從政治大學教師選書行為探討圖書館選書服務

Abstract

大學圖書館館藏發展與教師選書行為之關係密切，而實務中並非每位教師均參與選書，而使館藏發展受到侷限。過去有關大學教師選書之研究多聚焦於教師為圖書館選擇館藏的行為，包含選書使用的資訊管道、選書態度和意見、選書依據的項目等，或是討論由教師選書、館員選書或合作選書的妥適性。對影響教師選書因素，以及教師如何選書以滿足工作上的需要，並未深入探究。基於以上問題意識，本研究欲進一步瞭解影響教師各工作任務選書及推薦館藏的因素，並探討教師不同工作任務選書使用資訊管道的差異，更細膩地探究教師的選書行為；另一方面藉由蒐集圖書館處理教師薦購書籍的經驗與意見，並考量教師選書行為，建議圖書館提供適當的選書服務。 本研究以政治大學為個案研究對象，兼採量化與質化研究方法，首先進行問卷普查，調查政治大學專任教師的選書行為、選書態度與意見及其基本資料，共計發放問卷621份，回收有效問卷211份，回收率33.97%。其次，以半結構式之深度訪談，分別訪談九位擔任過圖書館委員的教師，及四位國立大學圖書館館員，前者探究教師個人選書行為、影響教師選書的因素、圖書館委員會運作的情形，及對選書服務的建議；後者從館員的角度探討圖書館處理教師薦購館藏的經驗、對教師選書的期望、增進教師選書意願之服務內容。 本研究發現，第一個影響教師選書的因素為領域特性，包含普遍特性、學科特性及教師資訊行為特徵，影響教師選書行為及選書結果。第二個因素為工作任務，教學選書受到教學對象與教學目的的影響、研究選書受到研究目的的影響、服務選書受到服務對象與服務性質的影響。除一般工作任務選書之外，有四位受訪教師申請到國科會人文社會科學購書計畫，呈現出以關鍵字為檢索工具、以圖書館館藏為購書範本、以學術期刊蒐集書目資訊、以主題脈絡架構選書範疇等選書方式。此外，亦發現教師選用電子書的主要原因為方便取得與儲存便利。第三個因素為接觸書或圖書館的經驗，正面或負面的經驗均為影響教師選書的意願，第四個因素為選書依據的關鍵項目，本研究發現書籍內容和作者是影響教師選書最主要的項目。 在選書態度和意見方面，教師多半抱持正面的態度和意見。教師認同選書是教學及研究的一部份；掌握選書工具是有效選書的條件，選書是維持學科領域新知的方式，但需要投入時間和心力；適任的選書者應具備特定學科領域專業知識、瞭解基本的檢索技巧、瞭解圖書館資源與出版訊息。此外，針對採購館員、選書服務及系統功能等問項，教師也多半採取正向支持的態度與意見。 本研究發現教師對選書的認知，展現在其不同工作任務選書使用的資訊管道上。教學、研究選書經常使用「閱讀過文章的參考書目」及「學術期刊書評」；其次，教學選書多使用「出版社目錄或廣告」，但研究選書偏重「網路資源或出版社網站」。顯示教學選書與研究選書範圍與選書資訊之可及性不同，教學選書標的量少且明顯，研究選書則需藉助網路資源檢索以獲得蛛絲馬跡。服務工作則視服務性質決定是否選書，大部分不選書，或從網路資源、出版社目錄廣告選擇概論式書籍。實體書店是三種工作任務選書均會使用的資訊管道。教學選書較特殊的管道是依據教學經驗、書商業務人員、國內外大學課程網站選書。研究選書較特殊的管道是從其他大學圖書館館藏和資料庫、學會年會書展、學會通訊之新書資訊選書。服務選書較特殊的管道是網路新聞和報紙書評。 圖書館選書需顧及學校重點發展方向、師生教學研究需求，並建立館藏特色；教師依據個人工作任務需求選書，兩者選書的範圍和考量不盡相同。圖書館選書需要先制訂基本的原則和規範，以符合圖書館營運所需；教師以個人使用需求為選書原則。圖書館選書需要在一個組織框架中，遵循有限的預算和學校的政策運作；教師選書雖較為自主與自由，然為順利執行教學與研究工作，仍需針對實際的需要選擇書籍。圖書館選書和教師選書雖有不同，但兩者合作選書仍為發展館藏的較佳模式。 最後，根據研究結果，建議圖書館可從館員、服務、活動和館舍，提供教師選書服務。在館員層面，具備豐富經驗與協調能力的採購館員，以及做為聯繫窗口的學科館員，均有利於圖書館執行採購作業，並與教師建立關係。服務層面顯示可透過提供書訊、提示處理狀態、便利的薦購系統、預約回饋機制、發佈新書通報等薦購服務，推動教師參與選書；分類編目方式及排架品質，和書目資料庫之推廣行銷，亦為讓教師參與選書的服務重點。在活動層面可舉辦主題書展及新書發表會吸引師生目光。館舍空間與藏書量息息相關，此外，舒適的館舍也較有利於邀約教師到館選書。

The studies of the university faculty book selection behavior focused on what channels and items they used, attitudes and opinions they had in the past. In addition, it was to discuss the book selection by faculty, librarians or adopted the cooperative way. This study tried to study the influential factors of faculty book selection behavior, to explore the different book selection channels between different tasks, finally to recommend libraries to provide fine book selection service for faculty. This study takes National Cheng-chi University as case study, adopted quantitative and qualitative research methods. First, conducted a questionnaire survey to investigate the book selection behavior, attitude and views, basic information of full-time faculty, for a total of 621 questionnaires were issued, 211 valid questionnaires were responsed, 33.97% response rate.Secondly, the depth of semi-structured interviews were held on 9 library representatives and 4 librarians to gather advanced faculty and library book selection behavior, also the issues of library representatives committee and library book selection service. There were some influential factors affected the faculty book selection behavior. The first factor was characteristics of academic areas, including general characteristics, subject characteristics and information behavioral characteristics. The second factor was tasks, such as teaching book selection was affected by teaching purposes and clients, research book selection was affected by research purposes, service book selection was affected by service characters and clients. In addition to the general tasks book selection, also discussed about the ways of National Science Council Humanities and Social Sciences Book Acquisition project. Besides, e-book selection was another topic in this study, easy access and storage were the main reasons faculty agreed. The third factor was contact books’ or libraries' experience, positive or negative experience both affected faculty book selection desire. The forth factor was filtering items of book selection, content and author were main items for faculty book selection. This study found the faculty held positive attitude and views for book selection. The faculty agreed book selection was a part of their teaching and research tasks, book selectors should master the tools, book selection can help to maintain the professional knowledge, but faculty also need to invest time. Regarding the query about library acquisition librarian, book selection service and system function, most faculty also held the positive opinions. This study found that faculty different task cognitive book selection shown within using the different information channels. First, Teaching and research frequently used 'bibliographies of academic articles' and 'reviews of academic journals'. Secondly, teaching used 'publishing or advertising directories', but research used 'internet resources'. Service task seldom used book, or used “internet resources” or 'publishing or advertising directories'. The same book selection information channel between different tasks was 'bookstores'. For teaching book selection exceptional channels were 'personal teaching experience', 'book agent salesmen', 'other university similar classes’ syllabus'. For research book selection exceptional channels were 'other university libraries’ collection and databases', 'the book fairs of academic society annual meeting', 'academic society communicating message'. For service book selection exceptional channels were'intertnet news' and 'reviews of newspapers'. Library book selection take into account the direction of campus developmental subject, faculty task need, collection characteristics. The faculty book selection based on individual needs. Library book selection must formulate basic principles. The faculty book selection basic principle was their own task needs. Library book selection must follow the framework of an organization, limited budget, operating policy.The faculty book selection had more autonomy but devoted to their teaching and research. Although there were many different points between library and faculty book selection, the better way to development collection was cooperative book selection model by each other. Finally, this study suggested providing four level book selection service for the faculty. In the staff level, acquisition librarian with extensive experience, as well as subject librarian with collaborative capacity were helpful. In the service level, convenient recommending book system and attached service can improve faculty book selection. Also adjustment of book classification, cataloging and shelf systems, promotion of bibliographic database are fine service to encourage faculty participating in book selection.In the activity level, book fair and signing book party can attract attention of faculty. In the premise level, enough and comfortable space can collect abundant books, else invite more faculty join the book selection.