Draft Policy for Weeding the Technical Services Reference Collection

Created August 31, 2007. Last updated August 31, 2007 by Christine Megowan.

Purpose of the collection:

Although the collection will be searchable in Roger, and the public may request to use items from the Tech Services reference collection, its primary purpose is to support cataloging and processing of MSCL collections. Specific areas covered include manuals for cataloging, classification, and archival processing, reference works on bibliography and book history and other subject areas in which MSCL actively collects but that may not be suitable for inclusion in the regular SPEC Reference collection, and foreign language dictionaries.

Guidelines for weeding:

1. If we have a later version of an item (i.e. LC Class schedules, or RBMS Thesauri), we should de-accession the older version.
2. If an item in the tech services reference collection is available for free online, we don't need to keep a paper copy. Exceptions to this guideline may be determined on a case-by-case basis when the work is easier to consult in paper format (i.e. not ready-reference, or heavily cross-referenced).
3. If an item is available online, but only through a proprietary source such as Cataloger's Desktop, we should have a copy of only the most current or complete print version. This way, even if our subscription to the electronic resource lapses, we will still be able to retain our print copy.
4. If an item is easily replaceable (i.e. still in print, reasonably priced), but in physically very poor condition (i.e. in more than one piece, or about to be in more than one piece), we should replace it. Exceptions to this guideline may be made in cases where the item is one that is not consulted frequently, and is prohibitively expensive.
5. If no later edition of a particular title has been issued, but its contents:
   • Are no longer up to date, or
   • Have been superseded or presented in a clearer format by a different title,
   Then we should remove that title and look into buying a different title to cover that subject area. Exceptions to this guideline are the same as above (i.e. the item is rarely consulted, and is prohibitively expensive). This will most likely be the most time-consuming guideline to follow, as it requires research into the subject area in order to determine if a work has been superseded or significantly improved upon.

One possible exception to this policy might be the LC Class schedules, which we may want to just de-accession outright because they're so bulky and are available online through Classweb. I have a feeling that most of our LC Schedules aren't the current version anymore anyway, so the question would just be whether it was worth it to buy newer paper copies.

Procedure for weeding

1. Assign students to go through the tech services reference collection and search for records in Roger. If there is a record, have the student print out a copy and place it in/with the book. In all probability, the majority of items will not have records in Roger. Students should be particularly careful when searching in case we have some records that are shared with SSH.
2. A staff member identifies items to be weeded/replaced, and pulls them from the collection. Follow the procedures for de-accessioning. Remember to delete holdings in OCLC, but only if another UCSD library doesn't also hold that title.
3. Once the collection has been weeded, catalogers should create catalog records for the remainder of the collection.
4. Identify gaps in the collection, and fill those in accordingly.