This article was downloaded by: [Central Michigan University]On: 20 December 2014, At: 12:41Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Serials Librarian: From thePrinted Page to the Digital AgePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wser20

DILEMMAS AND CONSEQUENCES OFCONVERTING PERIODICAL HOLDINGSTO MICROFORMATValerie Jackson Feinman MS aa Assistant Professor and Serials Librarian, Adelphi UniversityLibraryPublished online: 22 Oct 2010.

To cite this article: Valerie Jackson Feinman MS (1979) DILEMMAS AND CONSEQUENCES OFCONVERTING PERIODICAL HOLDINGS TO MICROFORMAT, The Serials Librarian: From the PrintedPage to the Digital Age, 4:1, 77-84, DOI: 10.1300/J123v04n01_10

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J123v04n01_10

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. Theaccuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liablefor any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

DILEMMAS AND CONSEQUENCES OF CONVERTING PERIODICAL HOLDINGS TO MICROFORMAT

ValerieJackson Feinman, MS

ABSTRACT. The rationales for conversion are covered in literature. but not the consepenees. The choice of microformat, policies formaterials to be acquired or rephced housing and seruicing of the collection, and the bibliogrnphic controls and records used areanalyzed The conversion is long-term, systematic, budgeted and undercontinuous review. The collection is heavily used by a supportive population This is anattempt to detail someof theconsequentdecisions basedon the reality ofoneactiue university library.

Adelphi is a small, private university of some 10,000 students, whose library has 268,000 volumes and 160,000 units of micro- text. We add 16,000 volumes annually. The periodicals collection numbers approximately 6,000 titles, of which3,OOOarecurrently received.

There are several state, city, and private universities nearby, as well as all the facilities of New York City, which is a thirtyminute commuter- train-ride away. We lack cooperative acquisition plans, yet are dependenk onour neighbors, as they areonus.

I will deal primarily with the subject of periodicals in this paper since we subscribe to very few serials in microform, although we are rapidly expand- ing our reference sets, such as Phonefiche and SEC-1OK Our procedures are not automated or computer-supported. We have managed to maintain a slight growth rate in our collectioq partially due to a good working relation- ship with faculty whoreview their subscription lists and curriculum and re- search needs regularly. We add and drop titles based on statistics of de- mand and use, support new programs, and provide few duplicated titles.

In the past three years, our Serials unit has undergone a number of changes. These include a self-appraisal of collection and spatial needs, an equipment review, the first inventory in a decade, the removal of all pre- 1965 hard copy to storage, two complete changes in floor plan, the partial closure of the periodical stacks, and the receipt of hundreds of reels of mi- crofilm as well as several new pieces of equipment. During this period weal- so began a gradual conversion to microformat, the policy of which affects

Valerie Jackson Feinrnan is Assistant Professor and Serials Librari- an. Adelphi University Library. Gardencity. New York 11530.

TheSerialsLihrarian.Val.4111. FsU 1979 41979 by The Heworth Press. A11 rightsreserved. 77

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

41 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

THE SERIALS LIBRARIAN

every acquisition decision. We had no choice with regard to conversion- thelack of space madeit a necessity.

A general search of the literature concerning the mechanics of conversion has elicited few useful articles, although James1 and Lynden2 describe the questions and dilemmas that arise as one considers conversion. We did not consider, we began. The consequent problems and questions we faced com- prise thebody of this study.

The decision to systematically convert a major portion of our periodicals collection to microformat was madewhenwerealized that our student seat- ing space was reduced to a ridiculous minimum and that periodical prolif- eration had filled the stacks. Space was the overriding concern. The binder used was excellent in quality and reasonable in price. The library was al- ready air-conditioned, and students were accustomed to viewing material on screens. Faculty were enchanted with our growing ERIC collection. The university as a whole was supportive of programs suggesting alternative media and formats, particularly when a saving of space would be included. If space is not the critical criteria, the cost comparison published by Reeds should be studied. The economic predictions made by Gellatly4 have not af- fectedlibrary budgets yet.

Several discussions were held early in 1975 with personnel from Univer- sity Microfilms, who surveyed the periodical collection and provided a printout of those titles then available from UM on 35 mm film. Of our 2900 current subscriptions, 931 were listed; but these included indexes, ab- stracts, ar t journals, and scientific journals, none of which were desirable on film. The collection lacked a large number of partial and complete back- files, many of which were available on film, but we weren't certain that these would be useful or necessary in the collection. The decision was made to reject any blanket order or complete package deal. Each title had to be considered separately for conversion in terms of our present holdings, de- partmental size and needs, illustrative and color content, use (e.g., review articles vs. news releases), and branch library holding the title (Main, Sci. ence, Social Work, and Fine Arts).

Certain policies were set by the Microforms Committee, which consisted of faculty from public and technical services, as well as the serials librarian and director. Policies include the following:

1. All new backfiles must beinmicroformat. 2. All new titles ordered should be automatically converted unless there

is a good reason for binding, e.g., illustrative material. 3. Titles which are regularly mutilated should be converted to or replaced

in microformat. 4. AlI news weeklies should beinmicroformat. 5. Titles which are heavily used, and for which a duplicate set was pur-

chased, shoulduse microform for the duplicate, nota boundvolume.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

41 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

Valerie Jackson Feinman 79

The committee met regularly to review titles presented by the serials librarian. A goal was set for conversion of 250 titles annually, and the easi- er, more logical choices were tackled first. In this way, professional judge ment maintained the flexibility required to develop the periodical collec- tion in keeping withuser needs and the dictates of conservation and preser- vation.

The university administration supported the conversion with a budget increase, after being'convinced by arguments such as those voiced by James that dollar savings were possible, and by discussion a t Atlanta's 2nd Microforms Conference (October, 1976) expressing the viewpoint that when faced with a choice of storage vs. microform, the latter is suddenly to most faculty an acceptable choice.

Theconversion continued to advance. Microfilm boxes began piling up in the shipping room, and the area which had housed ERIC, three old Recor- daks, a few fiche readers, and several hundred reels, was inundated. The committee read pertinent l i t e ra t~re ,~+~ ' on the question of dispersal VS.

centralized reading rooms, and then optimized the one available space, adjacent to the periodical stacks which serve as a sound break. Storage cabinets were used as a visual barrier between reading desks and machine tables, and carrels were set a t an angle to the windows, which received new venetian blinds. Chairs were taken from regular library stock. Carpeting was not purchased, but the noise level remains acceptably low. Patrons have open access to all cabinets within thearea, and usea phone to therefer- encedesk, if a question is not easily resolved.

Choosing new equipment was an early dilemma: wet vs. dry copiers, car- rels vs. freestanding machines were choices we had to make-and we made mistakes. We have kept all equipment, although some is used more fre- quently than others. We chose to keep the old Recordaks, resolving a space problem with shoehorn and a great deal of graph paper.

Supplies are kept in an adjacent alcove, and regular maintenance is per- formed. We now have the following equipment: 4-Recordaks, 6-Xerox 1414 Readers, 1 -3M NO0 Reader-Printer, 4-3M #500 Reader-Printer (2 each film and fiche), 1 Kodak Startech Reader-Printer, and 1 Realist Fiche Reader, all of which provides seating for 17 patrons. The collection also includes se- veral portable fiche readers, Microscan Escort K-100, and Micro-Design Mod. ~ O O A , yhichare housed throughout thelibrary.

The Biology Department recently gave the library the following equip- ment: 1-3M Data recording camera (#DRC101), 1-Bell and Howell fiche jacket processor, 1-Bell and Howell fiche jacket printer, and 1-Bell and Howell jacket reader filler. These pieces are housed in an adjacent area, and are not yet in use. The flexibility they provide has drastically changed our developmental policy, and made the acquisition of fiche materials more log- ical. With the ability to make fiche duplicates and loan out our portable fiche readers we expect both an improvement in service level and many new dilemmas and consequences in the near fu ture.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

41 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

80 THE SERIALS LIBRARIAN

By the spring of 1976, when film was rolling in and records were slightly fouled, the administration purchased a building a few miles off campus which would provide needed dance studios on the main floor and storage for library materials in the basement. Many pre-1950 bound volumes of peri- odicals and little-used monographs had been stored in an attic which was now to become offices. The need for the on-campus attic and the woeful lack of student seating in the library had prompted the search for off campus facilities, and a reasonably priced commercial building was purchased, hereafter called the Annex.

Several dilemmas resulted. Should the "attic" materials be discarded, moved to the Annex, or converted to microformat? Would the distance b e tween the library and the Annex, with once-daily delivery, necessitate con- version of different classes of titles? What indeed should be sent to the An- nex, and why? What bibliographic records are necessary when the collec- tionis split by location and format?

A basic policy was set to send al l hard-copy periodicals dated up to 1965 to the Annex, as well as duplicate sets and titles whichceased prior to 1970. Implementation of this caused a huge upheaval in the library. During the week of May 24-28,1976, when classes were not in session, teams of librari- ans and supporting staff vanished into the aisles. When they emerged four days later we had completed the first inventory in a decade, all pre-1965 bound volumes were spine-labelled for removal, and all pre-1976 unbound issues were removed for temporary or permanent binding, or disposal. The effort was supported by the total library staff, and culminated in a garden party luncheon on Friday. The massive shipment to the binder, and the hundreds of incomplete volumes which were then togic-bound, took a little longer. Yet, on June 9 it was reported that 894 volumes had been processed for binding, and that turn-around time for 620 volumes requested from the bindery unit was averaging two hours. The mechanics of this week must be chronicled elsewhere; the events led to two problems that overlapped with conversion to microformat: 1) discovering which titles should be recalled from storage-and why-and which converted to microform; and 2) main. tainingbibliographiccontrolof a collection further dispersed.

The basic decision had been to send materials to the Annex and to pre ceed with an orderly conversion to microform. There was little time for re- view. The costs of moving materials which might be kept were still low. A regular on-going review of requests would provide data for acquisitions and policy changes. The trend to use of remote storages is aparallel alterna- tive to theconversion to microformat, and both avenues are being followed simultaneously in this library.

The double program to alleviate space problems in the library has led to complicated record keeping in the acquisitions Kardex and in the public catalog. The records are all maintained manually. Although the library has used OCLC for monographs and some serials, our periodicals are unclassi- fied, uncatalogued, and arranged alphabetically in limited access periodical

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

41 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

Valerie Jackson Feinman 81

stacks. Issues are processed through a central serials Kardex before being routed to the PeriodicalslMicroforms area or the branch libraries-Science, Social Work, and Fine Arts.

The Central Serial Record (CSR) may have several Kardex unit cards over one header, e.g., paper copy, microform copy, annuals, branch copy, etc. The unit card contains the following information: title, publisher in- formation, location, source, price, invoice and payment record, ISSN and OCLC numbers, cover title, format, standing order status, routing data, complete bound volume record, and association or membership file cross- references, as well as receipts. As the CSR includes al l annuals, reference serials, newspapers and monographic series, it is truly a central record. I t also takes the place of a periodical shelf list, as we prefer not to duplicate files.

The public file for periodicals is the Periodicals Catalog (PERCAT), a small ld-drawer cabinet standing near the reference desk. One title card is filed in the university catalog for each periodical title. The holdings, loca- tion, and format data are only available in the PERCAT. The prime card in- cludes full bibliographical data and notes, title changes, where indexed, summary holdings statement (e.g., BD. 1-30 Annex;31 +), format, and lo- cation of all copies. The secondary cards give annotated holdings, with each branch or format listed on a separate card. Production and upkeep of this file rests solely with the Serials unit, which also produces original cards for the union catalog and provides title-change data. The catalog de- partment will soon begin catalogingallperiodicals using OCLC.

As formats and locations increase, the data on the PERCAT cards be- comes unwieldy. Three years ago we had two branches (Science and Fine Arts), and microfilm included some 120 titles. Titles in attic storage were listed in a notebook. Since then a new branch was opened (Social Work), the Annex was provided, and microform conversion has increased our holdings to650 titles.

One problem in bibliographic control is the use of the latest title by a ma- jor microfilm producer. One must then choose whether to follow sucessive title policy by re-labeling the microfilm boxes or by annotating each prime card with the legend: "Library's copy on microfilm under title: , ,

Wechose thelatter, preferring to maintain our files under successive title. One title is often not fully available from one company or in one format.

Our preferred format has been 35 mrn film, but many needed titles are avail- able only in fiche. University Microfilms tried to change to 16mm filma few years ago, and created brief havoc among librarians whose equipment was geared to 35 mm. Many researcher on campus donate their private collec- tions of microforms, givingus tiny pockets of discontinuity. However, we attempt to minimize the consequences of this. Theoretically a holdings statement may be of the form: LIB HAS: v. 1-63 MFM; 64-78 An- nex; 79 +. In this case, we would try to purchase v. 64-78 on microfilm.

We have an established policy of discarding all news weeklies as soon as

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

41 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

82 THE SERIALS LIBRARIAN

the microfilm arrives, usually after six months. In the interim, most issues of Timeand Newsweek have disappeared. What we need is a simultaneous receipt of the current issue on paper and on fiche. The fiche copy would pro- vide reference access, the paper copy would be displayed, and the microfilm copy, when received, would provide file integrity. I'm willing to pay for such fiche, but the publishers are not willing to provide it-yet. One could eventually decide to keep only fiche, as Taylor suggest^,^ but libraries need the immediate and timely production of microcopy, and must continue to bringpressureonpublishers for this.

The CSR record for each title andlor format is set up when the order is placed, and may include data on direct subscription, current year, transfer to our agent Faxon for the following year and standing order, microfilm subscription for backfiles or standing order, and a dummy for the PER- CAT prime card. When one form of the title is received, its pertinent record and catalog entry are checked against the issue and processed. For each succeeding copy or format, the additional PERCAT records are processed when received. Cards are filed in the PERCAT daily, and in the union cata- log monthly. Additions and corrections are usually processed within one day of thereceipt or notification.

With 3,100 currently received titles, and 650 microfilm titles, we are kept very busy updating cards. Yet the 3,000 number seems to be a good maxi- mum for manual records. The most difficult part of record keeping is train- ing other library staff in successful use of the CSR and PERCAT. Refer- ence staff is sometimes rushedandimpatient, so that straightforward data often looks confusing. Bibliographic control of microformat periodicals is not as difficult as that of, for example, census materials,I0but the necessary public awareness of the availability of materials and nearby easily-used equipment cannot be overemphasized.

User reaction to microform conversion must be considered beforehand, and monitored regularly.' Faculty and students generally favor in-house microform over the Annex hard copy. We provide duplicate copies of some heavily used and frequently mutilated nursing journals, yet students soon learn to seek the microfilm copy which they know will be intact and immedi- ately available. Perhaps our students are better oriented tousingmaterials displayed on a screen due to this generation's familiarity with television and to the library's heavy use of filmandvideotapeprograms. Or they may be satisfied with the available format, whatever it is. Faculty reaction has also been supportive. When a professor learns that he may have a backfile of a dearly beloved journal for $120 on fiche or film, all resistance to the me- dium melts. Our collection is being strengthened in ways impossible were we to depend on hard copy.

One recent example of faculty confrontation may demonstrate this. A faculty memberldepartment head complained that all "his" journals were in the Annex, and microformat was unusable because we charged 10C per page for reproduction whereas the service bureau charged 40. From Annex-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

41 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

Valerie Jackson Feinman 83

use statistics we were quickly able to demonstrate that six titles in his field had been recalled from the Annex, or when available, converted to rnicro- film. We also suggested two more titles which should be recalled due to in- terdepartmental use, and asked for his suggestions for filling in backfiles (in microform) of needed historical materials. His dilemma was resolved when faced with cooperative effort, and we completed the microform con- version of periodicals in another academic discipline.

The recall of volumes from the Annex has no formal policy. The Micro- forms Committee meets approximately quarterly to look a t Annex and ILL requests and suggest titles which should be considered for recall, con- version, or purchase. The titles recalled thus far number six, which are all unavailable in microform, and heavily used by two or more disciplines. The 90 volumes returned to our shelves have not affected our available space appreciably, yet have cut our Annex requests by 15%. The holdings state- ment for these titles has been amended to clarify this.

For many titles where we receive microfilm and would normally discard the superseded issues, we "togic" the issues and stamp the cover "Avail- able on Microfilm. " This way we are able to provide a duplicate shelf set for the two years of heaviest usage and the bindery clerk regularly discards them either after two years or when the shelf is too full. This year-old copy is technically not availablein thelibrary, but is heavily used.

From our experiences, we can recommend conversion to microformat; but we found that agradual shift, accompanied by ongoingreview waspref- erable. In the past three years, many more titles have been made available, new micropublishers have entered the field, and alternative micro adjuncts have appeared, e.g.. the slide program associated with Art in America. Our faculty and students have become used to microforms, and applaud their availability. The Annex was suddenly available, and this has changed many policies. A new building extension is being funded. The fiche filming and duplicatingequipment has appeared. Curricula have changed.

Policies were altered or amended regularly to reflect these developments. A major trend a t this timeis a shift to fiche copy. The Science Librarymade a major review of its titlesin theFall of 1977, and recommended conversion of 58 titles to fiche with the 1977 volume. This will increase their fiche hold- ings from 6 to 64. The faculty supported the conversion, based on the abso- lute lack of space and gradual awareness of the acceptance of microformat in the main library. They did insist on fiche, with which many are familiar now. This major change and the arrival of fiche equipment is causing us to reviseour basic preference for 35 mm format.

We have now converted approximately 15% of the collection, and are working toward 25-30%, which we feel is the maximum available and desir- able. This, too, is a flexible goalas more titles eventually become available.

Librarians must collectively put pressure on publishers to provide more microformatted journals to ease our space problems.

We have considered the dilemmas of microform conversion, and have de-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

41 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

84 THE SERIALS LIBRARIAN

veloped policies and mechanics to meet the consequences of conversion. Huff may callme a "serialist," but my dilemmas didnot occur serially. The interwoven decision points and consequences went beyond the theoretical discussions in the literature today.

REFERENCES I. John R. James. "Serials in 1976." Library Resorrrcesand TechnicalSeruices21:216~231

(Summer. 1977). 2. FrederickC. Lvnden. "Re~lacement of H a r d C o ~ v bv Microforms." MicmformReuiecu .- .

4:15-24 (Jan. 1974). 3. Jut ta R. Reed. "Cost Comparison of Periodicals in Hard Copy and on Microfilm." Mi-

cmformReuiew 5:185.92 (July. 1976): 4. Peter Cellatly. "Serials in Higher Education." Catholic Libmry World 47:388-90 IApr.

1976). 5. Arthur Tannenbaum and Eva Sidhom. "User Environment and Attitudes in an Aca-

demicMicroformCenter."Libmry.Jo1~ma1101:2139-43(0ct. 15.1976). 6. Donald C. Holmes. "Determination of the Environmental Conditions . . . Interim Re-

port." Washington. D.C.. Associationof Research Libraries. 1970 (ED-046-403). 7. Donald C. Holmes. "Determination of User Needs and Future Requirements for a Sya-

tem Approach to Microform Technology," Washington. D.C.. Association of Research Libraries. 1969 (ED-029-1681.

8. "Remote Storage in ARLLibraries." SPECFlyerno. 39 (Dec. 1977). 9. Desmond Taylor, "The NAPCU Microforms Center: Proposal for a Northwest Region-

al Microforms andStorageCenter."PNLA Quarterly 41:4-12(Winter. 1977). 10. RuthSandor. "Demography andLibrary Usage."RPINewsletterl:2IDec. 1977). I I. 1,ynden. "Replacement."pp. 15-24.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

41 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014