Search results

Conspectus can mean, in some instances, either a survey, overview, or outline of the subjects in a collection. However, conspectus is also a method—the method of using the outline as the structure for systematic assessment of a library collection. Libraries use both the outline and the method to describe their collections and collection goals, using common definitions.

Why create another collection assessment tool? One reason is the highly personal nature of the assessment process. Each local library describes and evaluates its own collection in relation to the library's goals for meeting the needs of its local clients. In our times of focusing on local needs, each library wants to customize the assessment process to meet local challenges as closely as possible. These local needs are greatly felt in the data collection step of the assessment process. An intermediate tool is helpful for collecting and organizing appropriate categories of data to prepare information for entry onto the WLN Conspectus worksheets and database, or into other assessment methods if desired.

The one component of collection development most difficult for librarians is the evaluation of the collection. Various methods can be employed to evaluate the collection including statistical analysis, list checking, user opinions, direct observation, and applying standards. All of these methods have strengths and weaknesses, and numerous opinions exist on the value of each method. However, almost all experts agree that libraries need to invest a great deal of time, staff, and budget for any evaluation to be considered valuable. The process becomes even more complex when evaluating interdisciplinary areas such as women's studies. Collection development issues for women's studies has been well covered in the literature, but very little exists on the evaluation of women's studies collections. This article will discuss one method for collection evaluation, the Research Libraries Group (RLG) Conspectus, and outline the process of using the Conspectus to evaluate the women's studies collection at the Pennsylvania State University Libraries. Given the importance of information needs for diversity materials and the number of librarians who select women's studies materials among their many other responsibilities, this information will be valuable for all librarians engaged in interdisciplinary collection development in both public and academic libraries.

The WLN Conspectus is examined in three articles that, together, give an explanation of the conspectus and an examination of how it has been used in two different venues.

Library planning and collection building in the research libraries of the United States have long had to deal with two contradictory forces, autonomy and interdependence. The independence and autonomy of those libraries in providing for local self‐sufficiency in information needs have been tested by a gradual but growing realization that local self‐sufficiency is not possible for the programs of comprehensive university libraries or other large libraries. They continue to operate independently, making their own decisions for local needs, while routinely rejecting the “myth of the self‐sufficient library” and paying lip‐service to cooperation and resource sharing.

We, in Illinois, have devoted much time and energy in the last several years to promoting the theories and methods of collection analysis, collection management, and cooperative collection management among our libraries. The conspectus approach to collection management is one we have devoted a great deal of time and effort to teaching and promoting—often using the carrots of grant funding, followed by the sticks of mandated collection analysis.

Amendments to Conspectus published in Spring 1967 For reasons of space it is not possible to publish in full a revised Conspectus in each issue of this Journal. The following list represents amendments to the first full Conspectus, again in the order of Undergraduate Degree Courses, Postgraduate Diploma and Degree Courses and Post‐experience Courses. A distinction is made between deletions, revised entries, and new entries; where revisions have been made, a full entry is published.

Since its inception in 1982, the tasks of the Alaska Collection Development project have changed as technology and our understanding of the process evolved and grew, but the goal has never varied. We strive to become more effective stewards of our limited library and information resources.

The RLG (Research Libraries Group) conspectus was developed in 1980 by the Collection Management and Development Committee of the Research Libraries Group. The committee was comprised of one representative from each full and associate RLG member institution. David H. Stam served as Chairman of the committee and Paul Mosher served as Vice‐Chairman. Anticipating the challenges of acquisitions budgeting in a period of inflationary pricing for library materials, the committee worked to identify a methodology in which RLG member libraries could better coordinate the growth and management of their collections. The result was the development of the RLG conspectus.

The Krueger Method, one of the first conspectus geared to use by smaller, non‐automated libraries, is examined in the following three articles. Together, they show both the beginnings of the conspectus and the use to which it is being put nearly fifteen years later.