Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChandler, Adam
dc.contributor.authorWilcox, Wendy
dc.contributor.authorLeary, Joanne
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-27T20:36:05Z
dc.date.available2019-11-27T20:36:05Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1813/69527
dc.description.abstractThis research is a significant contribution to our understanding of missing items in the CUL collection. The validation study was useful in determining the availability of CUL materials in the open stacks; when patrons seek a monograph in the stacks, they are able to locate that item 96.4% of the time, overall. This translates into a projected loss rate of 3.6% of materials in the open stacks. That is the aggregate estimate. The loss rate varies by location. There is no significant difference in the accounted for rate in EAST libraries that tattle-tape versus EAST libraries which do not tattle-tape. Our research suggests it is time to question the notion that tattle-taping is the primary and best method available to improve the usability of open stacks.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjecttattle-tapingen_US
dc.subjectsecurity stripsen_US
dc.subjectopen stacksen_US
dc.subjectsecurity gatesen_US
dc.titleWhere are our Books? 2018 Sample Inventory of CUL Open Stacksen_US
dc.typereporten_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Statistics