Library Committee Handbook

Library Faculty Meeting Agenda Committee

Library Faculty Meeting

Meetings 2013-2014

Meetings 2012-2013

Meetings 2011-2012

Meetings 2010-2011

Meetings 2009-2010

Meetings 2008-2009

Meetings 2007-2008

Meetings 2006-2007

Meetings 2005-2006

Meetings 2004-2005

Meetings 2003-2004

Meetings 2002-2003

Meetings 2001-2002

Library Faculty Meeting Minutes

24 August 2001
3:05 p.m.—4:15 pm.

The first Library Faculty meeting of the 2001-2002 year was chaired by Paula Kaufman.

1.  Announcements from the Faculty Secretary (Beth Woodard)

a. Each faculty should rise and state their name before speaking.  This is a courtesy for the other members of the faculty and a necessity for the secretary.
b. All faculty members presenting formal reports will be responsible for sending the faculty secretary a copy of the report within 48 hours, either in paper or as an electronic file.
c. All committees will be responsible for sending the faculty secretary a copy of the reports that they present to the faculty.  A copy must be sent within 48 hours of the meeting.  Electronic is preferred, paper is acceptable.


2. Approval of the 20 July 2001 faculty meeting minutes (posted on LIBNEWS-L on 27 July 2001)

The minutes were approved as presented

3. University Librarian's report

a. Presentations of Appointees:


b. Paula attended an informal faculty meeting in the College of Commerce and Business Administration to formally introduce Becky Smith as the Head of the Commerce Library.  Paula was presented with a recognition certificate to pass along to Beth Woodard for contributions to the college during her service as interim head of the Commerce Library.

c. Paula reminded everyone to visit the ACES Library in its new headquarters.  She recognized the contributions of Pat Allen, Maria Porta, Wendy Shelbourne, and Bart Clark in making the move expeditiously.

d. Dean's meeting

Several changes in deans were announced:


Nancy Cantor, chancellor, is concerned with interconnectedness of the university, and tends to look on the university as a whole.  She thinks a major challenge to the university is to bring the humanities and social sciences up the standards of science and engineering.  David Daniel, the new dean of Engineering, replacing the retired Bill Schowalter, agreed that it is important to have strong schools across campus.

e. Cultural groups on campus
Paula Kaufman and Bob Burger held the first meeting with individuals across campus who direct other campus cultural service groups, representing organizations such as Krannert Art Museum, Krannert Center for the Performing Arts, WILL, Spurlock Museum as well as the Library.  This group is loosely patterned after one at the University of Michigan and seeks to look for ways to collaborate and support each other as well as to heighten the awareness of campus of the cultural offerings and assets available locally.

f. Reception with GSLIS
Paula Kaufman reminded everyone that a joint reception with the Graduate School of the Library and Information Science will be held in room 131 LIS from 4-6 pm on Wednesday, August 29, 2001, to introduce new faculty members from both the Library and GSLIS.  All librarians were strongly encouraged to attend to meet new colleagues and to see the new building.

4. Committee reports
a. Executive Committee (Richard Griscom)
Dick Griscom reported for Tim Cole, outgoing Vice Chair of the Executive Committee.
The Executive Committee has met twice since the faculty last met.  On August 13, the Executive Committee discussed the status of the Trinkley Report, which makes recommendations regarding preservation and conservation for this library.  Copies of this report were sent to members of the Executive Committee and the Administrative Council and one copy is on file in the Library Science Library.
The screening committee for the Acting Sousa Archives position met and interviewed 3 candidates. There has been a slight delay in following through on this search.
The Executive Committee discussed the campus policy on charging for space.  Each library is charged a fee for maintenance, etc., and IRIS's use of the Observatory has not been charged to the library in the past.  This year's budget included a $28,000 fee which is being charged back to IRIS.
Paula Kaufman nominated Beth Woodard to serve on the Campus Budget Oversight Committee.  The Library and the professional programs on campus together have one representative to this committee, so a final choice as to who will serve on the committee has yet to be made.
The Executive Committee discussed ISCC committee structure for implementation of a new online catalog.
EC also approved the recommendation for Emeritus status for a retired librarian and made two visiting committee assignments.
On August 17, EC made appointments visiting committees for four new faculty members and appointed committees for the reopened Multicultural Librarian Search and the Coordinator for Information Literacy.  Searches approved searches for serials team leader and ACES librarian and appointed committees for each.
Several items were brought forward for future consideration.  First, records disposition for search committee chairs and visiting committees.  There seems to be confusion over who keeps these records and how long they should be kept, so policy needs to be determined and communicated.  Second, in the area of partner hires and target of opportunity positions, the library needs to establish unit guidelines.  The Executive Committee briefly reviewed topics that need to be addressed at future meetings.
Paula Kaufman recognized outgoing EC members Tim Cole, Margaret Chaplan, and Mary Stuart for their service on the Executive Committee.

5. Other reports
a. LibQual Survey (Bob Burger)
Bob distributed copies of the report, but reported that he will send the report out as an attachment to LIBNEWS-L next week.
As background, Bob reviewed the work that Sue Searing and Karen Schmidt did in 1998 and 1999 to survey campus satisfaction with library service.  LibQual (most recently dubbed LibQual+ because of its enhancements) is based on ServQual from the private sector and uses gap analysis to identify what is desired, perceived, and minimum levels of service.
Sue Searing and Karen Schmidt attended a one and one-half day seminar last fall on LibQual.  43 libraries participated this last spring.  669 surveys of the 3200 sent out were returned.  This year the survey had 56 questions regarding 8 factors.  Next year's survey will have 25 questions regarding 4 factors.  Many redundancies were removed.  In 3 overall questions, overall, service affect, and support of scholarly efforts, the UIUC Library scored above average (just like Lake Wobegon).  Further clarification of definitions for these categories are still needed.  This survey measures only the Library, not individual departmental libraries.  No negative gaps were identified for undergraduate and graduate students.  Faculty and staff identified several categories of gaps, but library staff identified many more.  Over 100 libraries will participate next year, and Sue Searing, Bob Burger, and Karen Schmidt will continue the discussion of whether this is something we will continue on a regular or an intermittent basis, exploring whether questions for individual libraries can be appended.  Bob will attend a workshop in September in Seattle on LibQual.
Questions and Discussion:
Leslie Troutman thought that this was a fairly low statistical response.  How did UIUC compare with other institutions?  Bob replied that our response rate was comparably high.
Paula Watson questioned whether library faculty were included in the faculty group or as library staff.  Bob noted that this was a problem with the survey in that people could have chosen either category.
Beth Sandore asked how the sampling was done.  Bob replied that the Division of Management Information Services created random samples within each of the 4 demographic groups.
Becky Smith noted that LibQual+ is based on ServQual.  The study, which was conducted by some professors at Texas A & M University, then gave more objective data about those differences of perception:  management, salespeople, and customers.  One of the companies studied (although not named) was probably Sears.  Sears' sales people tried to explain to management why customers were dissatisfied, but management had a different view.  The study revealed those perception differences.

6.  New Business
Tine Chrzastowski requested an update on the budget.  Paula has prepared a report that she has passed on the Bart Clark.  He will review and post next week.

7.  Announcements
a. Library Faculty Recruitment (Paula Kaufman)
Paula Kaufman started out the discussion by saying that she thought we should feel good about faculty recruitment this year.  In a report to the provost, we record hiring 17 faculty this past academic year.  The process should go more smoothly now that the Office of Human Resources is fully staffed.  She discussed telephone reference checking both before and after interviews.  Other places around campus seem to making much more use of this than the Library is at present.
Discussion:
Kathleen Kluegel (self-described Empress of English) agreed that the more we know the better, but is concerned about the lack of confidentiality.  For example, if we contact someone that the candidate has left off the list because he or she does not want his or her direct supervisor to know that they are looking.
Janis Johnston offered that the College of Law faculty use a practice they call Harris references, where they call colleagues.  The committee chair makes sure that the candidate knows that people will be calling.  Calls are not made without the approval of the search chair.  It is common to have lots of phone conversations.
Leslie Troutman clarified that the search committee chair does clarify this with the candidate first.
Tom Weissinger suggested that perhaps this should be indicated in the position announcements.
Leslie Troutman agreed that this would give candidates an opportunity to indicated confidentiality concerns in the application letter.
Becky Smith pointed out that this works best if calls are made only when someone is in serious contention for a position.
Janis Johnston noted that people are reluctant to be up front in writing, but one can hear hesitation in voices that can't be detected in writing.
Paula Kaufman noted that you more often feel better after a phone conversation than feeling worse.
Tom Weissinger questioned the level of documentation required to give to a rejected candidate.  Is it necessary to keep a transcript of the conversation?
Janis indicated that you don't have to be specific in your replies to requests about why a candidate was not selected.  You can use a phrase like…"we found a better match," with no legal obligation to go into specifics.
Kathleen Kluegel shared that fact that during a recent request for her to serve as a reference, the inquiring institution sent a letter stating that the conversation would be confidential.  She thought that some declaration of the degree of confidentiality would be in order.
Paula Watson wondered how the individual's interpretation of those results to the search committee could be construed and that perhaps more use of conference calls so other members of the search committee could participate would be beneficial.
Paul Callister suggested that sometimes the worst thing you can do is reduce something to writing.  Supplying the candidate with a written policy is not always in our best interests.
Becky Smith mentioned that Texas had an Open Records Act that allowed the candidate to request notes of phone calls.  Questions were standardized and there was leeway only at the end with an open question.
Beth Sandore indicated that as a committee chair she talked to candidates from a half hour to an hour on the phone before they came to campus so that she had a good idea of who they were, not just what they looked like on paper.
Paula Kaufman as a candidate not that long ago found it comforting to have those personal contacts and thought it provided a better experience both for the librarians and for the candidates.  Paula went on to share an article for the New York Times yesterday entitled "Librarians Adjust Image In an Effort To Fill Jobs" which quoted Leigh Estabrook as saying that "about 20 percent of the school's graduates get jobs outside libraries." Paula's impression is that other schools have even higher percentage of their student who get jobs outside of libraries.

Frances Harris suggested that we have a continuing discussion about retention of librarians and further suggested that we needed some sort of picture wall so that we can learn each other's names and faces.  Leslie Troutman amended that to be a virtual picture wall.

b. Digitization Workshops (Beth Sandore)


c. Access Task Force (Jo Kibbee)
Jo gave an interim report on the Access Task Force, which is a large group with a large charge.  They have established three subgroups:  access issues to things we have, accessing locally owned electronic resources, access to external resources.  They have been discussing the issues, developing a common vocabulary, and are now working in the subgroups.  They will report in October, with opportunity for input before the final report is due in January.

d. Email referrals survey (Jo Kibbee)
Jo announced that Kathleen Kern will be sending a survey to unit heads regarding unit email reference policies.  "Ask a Librarian" has been receiving a larger number of requests and Reference finds it necessary to make more referrals, and is grappling with establishing better and more informed policies about email referrals.

e. Call for Information (Paula Watson)

There has been considerable interest of late in Berkeley Electronic Press.  Berkeley Electronic Press was founded by professors at Berkeley who want to provide a means for organizations and individuals to publish electronic journals that may be alternatives to high-priced commercial journals.  They have developed a software package that facilitates all aspects of the publishing process and can be adapted to local needs.  Berkeley Press has been in contact with CIC and directly with Paula Kaufman to explore interest.  We are considering inviting them to make a presentation on campus.  A natural audience would be professors who are editors of journals, especially those currently producing their own electronic journals or who are interested in doing so.  Please send names of anyone you think might be interested to Paula Watson.  For more information on Berkeley Electronic Press, see http://www.bepress.com/ and http://www.infotoday.com/it/mar01/hane.htm.

f. LIBSCHOLCOM-L The first issue will be out on Monday, so if you haven’t yet subscribed, please do so soon. Willis Regier, U of I Press, will write some articles.  Please let Paula Kaufman know if there are issues that you would like to see addressed.