Library Technology Guides

Blog content

Profile


Photo of Marshall Breeding author of

Name: Marshall Breeding

Title: Publisher

Organization: Library Technology Guides


GuidePosts

Perspective and commentary by Marshall Breeding

subscribe to GuidePosts via RSS


New Resource available in Library Technology Guides: ILS implementations by Carnegie Classification

One of the key components of Library Technology Guides is the libraries.org (formerly lib-web-cats) directory of libraries that provides details about libraries and the major technology products they use. This resource can be used to identify and assess the adoption patterns of systems used among any given group of libraries. The advanced search provides the ability to select libraries according to geographic categories, collection size, library type, and other factors. I had previously created specialized reports for groups of particular interest such as the members of the Association of Research Libraries, the Urban Libraries Council, and the Association of Southeastern Research Libraries.

An additional tool is now available that produces reports of academic libraries in the United States and their automation systems according to the Carnegie Classification Levels of their parent institutions. This capability was made possible through the extension of the data elements for of the entries for academic libraries in the United States.

By default, the initial report shown corresponds to the Doctoral/Research Universities-Extensive (classification level 15). A drop-down list allows you to select any of the other classification reports.

The reports derived from some of the classification groups will include libraries where the ILS used is missing. Most of these represent libraries that were newly added to the libraries.org database. Any help in identifying the automation systems used in this libraries will be appreciated.

The data for the academic libraries was enhanced by loading selected data elements from the 2012 data set available from the National Center for Educational Statistics. This process involved creating a delimited file with the data, matching existing records based on the NCES institutional identifier that was already present on most of the entries for academic libraries in the United States.

Record elements loaded included:

UNITIDUnique NCES identifier used as the match point
INSTNMInstitution Name
ADDRAddress, used if a new record needs to be created
CITYCity, used if a new record needs to be created
STABBRState, used if a new record needs to be created
ZIPPostal Code. used if a new record needs to be created
WEBADDRURL for institution web site
SECTORdescribes whether the institution is public or private, for-profit or non-profit.
CARNEGIE2000 Carnegie Classification
BRANCHES Number of branch and independent libraries (exclude main or central library)
EXTOTTotal expenditures
EXCOMPExpenditures for computer hardware and software
EXCUSERExpenditures for current serial subscriptions
EXELSERExpenditures for electronic serials
EXBKSExpenditures for books, serial backfiles and other materials
EXELBKSExpenditures for electronic Books, electronic serial backfiles and other electronic materials
COLBKSHBooks, serial backfiles and other paper materials
CRGENGeneral circulation transactions
ICLEVELLevel of Institution
FTEUSED Fall Collection full-time equivalent student enrollment

These additional data elements display on each entry and some have been enabled as search terms. The selection according to Carnegie Classification is the most interesting example. In the future I will enable selection by for-profit / non-profit and private vs. public institutions, once data for other records beyond the academic libraries in the United States is more fully populated.

New records were created if they didn't already exist in the libraries.org database. Data were merged if a unique match was identified.

The NCES data on expenditures reported for each library provides some insight into technology budgets for each library or across categories of libraries. The reports calculate the aggregate and average total expenditures and those directed to technology. This data enables the calculation of the average percentage allocated to technology for each classification level.

The NCES data set of 4,262 libraries included 1,622 that were not previously represented in libraries.org. A few of these were smaller academic libraries that I had not previously come across, but the majority were those associated with for-profit educational institutions that I had intentionally not included since few of these offer traditional libraries. The addition of these libraries will enable some interesting comparisons.

The match and overlay of a data set such as this naturally requires a bit of clean up. Some duplicate records were created. I have identified and merged those that I initially identified and will fix others as I make a more systematic sweep of this section of the database.

The ILS Reports by Carnegie Classifications is based on the basic classifications published in 2000 that were included in the NCES data set. Work is underway to load the basic classifications published in 2010 that the Carnegie Foundation makes available.

Aug 13, 2014 10:25:57

Login or register to leave a comment.



Archive

Oct 2014 (2 posts)
Aug 2014 (1 post)
Jul 2014 (3 posts)
Jun 2014 (1 post)
Apr 2014 (1 post)
Mar 2014 (1 post)
Feb 2014 (1 post)
Dec 2013 (1 post)
Nov 2013 (3 posts)
Aug 2013 (2 posts)
Jun 2013 (1 post)
Apr 2013 (1 post)
Jan 2013 (2 posts)
Dec 2012 (1 post)
Nov 2012 (1 post)
Oct 2012 (1 post)
Sep 2012 (1 post)
Aug 2012 (1 post)
Jun 2012 (2 posts)
May 2012 (3 posts)
Mar 2012 (1 post)
Feb 2012 (1 post)
Jan 2012 (2 posts)
Dec 2011 (3 posts)
Nov 2011 (3 posts)
Oct 2011 (1 post)
Aug 2011 (1 post)
Jul 2011 (1 post)
May 2011 (1 post)
Apr 2011 (1 post)
Mar 2011 (3 posts)
Jan 2011 (1 post)
Dec 2010 (2 posts)
Nov 2010 (2 posts)
Sep 2010 (1 post)
Aug 2010 (2 posts)
Jul 2010 (1 post)
Jun 2010 (2 posts)
May 2010 (1 post)
Mar 2010 (2 posts)
Feb 2010 (1 post)
Jan 2010 (3 posts)
Dec 2009 (2 posts)
Nov 2009 (2 posts)
Oct 2009 (3 posts)
Sep 2009 (2 posts)
Aug 2009 (1 post)
Jul 2009 (1 post)
Jun 2009 (1 post)
May 2009 (1 post)
Apr 2009 (2 posts)
Mar 2009 (1 post)
Feb 2009 (1 post)
Jan 2009 (2 posts)
Dec 2008 (1 post)
Oct 2008 (2 posts)
Sep 2008 (2 posts)
Aug 2008 (5 posts)
Jul 2008 (1 post)
Jun 2008 (4 posts)
May 2008 (2 posts)
Apr 2008 (3 posts)
Mar 2008 (2 posts)
Feb 2008 (2 posts)
Jan 2008 (2 posts)
Dec 2007 (2 posts)
Nov 2007 (3 posts)
Oct 2007 (3 posts)
Sep 2007 (1 post)
Aug 2007 (3 posts)
Jul 2007 (1 post)