Circulation Data: The Burke Library

Zack LaneReCAP Coordinator

July 2011

ReCAPColumbia University

Looks at Burke Library circulation activity Is only one measure of collection usage Presents data both Burke specific and

system-wide Circulation Desk uses several happening

locations: Burke, Butler, BorrowDirect, HSL Burke Library data is available from

June 2004, after switch from SOPHIA to CLIO

No circulation data for non-circulating collections



Data from Burke Library Happening Location only

Five primary types of circulation activity: charge, discharge, renewal, recall and hold

Most renewal, recall and hold are done in the OPAC happening location, dynamically by patrons themselves


0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

FY03/04 FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11

Comparison of Five Modes of Circulation Activity at Burke Library

Sum of CHARGES Sum of DISCHARGES Sum of RENEWALS Sum of RECALLS Sum of HOLDS


Total volume of charges has remained consistent (compared to 25.4% drop system-wide)

Volume of discharge predictably mirrors charges

FY11 upswing of renewals attributed to a change in culture at Burke Circulation

Retraining of circ staff to be service oriented


1,044

12,699

13,423

12,51712,833

12,160

13,170

12,311

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000


Total CHARGE Activity by Fiscal Year at Burke Library


Almost 2/3 of all charges are to graduate students

Patron Group definitions have changed:◦ UTS Affliliates, in 2007 changed from UTA to VIS◦ Adjunct faculty, in 2008 grad students were given

primary group OFF instead of GRD VIS includes NYTS, Auburn and visiting

scholars Pie charts break down data for FY11 only Bar chart compares patron group charges

for each fiscal year


0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000


CHARGE Activity by Patron Group at Burke Library

GRD OFF REG UTA VIS


GRD58.0%

OFF17.8%

REG11.3%

UTA1.2%

VIS11.8%

FY11 CHARGE Activity by Patron Group at Burke Library


6547,527

8,760 8,2658,950

7,689 8,1707,138

312

1,727

1,691 1,393

1,413

1,950 2,1612,188

53

1,922

1,8771,530

1,3551,259 1,390

1,392

939533 853 114

71 63145

25 584 562 4761,001 1,191 1,386 1,448

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Total CHARGE Activity by Patron Group at Burke library

VIS

UTA

REG

OFF

GRD


Data for all transactions in the Burke Happening Location

Nearly 80% is for the LC Stacks collection alone

Offsite charges are placed in the Butler Happening Location

Data unavailable for non-circulating collections


Everything Else1.1%

Burke LC Stacks78.1%

Burke Reserves11.7%

Burke Union Stacks9.2%

Circulation Activity by CLIO Location at Burke Library

System-wide circulation statistics are available for both on campus and offsite collections

Circulation data are accessible to all staff Offsite collections can be identified by CLIO

location format off,xxx. System-wide data is available from July

2003, the date of Ex Libris Voyager implementation


Comparison of on campus and offsite collection charges by volume

On campus charge volume declined by 25.4% between FY04 and FY11

On campus charges have declined every year since FY04

Offsite charge volume increased 115.6% between FY04 and FY11

N.B. On campus collection size declines each year; offsite collections grow each year

ReCAPColumbia Univeristy


13,326 14,951 17,615 21,383 25,083 28,029 27,524 28,735

557,501 552,788

509,556

483,905

449,135 441,188 437,064

415,987

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000


CHARGES: Offsite vs. On Campus by Fiscal Year

Offsite

On Campus

Monthly charges of both onsite and off-site collections are in phase with the academic calendar

Peaks in the middle of Fall and Spring terms The pattern of offsite charges is more

apparent when viewed alone



0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

CHARGES: Offsite vs. On Campus by Month

Offsite

On Campus


0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

CHARGES: Offsite by Month

Onsite and offsite charges can be compared using a ratio

The ratio of off-site to onsite increased from FY004 to FY009

Since FY009 the ratio has held steady at approximately 6%



2.33%

2.63%

3.34%

4.23%

5.29%

5.97% 5.92%

6.46%

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%


CHARGES: Offsite % of Total Activity

Chart compares total volume of charges to renewals for Offsite collections

Graduate students and Faculty request more Offsite collections than Undergraduates

Graduate students and especially Faculty have higher renewal/charge ratios

Over time, these two patron groups tend to renew more than charge

CUL may expect to see steady or decreasing request volume as a result



0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000


Circulation of OFFSITE Collections: Charges vs Renewals

Offsite - - - Sum of CHARGES

Offsite - - - Sum of RENEWALS


0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000


Circulation of ON CAMPUS Collections: Charges vs Renewals

On Campus - - - Sum of CHARGES

On Campus - - - Sum of RENEWALS

More information about data sets can be found on the ReCAP Data Center website

Primary data categories include: accession, retrieval, delivery and circulation

Tailored data sets and analysis will be provided to staff via the ReCAP Coordinator

Please see the main ReCAP website for general information about CUL procedures and systems


Date post:	14-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	mohawk
View:	29 times
Download:	2 times

Circulation Data: The Burke Library

Documents