When faced with a 0% budget increase for fiscal year 2010, librarians at Gettysburg College designed a comprehensive review of journal subscriptions. Library staff began by gathering data about format(s), price, publisher, and more. Then subject librarians consulted with academic departments and asked faculty to review titles for relevance to current research and curriculum. 100% of departments cooperated with the review with a mixture of enthusiasm and concern; in the end, most offered to cancel about a third of their journal titles. By trimming multiple format subscriptions, relying on aggregator databases for full text content, cancelling titles that no longer support the curriculum, and cancelling a small number of high-cost subscriptions in favor of document delivery, the library met – and exceeded – its savings target. More importantly, by involving the faculty in every stage of the review process and sharing all available information, the library received absolutely no complaints about cancellations. This poster presentation will include a flow chart of the entire review process, sample review spreadsheets used by faculty in academic departments, and graphs showing cancellations by department. This journal review model is transferable to other academic libraries.
This is the author's version of the work. This publication appears in Gettysburg College's institutional repository by permission of the copyright owner for personal use, not for redistribution.
Wertzberger, Janelle L. and D'Angelo, Kathleen, "How to Cut a Third of Your Journal Subscriptions (and Keep Faculty Happy)" (2010). All Musselman Library Staff Works. 28.