LIBRARY FACULTY MEETING
Date: April 20, 2011
Location: 3rd Floor Levis Center
Time: 3pm – 4:30pm
Call to Order
Adoption of the Agenda – Paula Kaufman
Approval of Minutes - Paula Kaufman
Introductions - Paula Kaufman
Report of the University Librarian – Paula Kaufman
Executive Committee Discussion Items - David Ward
EC is putting together a plan for hiring five priority positions; 9 requests were received. These are dependent upon the funding available. EC would like feedback on whether the list of priority positions accurately reflects our priorities and whether or not the scope of the positions is comparable to that of other similar positions at peer institutions. For example, Michigan and Purdue are broadening requests. In one example they are advertising for Humanities Librarians with a background in a variety of areas. Purdue advertised for a set of skills they wanted people to have. In addition to that they wanted them to have worked in other areas such as business, biology and engineering.
The five positions would be in these areas:
What is the appropriate level/expanse of positions to meet our needs while keeping in mind our limited resources?
The Strategic Planning committee is asking for Library presentations on “Strategic Priorities” so as to create a “Straw Man” that can be used as a starting point for the Library’s Strategic Plan. The idea is that each presenter will present goals for different services. These goals in turn will help with making allocation decisions regarding funding and personnel. The expectation is that there will be three to five major areas for the Library to focus on. From the Faculty Retreat, the areas identified are: Teaching Spaces, Assessment, Discoverability Tools, Management Issues, Print and e-Storage, Networking, International Area Studies, and Special Collections.
Where do we want the Library to provide leadership to the campus over the next few years?
The New Services Model Reference Services Planning Team report included the establishment of a reference services committee. The Reference Services Implementation Team has mapped out two plans for a committee and would like input from the faculty. Plan A is a cross-library committee, modeled after the current Division Structure. This plan would include 9 members, 1 ex officio, and 2 interns. Plan B is still a cross-library committee but a smaller one, consisting of 5 or 6 people. This plan would be based on the “hub” model defined in the implementation report. In this model, there is one person from each hub and may include an intern, a representative from a specialty service desk, and an ex officio position for a possibility of six committee members. The hubs are: 1. Life Sciences (ACES), 2. Physical Sciences and Engineering (Grainger), and 3. Central (Main Library, Undergraduate Library, and Virtual).
Question for Discussion:
Do we want the larger representation-based committee (Plan A) or a smaller (potentially more nimble) committee (Plan B)?
Ad Hoc Items: