From 2010 the Library has a stated preference for e-books over print where these are available. Print copies will still be purchased where they offer a superior user experience e.g. art books.
When titles are recommended Acquisitions staff are now checking for the availability of an e-version and are ordering these where appropriate.
We have been ordering from EBL for a week or so now and our Ebrary account is now set up so we can commence ordering from them. To date we have ordered about 200 titles. These had stockpiled while we have been waiting for our accounts to be set up. (We have also been transitioning to our preferred monograph supplier for the next three years, YBP).
We are finding that the e-books are generally supplied within 24-48 hours compared with the average fill time of 42 days for print. Add to this the fact that e-books don’t need physical processing and that means they can be made available very quickly.
Once supplied the e-books are available 24/7 (barring technical glitches) and in most instances will be available to multiple users simultaneously.
Accessing e-books will eliminate the problems that students have finding books on the shelves and the ability for multiple users to access high demand titles should eliminate much of the negative feedback about insufficient copies of high demand materials.
E-books offer keyword searching so allow users to hone in on the relevant sections of the book. Automatic citation is available for cut and pasted material. E-book vendors are increasingly setting up to allow access from mobile devices so access can be literally anytime, anywhere.
Ebooks are not susceptible to loss or damage and represent a reduction in storage costs for the Library.
Once we have received e-books on the various platforms we have identified, a project group will be set up to look at the technical and access issues to inform our decisions about which platforms should have preference.
A significant disadvantage of e-books is that it is not realistic, or permissible to print the entire book as is done with serial articles. Publishers have built-in printing and copying & pasting restrictions. As with anything new, it is going to take time for some of our users to adjust.
Cynthia
When someone places a request for purchase are they told that an electronic copy will be ordered unless they have a specific reason for print?
In my view, e-books should be classified so that they can be browsed online in the Call no. (LC) index. It would be useful for someone browsing, say P 90 for general works on communication & mass media, to see e-books as well as physical books. That would help to make them less ‘invisible’ and better integrate them with the physical books.
Giving e-books call nos. would also mean they would appear in the new titles list by subject, whereas at present they appear at the end of the online NTL so are to some extent invisible (of course they don’t appear on the physical displays either).
Classifying e-books would, furthermore, make it easier to get a better idea of the no. of books at particular classifications, as was done using Conspectus.
No. We giving preference to the e-book, where it is available, unless we are advised otherwise.
It has been decided that we will classify e-books. We were keen to get them onto the new titles list but allowing searching by classification and being picked up by conspectus are also quite compelling reasons to classify.
Sorry, I misled you slightly about the classification. We are doing sufficient to get them onto the NTL but we are not doing sufficient to have them appear in a classification search. In fact having them appear in a classification search is likely to be problematic as peolple might go charging off to the shelves to look for them. Cynthia.
I agree with Max in that it makes it difficult to see what we have in the collection between different classifications. This is something we need to know when doing deselection but also very useful when new courses begin and the Library has to give input. I would have thought whether or not the classification is actually displayed was something that could be turned on/off. Even if it was displayed I would have thought the specified physical location could simply say something like "eBook" rather than "Central Library". Is this issue closed or can it be investigated further?
It sounds like the project group that is to be "set up to look at the technical and access issues" needs to have as part of its brief the need to consider some of these things. Or it might be that another project is needed to consider the collection management implications. The conspectus tool certainly needs revisiting in the light of the move to electronic or other solutions investigated. Tim
With regards to the collection side of it I generally am telling people we have X number of items between the classifications X-Y with an mean publication year of 9999. I don’t usually use the online tool but rather extract a list myself and figure it out. This is because the current tool can’t really handle after the decimal point. Most of the time that is not a problem but sometimes it is. Anything that does not have a publication date can confuse matters a bit too…