Library Committee Handbook

Library Faculty Meeting

Meetings 2015-2016

Meetings 2014-2015

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 Agenda Committee

Library Faculty Meeting

Library Faculty Meeting
Tuesday, May 18, 2004
3:00-4:30 pm
Illini Union, Room 314B


Paula Kaufman, presiding, called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm after it was determined that a quorum was present. 


1.    Approval of faculty meeting minutes of April 20, 2004

       Minutes were approved by a motion from Becky Smith, seconded by Karen Schmidt.


2.    University Librarian’s report – Paula Kaufman

       Congratulations to Linda Ackerson who recently was approved for tenure.


       Budget – We are being asked to return the rescission money. Paula and Rod Allen will have a budget hearing with the Provost on May 19. There is no word on the budget yet but we will work hard to avoid layoffs. The State Legislature will not be finished by May 21st.


       At the AC meeting one of the Division Coordinators mentioned that it would be good to know what other libraries are doing in these tough times. Washington and UCLA have been closing departmental libraries. Michigan, Harvard, and Minnesota have done layoffs. Michigan is also going to take a hit in their collections budget this year. Iowa has cut collection funds and lost many staff. Berkeley has consolidated management of the main and undergraduate libraries.


       At the ARL meeting last week in Arizona there was a presentation by Al Guskin who is the President Emeritus of Antioch, who is heading a project called “Project on the Future of Higher Education.” Lisa Hinchliffe has been involved in that a bit. They have a website, The main message is that money for Higher Education is not going to rebound as it has in the past.


       A word on endowment funds – people managing endowment funds should not leave large amounts of money in those funds. For one reason it’s hard to ask donors for more money when we can’t show how we’ve spent what they have already given. It is also hard to make a case with campus and the foundation that we need additional funds if we haven’t spent the money.  If funds in an endowment are being saved for a large purchase, you must let Karen Schmidt, Paula, or Rod Allan know.


       If you have endowments with restrictive funds and you are having trouble spending them, sit down with Lyn Jones and she may have some ideas about how to work within the restrictions. It is possible for campus to seize the funds if we don’t spend them. We would fight them, but they can do that.


       Lyn and Paula met with a donor who has promised a $100,000 charitable remains trust income and $250,000-$275,000 after they expire, all in unrestricted funds.


3.    Committee Reports

       Executive Committee (Beth Woodard)

       Since the last faculty meeting on April 20th, the Executive Committee has met four times, on Monday, April 26, and Monday, May 10th for regularly scheduled meetings, and twice as part of the 5-year review of the University Librarian.  The committee met Monday, May 3 with John Unsworth and Paula Kaufman to discuss the University Librarian’s self-evaluation, and Thursday, May 6 with John Unsworth to discuss the survey results and the
report of the University Librarian’s 5 year evaluation.

1.     Approval of the minutes
        Minutes of the last two meetings were approved as submitted.

2.     Question Time
        Question: What is the feeling about bringing together unit heads to talk about how to
                use staff, state funding, data access, etc?   Good idea as long as the discussion is            focused.

               The loss of Liberty Dial was discussed again.  The long distance card has not proven to be a reliable solution, so Paula Kaufman will discuss with Beth Sandore and John   Weible.

3.     Assistant professor external reviewers for promotion and tenure
        Reviewers were chosen for three candidates.

4.     Personnel issue
        A personnel issue was discussed.

5.     Acting Head of Music
        Dick Griscom is leaving on May 18th. Bob and Paula will meet with the faculty and       staff     in the Music Library to discuss what happens next. EC recommended to Paula          that Bob Burger oversee the department until a new head is hired.

6.     Faculty searches revisited
        Paula will be meeting with the Provost on May 19th to discuss the budget and she hopes            to know more about our level of funding then.  The Music position is one that the group           agreed should proceed regardless of the funding. 

7.     Update on staff and untenured faculty budget discussions and Implementation
        EC discussed some of the issues and concerns brought up at the FY05 budget planning discussion meetings, and were brought up to date on what the Implementation Team        has discussed. 

8.     Request to add ISCC member to CPC
        EC approved the request to add the chair of the recently reconstituted ISSC Cataloging             Team to the Cataloging Policy Committee.

9.     FRC, P&T and various faculty concerns

               Several issues regarding policies of FRC and P&T were discussed and EC was   informed that the two groups will be meeting to work out some confusions.  It was     recommended that FRC and P&T have control of their own websites to eliminate           confusion.  Paula Kaufman will discuss this with Beth Sandore and John Weible.  It
        was suggested that members of EC, P&T, and FRC should sign a statement of   confidentiality, and that recusal policies should be discussed within each group.  Janis    Johnston has some language from an AALL form for conflict of interest that she can
        send as a starting point for such a statement.  Another policy that should be discussed is            one on dealing with vendors.  Lisa German and Paula Kaufman will draft a policy for            discussion.

10.    Staff on faculty search committees
        The discussion centered on the expanded role of search committees in recruitment, and the need to make sure that staff are involved in the interview process and have the          opportunity to express their impressions of the candidates.  In some cases,
        it is appropriate for staff members to be part of search committees, so EC does not want            to write policies that would preclude them from participating, but agree that normally search committees would be composed primarily of library and teaching


       Bob Burger is watching over the Music Library and will spend some time every week there.


4.    Other reports

       Budget Implementation Team Progress Update– Paula Kaufman

       The Implementation Team is keeping its eye on the long-term future but needs to do some things right away. They are considering setting up several teams:


               Circulation, Holds, Mail Options, E-reserves

               PSED and Life Sciences

               Digital Library Issues

               SWAT  - to help out in areas where there are cyclical demands and for emergencies


       The Implementation Team will look at how to choose team members and leaders, desired outcomes, and what the teams need to succeed and will also be talking with the Executive Committee.


       Feedback on Draft Strategic Plan – Diane Schmidt

       Diane outlined the plan specifying that it included goals and objectives but no actions or priorities. The action plan will follow once the goals and objectives have been approved. The results from the discussion today at the faculty meeting will be taken into consideration along with the division reports and individual comments. If anyone has additional comments after the session today, they should email them to Diane. The Committee will try to have a revised plan for discussion/approval by the June faculty meeting.


       The faculty met for 20 minutes at each individual table to discuss the plan. Afterwards they shared their comments. The comments included the following:


       Table One:

·         General - The same words are used in several different ways throughout the plan, e.g. "outreach" and "physical environment".  Need to clarify.

·         General - in regard to facilities, there is nothing in the document about adding new additions to the Main Library (but noted that Oak St. allows reconfiguration of STX).


       Table Two:

·         Section II.D.2 - need to emphasize long-term changes to collection organization-and actually do it rather than talk about it - need to move to implementation.

·         Section I.B.1.3 - should be focused in the Main and Undergraduate Libraries, specifically.

·         Section II.A.1.1.2  - collecting back files of e-journals should be done in collaboration with other libraries, not UIUC alone.

·         General - still need to address the purpose, use, accountability, resources, and budget allocations the Strategic Plan will be requiring.

·         General - digital issues should be more highlighted.


       Table Three:

·         Section II - “Collection Development, Preservation” was suggested as a heading to replace "Collection Management".

·         Section II.B.2.1 - should be excised because the Cataloging Policy Committee performs these functions effectively.  But if II.B.2.1 is retained, perhaps “investigate, develop and disseminate Library policy” should replace the current language.

·         Section II.B.2.2 - The change to LC classification would be a positive step.

·         Section II.B.2 - “To become a leader in national cooperative cataloging programs” should be added.  We used to be recognized as a source of exceptional records, but we’ve fallen somewhat. 

·         General - Some wondered whether the sequence of sections implies prioritization in any way, but whether it should was not stated.

·         General - Content regarding ethics and accountability is needed in the document.

·         General - The role of librarian as teacher should receive more emphasis in the document.

·         General - We’d like to be a player in national discussions and decisions again.

·         General - A more uniform level of specificity is need in the text regarding training.


Table Four:

·         Section II.B.2.1 - maybe need to alter language, could improve CPC to perform this role.

·         Section II.B.2.2 - the Library can’t support another major project right now but we had no problem with investigating the possibility of LC classification.

·         General - Technical services seems lost within the document and needs should have its own section, not be under collection management.  Perhaps separate functions- Public Services, Technical Services, Collection Management (put in separate sections).

·         General - Diversity needs to be better emphasized at all levels; increasing diversity at all levels including librarians.

·         General - Need more emphasis on training.

·         General - Digital issues should be more prominent.


       Table Five:

·         Section IV.C.3.1.3 and 1.4 are in conflict (research vs. librarianship track).

·         General - Should it address advocacy role of libraries can play, vis-á-vis readers (e.g. standards (national), agreements regarding use of e-books, journal back files, etc).

·         General - Most of the document is unobjectionable-this is not praise.

·         General - What is the role of special collections?  It is conspicuously absent from the final document.

·         General - Has to be some process for prioritizing the goals and assigning specific responsibilities for actions


       Table Six:

·         Section I.A.3 - focuses negatively, and could be broken down into three goals: 1) develop mechanisms to assess public services; 2) identify high areas of user dissatisfaction and develop strategies to address; 3) identify high areas of user satisfaction and develop strategies to implement more broadly.

·         Two sections IIB - "preservation" should be IIC.

·         Section II.B.2.1 encompasses the broad idea for Library-wide policies. Authority is the issue; accountability could be done by CPC - but maybe not?

·         Footnotes - no Roman numerals, please, they seem pretentious.

·         General - There are action items in here that should not be in this document, but in the action plan instead.

·         General - International strategies are not addressed - the existing Library International Strategy Policy ( has not been incorporated except for V.B.2.  It should have higher prominence. Could be developed further: "will maintain our international collections" or "access to international collections" could be added.

·         General - Observed that this is not a document that you can tie your annual report to. Why? (Diane S. answered that Communication 21 states that faculty annual reports should be tied to the mission statement, not the strategic plan).

·         General - Overall-not too radical - A lot of this is reinforcing what we already have in process.


       Table Seven:

·         Section I.A.1: change "public service staff" to "all library employees".

·         Section II.A.1.1 - emphasize that both print and electronic collections are important.

·         Section II.B.1 (access to collections) and section IV.B.1 (public access) goals are very similar.

·         Section II.B.1- "access" is too narrowly focused-link to rest of library activities. Move ahead to move us beyond print.

·         Section I.B.1.2: we need to emphasize "point of use" and "point of need" services, add promotion and assessment components.

·         Section II.B.2 - too narrowly focused-need to be more mainstreamed.  Think access.

·         Section III.A.1.5 - who do we need to hire?

·         Section IV should add something about necessary Oak Street additions.

·         Section IV.B.1.3 - many libraries have tried “My Library” and have not met with much success.


Social Sciences Division Report – Sue Searing

       See Sue’s attached report.           


       Physical Sciences & Engineering Division Report – Tina Chrzastowski

       Division Coordinator Tina Chrzastowski outlined a few of the many research projects taking place in the Physical Sciences and Engineering Division. Especially important to remember is that "All Science is Interdisciplinary," (part of the title of Chemistry Professor Paul Lauterbur's Nobel Prize acceptance speech).  PSED is the home division of two Nobel Prize winners in 2004. Other research in Chemistry includes a 12 million dollar DARPA award to Professors Nuzzo (Chemistry) and Rogers (Materials Science) to promote research to develop materials and printing techniques for high performance circuits on plastic. Professor Gruebele (Chemistry) was awarded an NSF Human Frontiers Research award to study large amplitude folding motions of proteins directly with Terahertz spectroscopy.  The study will further understanding of how vibrational energy moves around within complex organic molecules, with important implications to photochemistry.  Undergraduate chemistry continues to be of great importance and was reflected in two awards to chemistry faculty, Professors Moore and Smith.  Remodeling undergraduate laboratories in Noyes Lab will mean relocating the Chemistry Library and making the second floor of Noyes a gleaming row of shining new undergraduate laboratories.

The College of Engineering is in the midst of an ambitious building program that is focusing on improving facilities and laboratories in computing and information sciences, electrical engineering, and micro and nanotechnology.

The Thomas M. Siebel Center for Computer Sciences, an $80 million facility created through a gift of $32 million by Tom Siebel, Chairman and CEO of Siebel Systems Inc., was opened and dedicated on April 30, 2004.  This facility will accommodate the planned doubling of the number of Computer Science faculty (to 65) over the next several years.

Currently under construction immediately north of the Siebel Center is the new $32 million NCSA building, which will bring together the Center for Supercomputing Applications staff.

Construction on the $18 million expansion of the Micro and Nanotechnology Laboratory (formerly the Compound Semiconductor Laboratory) located north of Grainger across from Newmark Lab will begin this year.  The expansion will allow the addition of ten new Electrical and Computer Engineering faculty. This facility will assist in the work performed by the new National Science Foundation interdisciplinary Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center, headed by a Department of Mechanical Engineering faculty member.

The Department of Bioengineering, approved in December 2003, is the first new COE department in more than two decades.  Plans are underway to hire up to 12 new faculty in Bioengineering in the next five years.

The Summary of Engineering Research for 2003, now produced in the Grainger Library, lists more than 1,700 funded research projects totaling over $162.3 million. COE faculty also published over 2,200 journal articles and conference papers in 2003.  Several new important funded Centers were added to the list of 23 COE Centers in the last few years.  They include
the NSF $20 million Center for Advanced Materials for Water Purification, three quantum computing research programs, the Midwest Earthquake Center, and the Center for Simulation of Advanced Rockets, a $35 million dollar initiative funded by several governmental agencies.

Several faculty have recently won major awards.  Anthony Leggett won the 2003 Nobel Prize in Physics and Nick Holonyak Jr. won the Lemelsen-MIT Prize, the IEEE Medal of Honor, and the U.S. National Medal of Technology. Don't be surprised if Nick also wins the Nobel Prize.

The Geology Department has recently added a new professor in mineralogy, two new research scientists, and a lecturer.  The previous year they added the Walgreen Professor of Geology.  They are also involved in a joint search with the departments of Atmospheric Science and Geography for as many as four new faculty members with interests in the role of water in the Earth system. The three departments are exploring the creation of a new School of Earth and Environment.  The Geology Department is in the final phase of a $3 million dollar endowment campaign. A new state-of-the-art lab for the study of mineral properties at high pressures has been finished.  Previously, a new lab for coral research was completed.  Both research labs are in the lower level of the Natural History Building.  Four geology faculty have recently received tenure.

The Geology Librarian is president of the Geoscience Information Society this year and is busy editing the proceedings from the annual meeting.  As vice president, she planned and ran the annual meeting in Seattle, including a full slate of forums and a topical session at Geological Society of America.

The Geology Library staff members have been continually expanding the number of Web resources, including an index of book reviews of geology books. This is the only such resource available for geology books, and has been favorably received by the geology librarian community.


7.    Announcements

       Greg Youngen announced that the retirement reception for Pril Smiley is May 20 from 3:00-4:30 in the Vet Med Atrium.


The meeting adjourned at 4:35 pm.