Library Committee Handbook

Executive Committee

AUL Annual Reports

Committee Charge and Membership

Innovation Fund

2017-2018 Meeting Information

Previous Documents 

Position Table
Position Request Form

Standing Policies

Executive Committee Minutes

August 10, 2001 

Present:  Paula Kaufman (chair), Janis Johnston, Bill Maher, Beth Sandore, Sue Searing, Leslie Troutman, Beth Woodard, Greg Youngen 

1.      Minutes of the last meeting were not available for approval. 

2.      Question Time 

There was a question about the by-laws.  The By-laws Committee has met, and one of the issues is that the definition of the faculty in the by-laws needs to be revised.  It’s unclear from the Provost’s office what part of the definition needs revision.  There seems to be confusion about academic rank of instructor.  It was suggested that the entire paragraph that references people with 50% or above be eliminated.  There should be a provision that allows one-half time people to vote.  

What is the status of the gender equity memorandum that was sent out in July?  It will be included on the list of future agenda items. 

3.      Systems Needs 

There is an ongoing compilation of a list of things that there is a need to ask Systems if they could implement for the whole faculty and staff.  No other comments or suggestions have been received.  There is a need to articulate things that Systems should be doing that they are not now doing that would make work easier for faculty and staff.  It is important to speak with John Weible to determine which of the items Systems is already working on, where they are going, what are the obstacles, what are budgetary issues.  The final list will be sent to Paula Kaufman who will, in turn, forward it to John Weible.  John will be invited to attend the next Executive Committee meeting. 

A new position (actually two half-time research programmers positions) has been granted.  It was decided that it might make more sense to hire one person.  There is a feeling that there is enough overlap between the kinds of things that would be asked of someone in either of the positions.  It would make a lot of sense to combine the two positions into one.  The goal in both cases is to support Library projects that can be supported centrally with technical public means.  Both positions are permanent and neither is occupied right now.  Names were recommended for a search committee for the academic professional position. 

4.      FRC/PTA Participation in Library Faculty Interviews 

This is basically a proposal to have one representative from the combined FRC/PTA participate in interviews.  It would be necessary to make sure the one person could cover both aspects because traditionally the PTA person has only covered research and publication.  Not everyone was in favor of this proposal.  It was decided to make no changes at this time.

5.      Planning for Discussion of Communication #21 

FRC is meeting tomorrow to discuss Communication 21.  At least part of the discussion should be led by FRC.  Three major issues need to be covered:  the annual evaluation and the feedback, the post-tenure review, and the grievance process.  Paula is still waiting for guidelines about asking for a full review.  A full review cannot be asked for every year.  The grievance matter is something the by-laws committee is working on and will bring to the Executive Committee for discussion.  It will be reported at the Faculty Meeting that the grievance process will be dealt with separately at a later meeting.  There is a need to determine if the process is totally in compliance with the spirit of Communication 21, in terms of the kind of evaluations which tie the annual reports to the goals of the units and then providing feedback.  There was concern that an open faculty discussion might not be profitable at this time.  Distributing Communication 21 and having initial discussion to take care of basic questions that might come up would be better.  The next step would be to draft a document that is the Communication 21 for the Library, and then take that to the faculty for discussion.  The October meeting might be an opportunity for people to express what questions they have about the areas that need focus in order to make the document work for the Library and to be sure the Library is in compliance.  FRC will distribute the document and solicit written suggestions and recommendations, then present the document at the November Faculty Meeting. 

6.      CPC Report 

An evaluative report was asked for after the first year.  The report is more factual than evaluative.  One of the concerns that was expressed last year was that the group seems to be communicating about rules and process, but it doesn’t seem to be a two-way street.  One avenue might be to go back to the committee and request a more evaluative report and provide a sense of whether the communications on cataloging practices in the Library have improved.  There may be merits in canvassing the people who were part of the former committee.  The original task force report will be sent to the Administrative Council;  Paula Kaufman has not yet sent it to them.  Sending the report to the Administrative Council is one way of getting input from the divisions.  Before going to the Administrative Council, it might be appropriate to first get more assessment from the committee about what they think is and isn’t working well, did they achieve what they hoped to achieve, etc.   Paula will ask a team to get input from the divisions, simultaneously. 

7.      Exit Interviews 

There are obvious reasons for exit interviews for people who are going to “ greener pastures.”  It is also important to do exit interviews with people who are moving from one departmental library to another.  A determination needs to be made to find out if there are other things going on that cause people to leave, to move.  Exit interviews need to be conducted with people who are exiting Library units as well as exiting the Library.   Paula Kaufman tries to talk with people who leave the Library.  It was suggested that a sampling of interviews with graduate assistants as they graduate might be helpful, or even maybe follow-up a year later with them.  This could lead to producing guidelines of minimum expectations that will be provided for graduate assistants.   A list of issues will be compiled and presented to the personnel office, including graduate assistant hiring.   

8.      Identifying Issues from this Meeting to be Communicated to the Faculty 

The issues to be presented to the faculty include:  

Communication #21.

Exit interviews are being conducted, and suggestions were made for improvement.

The Library is looking for ways to make faculty work easier.