February 1, 2006
Approval of Minutes
Introduction of new faculty
University Library Report
The issue will be on a future agenda and will be dealt with then.
(please see "Library PTA Committee Deliberative Policies & Procedures When Considering P&T Cases" at http://www.library.uiuc.edu/committee/faculty_meeting/meeting2005-2006.html )
2006 Library PTA Members are: Tim Cole, chair, Frances Jacobson Harris, Cindy Ingold, Mary Laskowski, Nancy O'Brien, Karen Schmidt, Greg Youngen
1. Summary of 2005 Activities:
a) In conjunction with Library FRC, we held two workshop/forums in 2005. The first forum held in January 2005 dealt with formats of personal annual reports and the promotion and tenure dossier (the latter being the basis for the peer review committee reports.) The second forum held June 2 nd dealt with preparation of final promotion and tenure papers fro submittal in the fall of 2005.
b) In March 2005 the Library PTA Committee reviewed 11 3Y peer review committee reports and forwarded advice to the University Librarian regarding 3Y candidate progress to date and future prospects of 3Y candidates for eventual P& T as members of the Library faculty.
c) In April 2005 the Library PTA Committee reviewed 21 0Y-3Y peer review committee reports (including all 3Y cases again) and forwarded brief critiques to each peer review committee regarding our assessment of their report's completeness and quality. Critiques were cc'd to University Librarian and appropriate candidate.
d) In October and November of 2005, the Library PTA Committee reviewed two cases for promotion and tenure, providing advice to the University Librarian regarding each case. A special full professor Library PTA Committee reviewed an additional 2 cases for promotion to full professor, providing advice to the University Librarian regarding each case.
2. Documentation updates:
During 2005 the Library PTA Committee also reviewed all P&T-related documents on the Library's staff Web site. Procedures and Guidelines for Peer Review Committees reviewing the work of untenured faculty were updated early in 2005. Tips documents were updated, especially as regards citation of digital publications. At the end of 2005, the P&T master calendar was revised for 2006. Migration of this calendar into a database form was completed and made effective with the 2006 calendar. Sub-calendars are now generated dynamically from the full database of events.
Other P&T documents, in particular the Library's Statement on Promotion and Tenure and the Library's alternative outline for Section III of the Promotion and Tenure dossier were not revised. Instead we concurred in the Library's FRC recommendation to EC that a task force be appointed to review these documents and report back to the Library faculty regarding potential update, revision, and/or reorganization. That task force recently began work
Three new documents were added to the Library's PTA/FRC Website:
a) A checklist of responsibilities of the Library PTA Committee Chair, outlining responsibilities of that position and (by inference) the responsibilities of the Committee.
b) A new document detailing procedures to be followed by Peer Review Committees reviewing work of tenured faculty. This document should be considered still in draft for this year. Feedback is welcome.
c) A new document detailing procedures and policies followed by the Library PTA during deliberation over promotion and promotion and tenure cases. (a limited number of hardcopies were made available at the Library faculty meeting. Highlights from this document to be discussed in open-ended fashion with Library faculty during the meeting.)
3. 2006 Plans:
a) First joint FRC/PTA workshop already held. Paper preparer workshops will be held in March (date and place to be announced).
b) In March and April Library PTA will be reviewing 14 0Y-3Y peer review committee reports (including 2 3Y reports).
c) In October and November we anticipate reviewing as many as 11 tenure cases and as many as 2 promotion to full professor cases.
d) Ongoing update and maintenance of Library PTA/FRC Website.
Faculty members are urged to raise questions or concerns with members of Library PTA as they arise. Comments and feedback are welcome. We also would ask all faculty members involved in PRCs or in any other way with candidates due to come up for promotion and/or tenure this fall to keep up with deadlines as described in the master calendar. Given number of cases expected this fall it is critical that we meet all deadlines in order to help insure highest possible level of process integrity and quality.
(please see http://www.library.uiuc.edu/committee/faculty_meeting/meeting2005-2006.html for PowerPoint presentation.)
The Learning Commons folks started with four working groups and then split up into 20 subgroups. A primary purpose of the Learning Commons (LC) is to create one-stop shopping for students when seeking information and resources. This will help revitalize UGL. This work will be both in the real and virtual worlds of the UGL. The goal is to create more collaborative learning spaces for students. This group has been working with many units from across the campus. Their reaction has been very positive. The goal of this project is to have the LC in full operation in the fall of 2006. Once people see the wonderful benefits of this project Lori hopes outside funding will provide additional support to help continue the development of the LC. Part of this effort will include renovations of the UGL. As part of this effort a common desktop image will be created for the LC's on-line site. There will be a soft launch of the information desk in June when there is not a lot of demand on UGL. An LC Coordinator will be hired in June.
David provided an overview of the layout of the LC. One of the design considerations was not to make the first floor look like a computer lab. The goal was to create a mixed work environment to help address the varied needs of students. The point is to keep the layout flexible and "comfortable." Another crucial aspect is to provide a variety of walk-up service points and types of service for students. The service desk will provide a uniform access point, but it won't necessarily be something to lock service people into a single location. A crucial role of the LC is to have staff rove around UGL to provide hands-on services to students at the point of contact. Upstairs will have an active area. The downstairs space will be more quiet space for people to do more "traditional" library work. The integration of compact shelving will help make better use of space. They are taking out 60% of the study carrels to help open up space for more group learning space. Media reserves will go downstairs.
Valerie Hotchkiss asked about DVD access and the importance of reminding students that the Library is still a place to conduct research and that UG students are welcome in the main Library. David and Lori said the LC would serve as an information entry point to the library for undergraduates.
Nuala Koetter asked about CITES involvement with the LC. How will students distinguish the difference between the CITES and Library contributions? How will the students get the feeling that the UGL is part of the Library? Beth Sandore said CITES, UG and Lib Systems have been working to create the most useful and effective learning environment to meet the needs of today's students. The goal is to get information to students to help them with their learning and research. It is important that a level of branding for the Library and CITES is established for the LC.
Gail Hueting pointed out that there will be many computer work stations throughout the LC and asked how people will get help at these stations. The computers downstairs will be browser-only express stations. The full-service computers will be located upstairs where technical support will be available to students.
Miranda asked about the technology operations and what type of "toys" will be made available to the students. Will these toys be more advanced? Lori said that phase 1 is more introductory in nature and phase 2 will move these toys to a more sophisticated level depending on funding and available technology.
Chris Prom asked about the LC Coordinator position. David said it would be an AP position that would work as a liaison between CITES and the Library. This person will be responsible for providing technology training for staff. This position will also provide reference, workshops, and would help coordinate the ICS and CITES workers who will work at the LC. This person would also help the Library to move forward the LC and would need to have a long-term vision of where this should go. This position has not been approved by the Library at this point.
Lisa Hinchliffe asked if David would post the results of the student survey. She said that she was struck by the sophistication of today's students and their expectations for the Library. She hoped for continual user feedback to make sure we stay on top of these needs.
Beth Sandore remarked about the integration of various units from across the campus to make this LC effort move ahead. There is much more integration on the surface between what the Library is doing with UGs to complete course and research assignments. The CITES computers have homework folders on them. The faculty have worked with CITES to provide campus-wide certain kinds of library desktop packages. They have a place for faculty to put content for the student to work with. Integrating with CITES on desktops gets us a lot more integrated with the UGs. There is much more programmatic integration throughout the campus and this needs to be reflected in this LC effort. Beth provided a nice thanks to Lori and David for their work.
In regards to the integrated services desk, they are now looking at this new model as one where they can train ICS workers with Library skills. David views this as a type of outreach.
Al Kagan asked if LC would be the name of UGL and would we still have an undergraduate library. Are we going to get more staffing from CITES as part of this new initiative? Lori said that a specific name for the LC hasn't been identified, but it is the hope that whatever the name students will come to use these resources. As for CITES there is no plan to augment their staffing of this LC. Joyce Wright talked about other university LC concepts and these libraries still remain as identifiable UG Libraries. Also, it takes a lot of paperwork and approval at various levels to change the name of a building. Whatever name is associated with the LC it will always remain the LC at the UGL.
Becky asked more about how Lori and David will be promoting the LC. Lori said the group has been thinking about this; possibly providing brown bags on campus, virtual web pages, etc, but nothing has been established. Becky suggested podcasts and blogs as two mechanisms for this type of marketing. David said that they have not really developed a marketing strategy.
Jo Kibbee asked about the hours the LC will be manned. David said that with current staffing they can only provide reference service until 10pm. They will be asking to hire additional GAs so they can provide full service until midnight even thought the LC space would remain open until 3am.
Maria Porta asked about the use of the East stairwell as additional space for LC. The space has been used for parties but does not seem to be part of the public space. The response was that there is no understanding as to what can and cannot be done to these spaces based on fire code issues.
DIA has provided $500,000 to support the LC.