|
In order for the library collection to stay current and to be of most use to its patrons, some books must be discarded so that new ones can be added. This is the basic principle behind weeding. The most important reason for proper weeding is to save space (Slote 3). Most libraries have a fixed amount of space and limited budget to build more space so efficient use of that space is essential. A proper weeding policy will make the library look at its collection to see what books aren’t used by their patrons, and unless they contain some vital information or fill a specific need, they can probably be weeded. Then new books that the patrons want or need can be put in the freed space. Another space concern is that many libraries are increasing the number of technological resources which also take up space, so in order to place computers and the associated furniture, space must be made (Slote 5). Another reason, though more superficial, is the appearance of the collection. Many people will not even consider looking at books that are worn or appear old (Weeding the Library Media Collection). If that is the case then keeping old copies of books, outside of historical value, is not helpful to the collection. Another appearance issue is when the user has to search through a packed and cluttered collection, with books very high or low on shelves it’s more difficult to find what they need (Slote 5). If weeding is done this will clear out many of the worn and tattered books allowing the patron less searching through items they don’t want. Currency of the collection is probably the most valuable thing that weeding helps with. Without good weeding procedures that check materials to see if the information is still correct then you are providing the patron with false information, which goes against the idea of what the library is for. The library should provide the most current and correct info available. A good weeding policy will stress relevancy (Weeding). If a book of factual information is old, but still in good shape and everything is still correct, then it can be kept but if the information is incorrect then it serves little use to the patron. The weeding literature has an acronym that serves as a general rule to remember about what books to weed, MUSTIE, meaning “Misleading, Ugly, Superseded by a new edition or better source, Trivial, Irrelevant to the needs and interests of your community, Elsewhere” (Weeding). Using that basic guide for what to weed and doing it on a normal schedule as part of the normal library operations, weeding should not be much of a problem. Many libraries have criteria in terms of age and shelf-time that they use as a basis for weeding (Slote 35). This reduces subjective weeding, in which a weeder looks at each book and makes a personal decision on whether they think the book should be kept or not, with no guides to base this decision on (Slote 34). In the past weeding policies have been much less structured or non-existent. Subjective weeding was the primary method used. Since it is totally up to the opinion of the librarian if a book should be removed this is inefficient way to weed. It’s very time consuming because each book has to be reviewed only on its individual merits (Slote 19). It also requires the weeder to be knowledgeable in many subject areas to know if the information is current. This is especially true in academic libraries where many of the books contain information that very complex and written for a high level researcher. Some academic libraries have tried to get the school’s faculty to help with the weeding process but so far the results have disappointing (Slote 10). In the past, and to a lesser extent, still today, certain negative ideas about weeding have kept it from occurring in a proper manner. One that is held by a number of librarians is that the library is the keeper of knowledge and history and that all written record should be preserved (Slote 9). While this is a noble ideal, the purpose of most libraries is not that of a collective history, but to serve the public, giving them the information they want or need. It serves no purpose to keep an older book that is never used. An extreme case of this is mentioned about a woman in Port Townsend, Washington where a librarian was fired after she refused to discard any books despite being ordered to do so (Slote 9). What needs to be understood is that when books are weeded they don’t have to be discarded but they can be sold or donated to people who do want them (Weeding). Historically proper weeding has also been discouraged because of issues relating to the collection size. One idea that some librarians have is that if they weed they won’t have enough books (Weeding). This brings up a question of how much is enough? Some libraries have taken the approach that their collection must be some predetermined size, so that they will only weed when it gets too large (Slote 10). There are arguments in two different directions toward this idea. Some think that as the base of knowledge grows that the library’s total collection size much grow also, and that if you were to weed to keep a certain size you’ll take out valuable material (Slote 10) Others say that leaving any books that are of no use to the patrons should be weeded without regard to collection size (Weeding). So if the collection size does become much smaller that it will better serve its patrons because they won’t have to wade through all the outdated or worthless material. These days many libraries do have weeding policies and procedures in place. They are written in a way so that they are not too difficult to implement and they keep the amount of unused books to a minimum. They use a mix of objective criteria and subjective criteria to determine what needs to be weeded (Weeding the Library Media Center). Their policies are also meant emphasize the quality of the collection rather than more superficial desires. One goal of a modern weeding policy is to increase circulation (Slote 10). If you weed out books that no one checks out not only will clear space for new books, but it will help libraries identify what areas they need to purchase new resources in so that they have the most comprehensive collection possible. Many weeding policies have extensive objective criteria as to what should be weeded and when. Slote lists a large number of criteria which should be considered (Slote 21-24). They cover all types of materials, their physical qualities, their content, and language used. He also suggests lengths of time in which almost every type of material and material subject matter should be kept until it’s checked to see if they should be discarded (Slote 24-27). These lengths of time aren’t meant as definitive rule; instead this is the point in which some subjective weeding is used. This allows the librarian to use the weeding process to determine what should be weeded but allowing them to use some judgment for those materials which may not fit the mold. A good weeding policy will require the librarian to get rid of those books which aren’t useful to their patrons. The way some libraries have chosen to decide what is of use to their patrons is to take a statistical look at the number of times an item is checked out over a period of time (Slote 41). Those books which are checked out the least then are checked to see if they need to be weeded. This is made easier with computerized check out systems because it can keep up with the number of times each item is used without much difficulty. An automated system can be created so that every so often a printout is created listing those books which need to be checked. Today many libraries use weeding procedures with varying levels of success. Some may have a true weeding policy while others will just say they do weed their collection. There are still libraries that do no formal weeding at all. In the short term I believe more libraries will realize the importance of weeding. With the increase in computer resources which take up more space and which people turn to, to find quick answers, all libraries will have to make sure their collection contains resources that are as useful as possible. It’s not always easy to implement a weeding policy if there is nothing so that could be a major factor in many libraries not doing so. There are additional things that lead me to think that over the short term, libraries may be slow to adopt good weeding policies. Some library patrons get upset when they find out the library is removing books from the collection (Weeding). It is understandable that some patrons will not like the idea that the library has to get rid of books and materials but the librarians should explain that weeding is an essential process of a good library. It makes the library more useful because it removes books of no use and it creates room for new ones. I am
encouraged by the number of weeding resources I found online that advocate good
weeding methods and attempt to teach them to others. Many public and academic
libraries will actually put their weeding policy up so that everyone can read
them. CPCC has a very in-depth page which covers their “deselection” policy and
the reasons behind it (CPCC Collection Development Deselection Procedures).
They have a monthly breakdown of items to check and a list of LC subjects and
when many should be discarded. Sunlink, which is run by the Over the long term I would expect weeding to become better and more widely used. More and more libraries will want to make their collections the best they can be in order to serve their patrons better. The wide use of the internet for finding up to date information will only force libraries to make sure that their books and other resources don’t contain false information which could cause users to not want to use them. I would also expect more librarians to hear about good weeding policies and their successes and want to see that at their library.
CPCC Collection Development Deselection Procedures. Slote,
SUNLINK Weed of the Month Club. 2004. Sunlink
Project. Weeding. 2004. Weeding the |