jan05book.indb Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty Karla L. Hahn and Kari Schmidt A library’s Web site can provide a powerful forum for communicating with users about changes occurring in local collecting practices and their relationship to larger issues of scholarly communication. This survey of SPARC member Web sites examines how information on collection changes and scholarly communication issues is presented. Although a few institutions use their Web sites to inform users and connect the local and the global, most present little or no informationon these topics.When collections information is present, it usually appears on either dedicated collections pages or faculty services pages. Typically, collections pages focus on largely static information describing services and policies. Infor- mation on changes in collection building is uncommon. Scholarly com- munication information is even scarcer and is rarely linked to information on local collection development or management. s the pace of change in the scholarly publishing sys- tems accelerates, academic and research libraries are transforming their collections. As librar- ies cancel serials, move formerly print subscriptions to electronic-only format, construct institutional repositories, and support open-access initiatives, the need to communicate with users about these changes is growing. Many of the changes in the journal publishing marketplace have been documented in the regular periodical pricing surveys published in Library Journal. In recent years, these articles have increasingly noted the rapid development of electronic publishing, the move to electronic-only subscribing be- havior, and the increasing volatility in the publishing marketplace with deepening concerns over price pressure on library collections.1–3 These changes in the journal market- place are undoubtedly affecting library collections. As long-standing local collec- tion management practices are undergo- ing fundamental revisions, clear com- munication with library users becomes vital. Faculty members are a particularly important segment to reach because they tend to be especially dependent on access to the latest scholarly publications. Many, if not all, of these local shi s are related to a constellation of systemic changes in scholarly communication. Two major library organizations have developed initiatives to foster outreach to faculty by libraries on the issues relating to scholarly Karla L. Hahn is Collection Management Team Leader at the University of Maryland Libraries; e-mail: khahn@umd.edu. Kari Schmidt is a Electronic Resources Librarian at the University of Maryland Librar- ies; e-mail: schmidtk@umd.edu. 28 mailto:schmidtk@umd.edu mailto:khahn@umd.edu Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 29 communication. Since 1997, the SPARC initiative, sponsored by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), has developed resources, programs, and competing non- profit publishing initiatives.4 The more re- cent establishment of the Scholarly Com- munication Section of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) indicates an even broader sense of shared urgency within the library community.5 SPARC has worked in conjunction with the ARL Scholarly Communication office and the ACRL to promote a program of faculty and researcher education under the rubric “Create Change.” There is a growing body of literature examining how faculty and researchers are responding to the rapid changes in scholarly publishing and how they are using electronic publications, but rela- tively li le a ention has focused on how libraries are communicating with their users about these changes. Randall Ward et al. surveyed SPARC member libraries about their sponsorship of formal speak- ing events aimed at promoting dialog with faculty on scholarly communication issues.6 Lance Lugar and Kate Thomes surveyed ARL member Web sites and noted how many included information on the scholarly communication crisis on their home page and how such informa- tion was presented.7 As a founding member of SPARC, the University of Maryland Libraries have explored various avenues for engaging faculty in dialog about recent develop- ments in scholarly communication. A recent reevaluation of the libraries’ col- lection management pages suggested that this prominent user interface was not be- ing used to promote awareness of recent collection changes nor was it addressing the relationships between changes in collection building and changes occur- ring across the scholarly communica- tion system. It became clear that local Web site design and design practices in the academic library community could benefit more broadly from a systematic effort to identify best practices in this arena, particularly with regard to faculty communication, and to determine how frequently libraries are using their Web sites to communicate about changes in their collections and collection manage- ment practices. To answer these ques- tions, the authors undertook a survey of SPARC member Web sites to assess their use in support of faculty communication with regard to changes in library collec- tions and collection management. Surveying the SPARC Member Sites The survey of SPARC member Web sites was an unobtrusive survey of all mem- ber Web sites and applied a qualitative research design for data gathering and analysis. Similar survey techniques have been used by a small number of studies to address questions related to presenting e- journals to users, presenting information on library services, developing scholarly communication pages, and publishing collection development policies.8 These studies have focused on links on either a Web site’s home page or anywhere on the site. SPARC members were chosen as the study population because these institu- tions provide a diverse library popula- tion that has chosen to engage in actively seeking solutions to the scholarly com- munication crisis. SPARC members range from small liberal arts institutions to large research libraries. Only full-member libraries were included to maintain the focus on institutions with a substantial investment in addressing scholarly com- munication challenges. Member libraries are all located in the United States or Canada. To assess the frequency with which SPARC member sites were providing 30 College & Research Libraries information on local collections changes, all member ’s library Web sites were surveyed between October 2003 and February 2004 using the membership list posted on the SPARC Web site. The authors performed content analysis of each library’s home page with site review focused on the top two levels of each site on the assumption that links oc- curring deeper in the site were unlikely to be accessed by library users. When information was present, however, the pages linked in were considered in their entirety. Coding was developed initially on the basis of the research questions but then deepened by an iterative process commonly referred to as the constant comparative method.9 Initially, twenty SPARC members were selected randomly from the full-member list of 149 libraries and their Web sites were analyzed and coded independently by both authors. The coding of the first twenty sites was compared through an intercoder check. Initial agreement on coding was 88 percent on all codes. Both coders then resolved all coding conflicts. In the process, the code definitions were refined to enable more consistent code application. All remaining SPARC mem- ber sites were then coded by one or the other author. In total, Web sites of the full SPARC member list of 149 libraries were reviewed. Although this survey focused on fac- ulty pages and collection management pages, the researchers recognized that presentation of collections and scholarly communications issues could be handled in other ways. Even though these pages provide the most promising forum for presenting information on changes in col- lection management and scholarly com- munication, the Web sites were assessed with an eye to other options. Initially, the authors hypothesized that electronic re- source pages and digital collections pages January 2005 might offer similar opportunities for pre- senting information on these topics, but it quickly became obvious that research libraries are not using these pages for such purposes, although these pages were evaluated for every site. For the pilot survey, codes were cre- ated in four categories: the presence or absence of pages discussing collection development or management, the pres- ence or absences of pages aimed at a fac- ulty audience, the presence or absence of pages describing local digital collections or local electronic publishing efforts, and the nature of information presented on electronic resources pages. Subcodes were developed within each coding category to reflect the content presented with the page structure. As new classes of information were observed, appropriate codes were developed and defined. The codes included categories for the presence or absence of scholarly communication information. After the initial review of the pilot group of twenty, it became clear that in a small number of cases, libraries were creating freestanding groups of pages discussing scholarly communication. To capture these in the research design, an additional coding category was added. The final coding structure is presented in appendix A. Findings Pages Addressing Collection Management A significant collection management section is found on 73 (49%) of the 149 SPARC member sites analyzed. Typically, the content on these sections provides contact and procedural information for the department, collection descriptions, and collection management policies. Of the seventy-three collection management sites found, 82 percent offer collection manager contact information; 64 percent provide directions for requesting the purchase of Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 31 TABLE 1 Pages Addressing Collection Management % of All Sites % of Sites With Section Significant section on collection management or development activities 49% N/A List of collection managers 40% 82% Form to request a purchase 32% 64% Descriptions of collections 29% 59% Collection development policy 24% 49% Info on the structure of the collection development department 24% 49% Info on gifts 23% 48% Info on special collections 18% 37% Info on journal cancellations or serials review 15% 32% Info on digital collections 14% 29% Info for staff 13% 26% Info on scholarly communication issues 10% 21% Info on approval plan 10% 19% Info on materials budget 9% 19% Info on preservation 9% 18% Lists of new books 8% 16% Info on discontinuing print versions of journals 7% 14% Usage statistics 7% 14% Copyright information 5% 11% Current trials 5% 10% Info on intellectual freedom 3% 5% Serials committee 2% 4% Support for accreditations 2% 4% a book or journal; 59 percent give a gen- eral description of the collection, with 37 percent providing information on special collections and 29 percent explaining the institution’s digital collection projects; 49 percent outline the department’s structure; and 49 percent post collection manage- ment policies. Collection management pages less frequently include information on major shi s in collections. Collection manage- ment policies are rarely enriched with specific project information, such as updates on recent journal cancellations or explanations of ongoing serial review processes. Only twenty-three libraries (32%) offer journal cancellations or serial review information, and only ten (14%) discuss the discontinuation of print ver- sions of journals. Fourteen libraries (19%) include information on their materials budget. (See table 1.) Of the seventy-three sites with collec- tion management sections, only fi een (21%) contain any mention of the crisis in scholarly communication. All fi een 32 College & Research Libraries provide links to other sites for scholarly communication. In some cases, this linking is to local programs, but there seems to be a primary focus on national and internation- al scholarly communication partnerships and initiatives. Bibliographies and men- tion of an institution’s SPARC membership are found on six (8%) of the pages, whereas pathfinders and topic pages for scholarly communication are found on five (7%) of the collection management pages. Overall, collection management pages emphasize relatively static information on January 2005 the procedures of the local program rather than on broad collection management matters facing the library community. More dynamic content concerning ongo- ing changes to the collections and schol- arly communication is not a standard part of these sections. The findings suggest a failure to associate local collections work with issues affecting the library and schol- arly community at large, such as shrink- ing materials budgets, perpetual journal inflation, and the demand for electronic scholarly material. TABLE 2 Pages Addressing Faculty % of All Sites % of Sites With Section Section for faculty 43% N/A List of collection managers 34% 79% Form to request a purchase 32% 76% Info on digital collections 21% 49% Info on special collections 14% 33% Info on gifts 12% 29% Descriptions of collections 12% 29% Info on scholarly communication issues 9% 22% Lists of new books 9% 22% Copyright information 9% 22% Info on the structure of the collection development department 7% 17% Collection development policy 7% 16% Info on journal cancellations or serials review 4% 10% Info on materials budget 3% 8% Info on preservation 3% 8% Info on approval plan 3% 6% Info for staff 2% 5% Faculty newsletter 2% 5% Info on discontinuing print versions of journals 1% 3% Current trials 1% 3% Usage statistics 1% 3% Serials committee 1% 2% Support for accreditations 1% 2% Info on intellectual freedom 1% 2% Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 33 Collections Information on Pages Address- ing Faculty Of the 149 sites analyzed, sixty-three (43%) host Web pages specifically tailored to faculty that contain a significant section on collection management. Within this group, the information included focuses mainly on departmental contacts in terms of requesting and receiving information from the library as well as descriptions of the library’s collections. A list of selectors is most frequently included, with 79 percent posting these lists. A standard part of these pages is a form or procedure on how to request or recommend the purchase of a book or journal, with 76 percent including this information. Collection descriptions, whether about specific or general collec- tions, are less prominent. Descriptions of digital collections are included on 49 percent of the pages, special collections on 33 percent of the pages, and general collections on 29 percent of the pages. In addition, 29 percent contain information on the library’s giving programs. Beyond these basic categories of faculty outreach, information pertaining to local collection policies and projects is minimal. Collec- tion management policies are available on only ten of the pages targeting faculty. Half the categories the authors analyzed are included less than 10 percent of the time on faculty pages. These categories are related to specific collection management work such as journal cancellations, usage statistics, current electronic resource trials, and serials commi ee work. (See table 2.) Scholarly Communication Information on Faculty Pages Of the sixty-three libraries with faculty pages, only fourteen (22%) include con- tent regarding the crisis in scholarly com- munication. Although some of the institu- tions providing this information use the same structure for both collections and faculty pages, many institutions provide scholarly communication information in only one context. The pa erns in page structure are similar whether the informa- tion appears on a faculty-oriented page or a collection management page. The type of information presented ranges from basic to quite detailed: twelve (19%) post links to other sites for scholarly commu- nication; eight (13%) include topic pages for scholarly communication; seven (11%) have pathfinders; and six (10%) provide bibliographies. Only three (5%) mention membership in the SPARC initiative, but all include a link to SPARC’s Web site. Those institutions providing particular- ly rich scholarly communication outreach to faculty highlight how the present state of affairs in scholarly publishing affects collections at the local level in terms of serial reviews, journal cancellations, and publisher negotiations. These libraries construct a contextual framework for faculty to understand current issues in scholarly communication by providing links to national and international organi- zations, suggesting important writings on the topic, and encouraging action through participation in initiatives such as SPARC, institutional repositories, and open-access projects. Relatively few faculty pages pres- ent this connection dynamically, however. As with the collection management pages, the findings suggest faculty pages are underused as a forum for creating a link between substantive collections manage- ment work at academic libraries and the effect changes in the creation, acquisition, and dissemination of scholarly material are having on the collections, and conse- quently, the scholar. (See table 3.) Scholarly Communication Information on Other Library Web Pages In addition to studying sites for the ap- pearance of collection management and faculty pages, the authors paid close at- tention to home pages, digital initiative 34 College & Research Libraries TABLE 3 Scholarly Communication Information % of All Sites Any information on scholarly communication issues 23% Links to other sites for scholarly communication 19% Topic pages for scholarly communication 10% Scholarly communication bibliography 9% Scholarly communication pathfinder 8% Mention of SPARC membership 7% pages, and electronic resources pages, surmising these might provide forums for scholarly communication information. Al- though scholarly communication content is found on a small number of home pages and digital initiative pages, it is not posted on any library’s electronic resources por- tals. Not surprisingly, 149 (99%) maintain electronic resources pages. Libraries may be missing an important avenue for out- reach on these pages. Home Pages Only two (1%) of the 149 sites studied maintain a freestanding scholarly com- munication section on the home page. This study’s findings are compatible with Lugar and Thomes’s findings in that their investigation revealed that only four per- cent of the 123 ARL institutions surveyed posted any scholarly communication in- formation on the main library site.10 Four other sites in this survey offered scholarly communication links on the home page, but these institutions listed the informa- tion under the heading “news,” suggest- ing that the links are not meant to be persistent. For this reason, they are not January 2005 included in this study as freestanding scholarly communication sections found on a home page. Digital Initiatives Pages Of the sites analyzed, seventy-two (49%) devote Web pages to the institution’s digital initiatives, but only eleven (15%) of these pages include scholarly commu- nication information. Typically, links to other sites on scholarly communication are included, with topic pages, pathfind- ers, and bibliographies found on less than four percent of the pages. Interestingly, none mention the library’s membership in SPARC. As with effective collection management and faculty pages, digital initiative pages successfully integrating scholarly communication issues with local digital projects explain why these initiatives are taking place and how they relate to national and international projects. Many pages link to prominent electronic publishing programs and encourage faculty participation in insti- tutional repository and digital collections programs. There is pointed recognition that what is done locally is connected to what is being done on a wider scale, with information presented to demonstrate the causal links between new frontiers in electronic dissemination of scholarly material and issues affecting scholarly communication in general. The frequency with which this is done, as with the col- lection management and faculty pages, is low. Discussion Perhaps the most obvious question arising from the study’s findings is: Do libraries need to do more to use their Web sites to communicate about the changing nature of library collections and the cur- rent crisis in scholarly communication? Collection management pages are slightly more common than faculty-focused http:information.Al Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 35 pages. However, it is clear that separate collection management pages are the preferred vehicles for presenting infor- mation about changes in the collections. Faculty-focused pages rarely presented any significant information about collec- tions beyond lists of collection managers and purchase request forms. Both types of pages were used infrequently to present information on scholarly communication, suggesting that efforts to tie together in- formation about systemic scholarly com- munication issues and changes in local collection development and management are relatively uncommon. This study does not assume that li- braries need to have Web pages devoted to collection management or to faculty audiences. Yet, 74 percent of SPARC member Web sites have either or both types of pages. One could conclude that most SPARC libraries have a natural forum for presenting scholarly commu- nication information via their Web site. However, only nine percent of SPARC libraries are using faculty pages to present information on scholarly communica- tion and only 10 percent are presenting scholarly communication information on collection management pages. Only one library used its digital collections pages to present this information, none used their electronic resources pages for this purpose, and only two libraries had such information linked to their home page. Some forward-thinking institutions have, in fact, made substantial use of their Web sites as communications vehicles for informing their users about a wide range of issues, actions, and resources. Presum- ably, they are acting to assist those users in understanding and adapting to the rapidly changing collections librarians are managing. For libraries inspired to explore the possibilities for creating pages that dis- cuss collection changes and scholarly communication issues, it is helpful to identify some Web sites that could serve as models of best practices in this arena. Four institutions that are using collection management pages effectively to relate local collections issues to global scholarly communication concerns are East Caro- lina University, the University of Texas, North Carolina State University, and the University of California, Davis.11 Models of the alternative approach of using fac- ulty pages to present information on the local effects of scholarly communication are Boston College, the University of Cali- fornia-Los Angeles, Cornell University, and the University of Washington.12 Although li le previous work has been done in this area, two earlier surveys of library Web sites provide some points of comparison for this research. Lugar and Thomes surveyed ARL libraries for links to scholarly communication information from their home pages.13 They found that 52 percent of ARL members in 2001 in- cluded such links anywhere on their Web sites and only four percent mentioned scholarly communication on their home page. The more recent survey presented here found an even lower rate (1%) of home page links to similar information when news items were excluded. How- ever, this study documented that some institutions (19% of those surveyed) are linking to such information from pages gathering information specifically for faculty (9%) or from pages providing information on collection management (10%). The two studies surveyed different, though overlapping, sets of sites and re- viewed the Web sites somewhat different- ly. Lugar and Thomes seemed to assume that any access other than via the home page was largely unnoticeable for users. The current study looked at a somewhat different question, documenting that scholarly communication information, where present, is frequently offered in the http:pages.13 http:Washington.12 http:Davis.11 36 College & Research Libraries context of faculty or collections informa- tion. However, it is likely that there has been li le change in the development of scholarly communication pages on library Web sites in the interval between the two studies. This is disappointing given the significant investments that major library organizations are making to promote awareness of these issues both inside the profession and in outreach to researchers. One might expect that the special commit- ment of SPARC member libraries to foster this outreach would be reflected in the development of their Web sites. A second point of comparison for this study is earlier work by Joseph Straw, which looked at ARL members’ posting of collection development policies on their Web sites.14 Straw does not indicate when he reviewed the ARL Web sites and does not describe how he reviewed each site’s pages. From the publication date of the article and the number of ARL mem- bers reported, it can be inferred that the examination took place perhaps in 2000; and from the outline of his research ap- proach, it appears that he a empted to review all pages on a Web site. Again, this study focused on a somewhat differ- ent, but largely overlapping, population. Straw reported that 71 percent of ARL members had collection management pages at the time of his survey. He also assessed the collection management pages for the presence of collection de- velopment policies, finding policies on 30 percent of the collection management pages. This study found that 49 percent of SPARC members had collection man- agement pages linked within the top two levels of their Web sites, with 24 percent of those with such pages including col- lection development policies on their pages. It is unclear what might account for the decreased frequency of collection management pages observed in the cur- rent study. It is possible that collection January 2005 management pages are being removed from Web sites, perhaps in streamlining efforts. It also is possible that the ARL contingent is merely slightly more likely than the broader SPARC membership to have such pages. Finally, it is possible that Straw was performing a more compre- hensive review of each Web site, counting pages that were more deeply buried than those considered in this survey. This project paints a picture of librar- ies’ use of one communication venue at a particular moment in time. As an unobtrusive study, it documents the frequency with which the study popula- tion is using this venue to communicate about collection changes and scholarly communication issues, but it cannot an- swer many questions. For instance, it is unclear what motivates some libraries to take advantage of their Web site for this communication whereas others fail to use it or perhaps choose to focus on other communication venues. In the authors’ initial survey of the pilot group of Web sites, it was incidentally observed that, in many instances, libraries are using library newsle ers to communicate with their users about scholarly communica- tion issues. These venues fell outside the scope of the current study, but future analysis could explore more broadly how SPARC members are communicating with their user communities about these issues and why they choose particular communications approaches over other options. At a presentation at the SPARC forum at ALA’s annual meeting in 2003, Ward et al. reported that 49 percent of SPARC member institutions surveyed reported sponsoring on-campus speak- ers to present on scholarly communica- tion issues.15 It also would be helpful to explore more fully the benefits of using the library’s Web site instead of, or in conjunction with, other communication venues. http:issues.15 http:sites.14 Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 37 Notes 1. Lee Ketcham-van Orsdel and Kathleen Born, “E-Journals Come of Age.” Library Journal 123, no. 7 (Apr. 1998): 40–45. 2. ———, “Doing the Digital Flip.” Library Journal 127, no. 7 (Apr. 2002): 51—55, and “Search- ing for Serials Utopia,” Library Journal 126, no. 7 (Apr. 2001): 53–58. 3. ———, “Big Chill on the Big Deal?” Library Journal 128, no. 7 (Apr. 2003): 51–56. 4. Sarah C. Michalak, “The Evolution of SPARC.” Serials Review 26, no. 1 (Apr. 2000): 10–21. 5. Ray English, “The ACRL Scholarly Communication Initiative.” C&RL News 65, no. 8 (Sept 2004): 450–53; Ray English, “Scholarly Communication and the Academy: The Importance of the ACRL Initiative.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 3, no. 2 (Apr. 2003): 337–40; Ray English and Deborah Dancik, “ACRL’s New Scholarly Communication Initiative: Addressing a Growing Crisis.” C&RL News 63, no. 5 (May 2002): 356–58. 6. Randall Ward, David Michaelis, Robert Murdoch, Brian Roberts, and Julia Blixrud, “Wide- spread Academic Efforts Address the Scholarly Communication Crisis: The Results of a Survey of Academic Institutions.” C&RL News 64, no. 6 (June 2003): 382–84. 7. Lance Lugar and Kate Thomes, “Access to Scholarly Communication Information on ARL Member Library Websites.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 2, no. 1 (Jan. 2002): 59–67. 8. For two surveys examining e-journal presentation, see Linda A. Rich and Julie L. Rabine, “The Changing Access to Electronic Journals: A Survey of Academic Library Websites Revisited.” Serials Review 27, no. 3/4 (Dec. 2001): 1–61 and “How Libraries Are Providing Access to Electronic Serials: A Survey of Academic Library Web Sites.” Serials Review 25, no. 2 (June 1999): 35–46. A survey of presentation of library services is reported in Barbara I. Dewey, “In Search of Services: Analyzing the Findability of Links on CIC University Libraries’ Web Pages,” Information Technol- ogy and Libraries 18, no. 4 (Dec. 1999): 210–13. As mentioned earlier, Lugar and Thomes surveyed seeking scholarly communication pages. For a survey of collection development policies, see Joseph Straw, “Collection Management Statements on the World Wide Web,” Acquisitions Librarian 30 (July 2003): 77–86. 9. Strauss and Corbin describe this technique of coding development. The texts involved (in this case, the initial twenty sites visited) were used to develop coding categories. For details on this technique, see Anselm L. Strauss and Juliet M. Corbin, “Coding Procedures: Open Coding,” in Basics of Qualitative Research (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1990). 10. Lugar and Thomes, “Access to Scholarly Communication Information on ARL Member Library Websites.” 11. The four model sites for collection management pages can be reviewed at East Carolina University (h p://www.lib.ecu.edu/cdpgs/), the University of Texas (h p://www.lib.utexas. edu/admin/cird/), North Carolina State University (h p://www.lib.ncsu.edu/colmgmt/), and the University of California, Davis (h p://www.lib.ucdavis.edu/info/jrnltrans/index.html). 12. The four model sites for faculty outreach are available at Boston College (h p://www. bc.edu/libraries/services/faculty/), the University of California, Los Angeles (h p://www.library. ucla.edu/support/index_f.html), Cornell University (h p://campus.gwlibrary.cornell.edu/services/ facultyserv.html), and the University of Washington (h p://www.lib.washington.edu/services/ faculty.html). 13. Lugar and Thomes, “Access to Scholarly Communication Information on ARL Member Library Websites.” 14. Straw, “Collection Management Statements on the World Wide Web.” 15. h p://www.arl.org/sparc/SPARC_Forum_Talk.ppt. 38 College & Research Libraries January 2005 APPENDIX A Coding Categories 1.0 No section for collection development or management activities exists on first two levels of Web site (home page or one link down) 1 1.1 Significant section on collection management or development activities appears on either of the first two levels 1.11 Information on approval plan 1 1.12 Information on gi s 1 1.13 Collection development policy(ies) 1 1.14 Information on materials budget 1 1.15 Information on a serials commi ee 1 1.16 Descriptions of collections 1 1.17 Information on scholarly communication 1.171 Scholarly communication pathfinder (organized list of key topics) 1 1.172 Scholarly communication bibliography (list of citations or links to resources for further reading) 1 1.173 Links to other sites for scholarly communication (pointing off of the local site) 1 1.174 Individual topic pages for scholarly communication issues 1 1.175 Mention of the library’s SPARC membership 1 1.18 List of selectors, collection managers, or library staff liaisons 1 1.19 Information on how to request a purchase 1 1.20 Information on special collections 1 1.21 Information on digital collections (besides databases, commercial full-text sources, etc.) 1 1.22 Listing of new books 1 1.23 Information on discontinuing print versions of journals 1 1.24 Information on the structure of the collection development/management unit 1 1.25 Information for staff 1 1.26 Information on current trials for electronic resources 1 1.27 Information on journal cancellations or serials review 1 1.28 Copyright information/Intellectual property 1 1.29 Faculty newsle er 1 1.30 Information on preservation program or activities 1 1.31 Support for accreditations 1 1.32 Information on intellectual freedom 1 1.33 Usage statistics 1 2.0 No section for faculty exists on first two levels of Web site (home page or one link down) 1 2.1 Section for faculty on either of the first two levels includes significant informa- tion on collections 1 2.11 Information on approval plan 1 2.12 Information on gi s 1 2.13 Collection development policy(ies) 1 2.14 Information on materials budget 1 2.15 Information on a serials commi ee 1 2.16 Descriptions of collections 1 Web Communications and Collections Outreach to Faculty 39 2.17 Information on scholarly communication 1 2.171 Scholarly communication pathfinder (organized list of key topics) 1 2.172 Scholarly communication bibliography (list of citations or links to resources for further reading) 1 2.173 Links to other sites for scholarly communication 1 2.174 Individual topic pages for scholarly communication issues 1 2.175 Mention of the library’s SPARC membership 1 2.18 List of selectors, collection managers, or library staff liaisons 1 2.19 Information on how to request a purchase 1 2.20 Information on special collections 1 2.21 Information on digital collections (besides databases, commercial full-text sources, etc.) 1 2.22 Listing of new books 1 2.23 Information on discontinuing print versions of journals 1 2.24 Information on the structure of the collection development/management unit 1 2.25 Information for staff 1 2.26 Information on current trials for electronic resources 1 2.27 Information on journal cancellations or serials review 1 2.28 Copyright information/Intellectual property 1 2.29 Faculty newsle er 1 2.30 Information on preservation program or activities 1 2.31 Support for accreditations 1 2.32 Information on intellectual freedom 1 2.33 Usage statistics 1 3.0 No section for local digital initiatives exists on first two levels of Web site (home page or one link down) 1 3.1 Significant section on local digital collections appears on either of the first two levels 3.11 Descriptions of local digital collections 1 3.12 Preprint server or institutional archive 1 3.13 Archive of e-journals 1 3.14 Electronic publishing initiative 1 3.15 Information on scholarly communication 1 3.16 Scholarly communication pathfinder (organized list of key topics) 1 3.17 Scholarly communication bibliography (list of citations or links to resources for further reading) 1 3.18 Links to other sites for scholarly communication 1 3.19 Individual topic pages for scholarly communication issues 1 3.20 Mention of the library’s SPARC membership 1 4.0 No dedicated pages for electronic resources exist on first two levels of Web site 1 4.1 Significant sections on electronic resources on home page 1 4.11 Search functions embedded in pages 4.12 Descriptions of resources 1 4.13 Trials for new e-resources 1 4.14 New e-resources identified 1 4.15 Cancelled e-resources identified 1 40 College & Research Libraries January 2005 4.16 Information on access from off campus 1 4.17 Information on citation management so ware (reference works) 1 4.18 Information on SFX linking 1 4.19 Copyright information 1 4.20 FAQs or help documents 1 5.0 No freestanding section for scholarly communication exists on home page of Web site 1 5.1 Free-standing section labeled “scholarly communication” exists on home page of Web site 1 5.11 Scholarly communication pathfinder (organized list of key topics) 1 5.12 Scholarly communication bibliography (list of citations or links to resources for further reading) 1 5.13 Links to other sites for scholarly communication (pointing off of the local site) 1 5.14 Individual topic pages for scholarly communication issues 1 5.15 Mention of the library’s SPARC membership 1 5.16 Information on open access 1 5.17 Copyright information/Intellectual property 1 5.18 Institutional repository 1 5.19 Local events information/announcement