« fabric organizing party | main | Kennedy, CD Policy for Digital Information Resources »
Lee, Collection Development as a Social Process
10 Apr 07
Lee, Hur-Li. “Collection Development as a Social Process.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 29.1 (2003): 23-31.
Lee describes a case study analyzing collection development processes in a women’s studies collection through the 70s, 80s, and 90s. She starts from the “basic assumption. . . that collection development involves not only objective professional activities but also complex social interactions” (23). In the course of the study, Lee analyzes data culled from internal documentation of library activities, archival records that represent the make up of the institution and how it changed over time, and interviews with librarians involved in collection activities in the area:
The data revealed two distinctive points of view towards women’s studies and women’s collections: feminist, and non-feminist. The standpoint held by librarians on both sides of the issue colored their perceptions of user information needs and information seeking and, in turn, became part of their justifications for collection decisions. The feminist group took a women-centered collection approach and worked persistently to establish a separate library collection focused on women. The non-feminist group adhered to the traditional disciplinary model and objected to the proposal for a separate women’s studies collection. (26)
It’s important to point out that Lee does not characterize either side as being necessarily more valid than the other. She gives considerable attention to a fair treatment of the two perspectives in an effort to understand the biases inherent in each. Interestingly, she concludes that, “Neither of the conflicting positions on interdisciplinary inquiry in women’s studies was evidence-based” (27).
If there is an implication for collection policy development—in other words, for that process by which we might attempt to codify in a policy document how selection and other relevant collection decisions are to be made—it would fall somewhere between one of two poles. Arguably, a collection policy document could attempt to be the governing factor that would eliminate subjectivity by establishing criteria by which decisions would be made. However, I consider that naive wishful thinking. It would be much more interesting to develop a policy document that would recognize and accommodate the implications of Lee’s findings. These are the implications I have so far come up with:
- Collection development is contextual, within the institution, within society, and taking into consideration the individuality of the librarians, faculty, and students directly or indirectly involved;
- The influence of individual biases must be understood and allowed for;
- Political realities, both institutional and societal, will have an impact on decisions being made;
- A policy document will need to provide clear guidelines in terms of direction and expectations, but still allow flexibility for the librarians involved to act with autonomy.
I’m not sure if this article contributes to where I want to go in my thinking about policy development, but I think its important if only because it is a fascinating and well-evidenced case that describes the reality of how collection librarians behave much more accurately than most collection development policy documents I’ve examined.
Posted by pzed on April 10, 2007 at 2.25pm
Categories: collection policies, libraries
