---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:27:47 -0400
From: Albert Henderson <chessNIC@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: Who has the final say? (Liu Liu)

on Thu, 19 Apr 2001 Liu Liu <liuliu@USA.COM> wrote:

> My college is a smaller 2-year community college.  I have started managing
> periodicals for about a year.  Weeding the periodicals, my predesscessor
> made all the decisions as to which periodicals to weed and she did not
> consult/inform the faculty...pretty much a closed door operation. She did
> not have any trouble.
>
> Recently, I started the weeding project.  My criteria are if the
> periodicals are old, not indexed in our indexes and have low usage, I
> would weed them.  I want to involve the faculty.  After all, library
> exists to support teaching. So I sent out a email to inform them.
>
> The result is: a couple of faculty reacted very strongly against the
> weeding.  They want us to keep the periodicals in their subject areas
> forever in the library.  Some argue that current information based on old
> information, and they rely on the library to keep the old periodicals in
> case people need to do research. Periodicals, though not indexed in our
> indexes, may appear in the references of some articles, etc.
>
> I feel like I have asked for trouble.  They have their reasons, the
> library has our considerations too.  Who has the final say?  What are the
> guidelines when it comes to weeding periodicals?  Any books on this
> subject?

        If the interests of education rank first in your priorities,
        then the needs of your patrons as seen by the faculty should
        outweigh administrative concerns. There are considerable
        disagreements about whether measures of use are accurate
        and whether a use by one party equals a use by another.

        Unfortunately, administators have been having the last
        word thanks to the faustian bargain made when college members
        first turned control over to nonfaculty managers and trustees.
        Your anecdote is particularly revealing of why secrecy -- Max
        Weber called it "administrative secrecy" -- is so well favored
        when there is a potential for criticism.

        Tony Stankus has written convincingly of negotiating
        weeding with faculty (Science and Technology Libraries.
        6,3:45-53. 1986).

        Best wishes,

Albert Henderson
<70244.1532@compuserve.com>