programs. In terms of
CHED requirements, the College of Science has the highest percentage of
compliance (74.1%), followed by the College of Business Administration and
Accounting (44.4%), and the College of Home Science and Industry (40.7%).
However, in terms of non-compliance, the study reveals that the College of
Engineering has the largest percentage of non-compliance (71.1%), followed by
the College of Arts and Social Sciences (70.3%), and the College of Fisheries
(65.6%).
Table 2 presents the names of the 32 undergraduate curricular programs
offered by the university, along with the total number of copyrighted book
titles per program in the last 5 years, the total number of available
copyrighted titles in the same period, and the percentage of compliance and
non-compliance with CHED standard requirements. The data indicate that none of
the 32 undergraduate curricular programs achieved 100% compliance. Only 6
programs achieved a compliance rate above 70%, while the remaining 26 programs
had a compliance rate below 65%.
Table 3 shows the 26 curricular programs with title gaps of 30% or
higher. Some of these curricular programs are newly offered, while others have
had their curriculum revised. New or specialized academic programs face
challenges in achieving the standards imposed by governing authorities such as
the CHED or guaranteed access to required book titles. There may not be many
publications or textbooks available on the market for specialized subject
courses in some cases. To acquire access to a wider range of materials,
including foreign publications, we use digital resources such as e-books,
online journals, and databases. We also constantly evaluate resource
availability and the changing nature of the discipline to update course
materials and requirements when new publications become available.
The librarians create a template for evaluating library items based on
the objectives of the study, and the cataloguer places the number of available
references in each program based on the library system's created report. To
achieve the goal of this research, the purchase of books for courses with no or
few references will be prioritized. Searching for and downloading free
instructional resources, as well as joining certain consortiums, will be
undertaken. Collaboration with the Library Committee and faculty was also
sought, so suitable course references were included in the acquisition. In
addition, attendance at the Manila International Book Fair was carried out.
Act
We begin to implement our solution. The cataloguer has started
downloading e-books from open educational resources. The librarians look for
open educational resources, which are freely available materials that can be
used for teaching and learning. They were able to download some e-books;
however, not all available subjects are relevant to the courses offered by the
university. The university librarian and the cataloguer sent the
list of books to the Library Committee. The Library Committee in our institution
consists of the Vice President and faculty representatives from colleges. One
of its mandates is to advise the university librarian on matters pertaining to
collection development and use. The university librarian instructed them via
email to select books on subject courses that have limited references. They
selected e-books relevant to their program within the allotted budget. With the
assistance of the Library Committee, we continuously acquired books from
different sellers.
Last September, the cataloguer and one member of the library staff
attended the Manila International Book Fair (MIBF). They were able to select
334 titles that were already paid for, processed, and included in the
collection. We were also able to join the Wiley Online Consortium, specifically
the Consortium of Engineering Libraries of the Philippines (CELPh), where we
were able to access hundreds of e-books. The newly acquired books were added to
the bibliography of subject courses per curricular program to easily identify
which was the most augmented and already compliant with the standard.
Observe
Several insights emerged from the analysis of the solution. First and
foremost, the Library Committee is eager to collaborate in the selection of
book titles related to their curriculum. However, selection is limited because
the quantity of titles to be selected was determined by the budget. The
cataloguer and library personnel who visited the Manila International Book Fair
diligently examined all available titles against the list they had of books
that needed to be purchased. However, titles for other degrees, such as
Bachelor of Science in Fashion and Textile Technology, Bachelor of Hospitality
Management, and others, are limited.
Downloading e-books from open source databases helps to augment certain
titles that we require while also saving the library money. While many open
access databases offer a large number of e-books, the selection was limited to
typical subject courses as compared to what is available through subscription
platforms. Another reason why some programs have fewer references is because
available publications are costly and library budgets are insufficient. We
prioritized programs lined up for accreditation, as there are also programs
that have not yet undergone accreditation. The absence of a collection
development plan made it difficult to monitor the balance of the distribution
of materials across the subject areas, which seems to contribute to the
strengths and weaknesses of collection in some curricular programs. It is also
desirable to join the Online Books National Consortium and Central Luzon Digital
Library Consortium. Sharing resources is one of the key advantages of joining a
library consortium. We were able to save money by sharing a number of
electronic books. Member libraries can get resources and services at lower
prices than they might be able to afford individually, by pooling resources and
negotiating collective discounts. While these acts were completed, the
processes of gathering, building, and acquisition are ongoing. Students' needs
change, curricular updates occur, and books must remain relevant.
Reflect
After analyzing the assessment data, librarians discovered some
interesting facts. While other subject courses are compliant, there are some
that have no references. This was an alarming conclusion for librarians, as
they need to provide materials for students while subject courses with suitable
references are available. Additional attention is required to focus on subject
courses with zero to minimal information sources. This suggests that there are
programs that fall significantly short of the number of references required by
the CHED. Librarians should prioritize acquiring titles related to the programs
mentioned. There are also issues with the availability of titles. Although
librarians explored how to supplement and obtain scholarly sources for these programs,
their efforts are insufficient to satisfy the CHED requirements. Additional
funding from the General Appropriations Act Fund as well as solicitation from
other funding bodies may be employed. The librarians will continue to conduct
assessments, including those for graduate programs, until all curricular
programs have well-balanced references. Acquisition will include not only
physical materials but also subscriptions to online resources. This assessment
was based solely on the quantity of the collection. By constructing a long-term
plan for gradually building up the collection over time, for instance, we
created a long-term collection strategy that is easy to remember and adhere to
by simply using the abbreviation for our university, CLSU. Presented below is a
concise guide:
Continue the process of evaluating and analyzing the
library's holdings by aligning them with the institution's aims and objectives,
as well as current trends and needs. Additionally, conducts surveys and
interviews with library users.
Look for additional partner libraries and institutions
to engage in resource sharing and collaborative endeavors, which will
strengthen the entire collection.
Select and acquire a wide range of resources in both
physical and digital forms, which may include freely accessible materials, to
meet the requirements of the academic community and foster inclusiveness.
Update library collection development policy and buying
plan based on the assessment results and the needs of clientele, considering
the following: upgrade budget allocation towards high-impact resources as we
are also waiting for the approval of the proposed library fee increase; upgrade
library technology; build staff competencies through continuous training on
collection analysis; and utilize feedback mechanisms to ensure continuous
relevance and improvement.
Discussion
The Library Collection Assessment Program is a method that libraries use
to assess the effectiveness and relevance of their collections. In this study,
the number of available and relevant materials within the library's collection
was analyzed by focusing on the main subject courses of each curricular
program. The primary purpose of this program is to ensure that the collection
meets the academic library criteria established by the CHED. According to the
findings, more than half of major subject courses (57.3%) in various curricular
programs are non-compliant with CHED regulations, including 17.63% of major
subject courses with 0 titles copyrighted in the last 5 years. This could pose
difficulties for the institution and have a number of consequences for the
quality of education. Identifying subject courses with no or few references is
a key component of collection assessment. This exercise assists the library in
determining where gaps in the collection exist and where resources may need to
be added or improved.
The action research method also provided librarians with useful
information for strategically improving their collections and providing greater
support for educational and research initiatives. This situation may have
consequences for students, staff, and researchers who rely on library materials
for academic and research purposes. When a library collection assessment
reveals that certain curricular programs meet the CHED reference standards
while others do not, it indicates a disparity and imbalance in the availability
of resources across different programs. This is because some of the curricular
programs are new or have had their curriculum altered. This was also the first
time that library management began conducting a detailed analysis of the
current collection against the CHED library standards, identifying areas where
the collection falls short in terms of quantity and, possibly, the quality of
references for the next project. It enables librarians to choose which
materials should be obtained to optimize the budget and build an effective
collection (Finch & Flenner, 2017). Furthermore, the data indicate that
budgetary constraints and a paucity of published books are hampering the
acquisition of library materials for a specific topic course. This is
consistent with the findings of Kumar and Kumar (2019), showing that a lack of
funding for obtaining new items was cited as the top barrier by most
librarians. This is a common phenomenon that can cause problems for educational
institutions, especially when trying to provide comprehensive resources for
specialized courses. Despite this considerable limitation, we continue to
identify and select the course's most relevant books. Updating the collection
development plan and acquisition strategies must be recalibrated to develop
more meaningful and purposeful library collections (Rama et al., 2022). We
curate open educational resources, which are materials that are freely
available to the public and can be used for teaching and learning. We work with
other institutions to share resources because libraries are willing to give
access to their collections and participate on collaborative acquisitions.
Coordination with public libraries, university libraries, and other scientific
research institutions will help in addressing the information needs of the
whole society (Ping, 2022). Seeking
external funds, grants, or contributions from alumni, industry partners, and
other stakeholders who may be interested in contributing to the acquisition of
objects in the subject area is also considered. This study's empirical findings
can be utilized to argue for improved budget allocation for library resources
and the importance of having appropriate resources for effective teaching and
learning. Addressing financial and resource constraints is a gradual process.
We can improve the availability of library materials for the subject course by
combining diverse tactics and working with key partners. If immediate purchase of materials is difficult,
another alternative is to examine launching or upgrading interlibrary loan
services. This allows library users to request materials from other libraries,
bridging the gap until local resources can be provided. To ensure that the
collection remains aligned with shifting curriculum requirements and research
trends, it is necessary to design a systematic strategy for reviewing and
updating it on a regular basis. Similarly, we must construct a long-term
collection development strategy that outlines suggestions for filling
collection gaps across several curricular areas.
Limitations and Further
Research
We simply evaluated the quantity of our collection in accordance with
the CHED requirements. While meeting minimum educational resource standards is
important, assessing the quality of our collection and implementing other
acquisition methods, such as patron-driven acquisition, user satisfaction
surveys, circulation rates, and reference inquiries, may be considered for the
next stage of the study, when we intend to assess the quality of the collection
based on its utilization. For this next phase, we will also assess the
adherence of graduate programs' collections to CHED standards, based on
quantity. We will also assess the relevance and currency of materials,
considering both print and electronic resources. Furthermore, we will consider
client requests and enhance our collection mapping and visualization to
illustrate the distribution of materials across various subject areas. Lastly,
we will conduct a cost-per-use analysis to identify resources with high costs
and low usage, which may be reconsidered or cancelled. Even with limited
resources, a deliberate strategy can eventually lead to a more comprehensive
collection. These methods have the potential to greatly improve the overall
effectiveness, balance, and relevance of our library's holdings.
Conclusion
The library collection assessment technique is crucial
for identifying gaps in the collection and determining areas where resources
may require enhancement or addition. This study aims to enhance our collection
development program by assessing whether the quantity of materials in each
subject course of the undergraduate program meets the regulatory criteria set
by the CHED for academic libraries. The
findings indicate that more than half of the major subject courses do not meet
the requirements set by CHED. Addressing the significant gap in the titles of
more than half of the curricular programs is a priority to obtain the necessary
materials that will benefit our clients and the institution while also ensuring
CHED compliance.
Acknowledgement
Thanks to Julius Weldon L. Ragasa, MLIS
Management Information System Office for formatting and feedback.
Author Contributions
Camia A. Lasig: Writing – review & editing (lead) Roselyn
M. Madia: Conceptualization (lead), Writing – original draft (lead),
Formal analysis (lead), Writing – review & editing (equal) Nuelah
SJ Reyes: Writing – review & editing (equal) Vanessa B.
Morales: Methodology (lead), Writing – review & editing
(equal) Richie N. Garabiles: Conceptualization (supporting),
Writing – original draft (supporting)
References
Commission on Higher Education. (2021). Minimum
requirements for libraries of higher education institutions common to all
programs. https://ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/CMO-No.-22-s.-2021.pdf
Davidoff, S. & Van den Berg, O. (1990). Changing your teaching: The challenge of the classroom. Centaur Publishing.
Duncan, C.J. & O'Gara, G.M. (2015).
Building holistic and agile collection development and assessment. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 16(1), 62-85.
https://doi.org/10.1108/PMM-12-2014-0041
Edwards, S. (1999). Citation analysis as a collection
development tool: A bibliometric study of polymer science theses and
dissertations. Serials Review, 25(1), 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.1999.10764479
Finch, J. & Flenner, A. (2017). Using data
visualization to examine an academic library collection. College &
Research Libraries, 77(6), 765. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.77.6.765
Henry, E., Longstaff, R., & Van Kampen, D. (2008).
Collection analysis outcomes in an academic library. Collection Building, 27(3),
113–117. https://doi.org/10.1108/01604950810886022
Johnson, P. (2009). Fundamentals of collection development and management (2nd
ed.). American Library Associations.
Johnson, Q. (2016). Moving from analysis to assessment:
Strategic assessment of library collections. Journal of Library Administration, 56(4), 488498. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2016.1157425
Kumar, S.G.K. & Kumar, D.P. (2019). Collection
development policies in B Ed college libraries affiliated to Kuvempu University
– A study. International Journal of
Library and Information Studies, 9(4).
https://www.ijlis.org/articles/collection-development-policies-in-b-ed-college-libraries-affiliated-to-kuvempu-university--a-study.pdf
Lim Li Min, S. & Casselden, B. (2021). A case study of Singapore management libraries: Adopting
a mixed methods approach towards collection evaluation. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(3), 102330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102330
Murphy, E. (2013). Assessing university library
print book collections and deselection: A case study at The National University
of Ireland Maynoot. New Review of
Academic Librarianship, 19(3),
256-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2013.808252
Nixon, J. M., Freeman, R. S., & Ward, S. M.
(2010). Patron-driven acquisitions: An introduction and literature review. Collection Management, 35(3-4), 119-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/01462679.2010.486957
Ping, A. (2022). An empirical study of collection
assessment based on the quality–utility–value theory. Library Management, 43(6/7),
415-426. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-01-2022-0004
Reitz, J. M. (2013). Online Dictionary of Library and
Information Science. http://lu.com/odlis/
White, P. B. (2019). Using data mining for citation
analysis. College & Research
Libraries, 80(1), 76-93. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.80.1.76
Yang, L. Wei, F. & Chen, E. (2022, January).
Developing an assessment index for collection–user suitability: Application of
information entropy in library science. Journal
of Academic Librarianship, 48(1),
102477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102477