An assessment of the value of differing evaluation methods in the production of a practical cooperative collection plan for theological libraries

Abstract

For economic and other reasons, the development of self-sufficient library collections, capable of meeting all the teaching and research needs of tertiary educational institutions, is widely perceived as an unattainable goal. Therefore the idea of cooperative collection development, in which a group of libraries coordinate their collecting in such a way as to make the greatest possible pool of resources available to their users, is receiving attention internationally. One of the factors on which the success of cooperative collecting depends is a reliable assessment of the already existing subject strengths and weaknesses of the libraries concerned. In Dunedin, New Zealand, three libraries, each connected to a teaching institution, provide resources for teaching and research in the closely associated fields of Religion and Theology. The libraries have an overlapping borrower population, and reciprocal borrowing privileges exist. Before a cooperative collection programme could be embarked upon, subject evaluations were necessary. Because Conspectus, the collection evaluation method currently being widely employed in New Zealand, was for various reasons impracticable, alternative methods of evaluation needed to be identified and used. A number of methods were considered, and three methods were chosen, adapted to local conditions, tested, and evaluated for reliability and cost-effectiveness. The three methods thus employed involved the checking of standard lists, questionnaires of library users, and citation analysis. It was found that all three methods were cost-effective and independently reliable, but that the citation method was slightly preferable to the other two.