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

Faculty Meeting Minutes September 22, 2011

 

MINUTES

of the

LIBRARY FACULTY MEETING

 

Date: September 22, 2010

Location: 3rd Floor Levis

Time: 3pm - 4:30pm

 

 

Call to Order

 

Standing Items:

Adoption of the Agenda (David Ward)

Agenda was modified to remove the IT discussion item from New Business and move Greg Youngen's Lightning Presentation to precede Kathleen Kern's Reference NSM discussion item.

 

Approval of Minutes  (David Ward)

Minutes were not approved due to no quorum.

 

Introductions (David Ward)

There were no introductions.

 

Report of the University Librarian  (None)

 

Executive Committee Discussion Items (David Ward)

 

1.      Exceptional Dewey Report- discussion

 

EC has reviewed and endorsed the Exceptional Dewey Report and wants feedback on its recommendations concerning implementing LC for new materials in the Languages and Literatures Library. Are there other areas where we might want to consider adopting LC?

 

Lynne Rudasill suggested that for any new units have reference collections changed over to LC when collection materials are moved and consolidated, and suggested doing so for the new International and Area Studies Library

 

Kirstin Dougan noted that Performing Arts has been dealing with a split collection (part Dewey part LC) for a while and offered to show those involved with implementation or considering the switch to LC  how a split collection can work.

 

Lori Mestre suggested we change reference collections over to LC for all units, not just new units.

 

JoAnn Jacoby asked  if the implementation team has been convened yet. Michael Norman said it has not, but a charge for the team  was approved by Paula - as an operational team, the charge doesn't need to go through EC.  Invitations will be going out and they should begin working soon.

 

Lynn Wiley noted that going forward we will be looking at using LC for new materials but changing to LC would be something done incrementally, prioritizing areas where it makes most sense or based on those areas that volunteer to convert. The process must be an efficient process and we will not ever expect to be doing a full retrospective project. However, it will be important to make sure that libraries can request retrospective conversion of series or collections (e.g., Milton) to make sure that like materials are drawn together.

 

Sue Searing noted that any classification system is imperfect when it comes to some collections such as the LIS collection. But regardless, she is concerned with the burden placed on people working in the stacks and dealing with split collections. Sue noted LIS schools still teach Dewey to library students because school libraries still use Dewey and having the LIS materials classified in Dewey provides a good learning opportunity.

 

 

2.      Faculty Retreat Planning - Discussion (Date to be determined. Postponed from originally proposed Oct 18th date)

 

EC looked at the outcomes of the Faculty White Paper discussions and went through the retirement process and hiring plan and came to the idea of a faculty retreat to discuss  issues impacting faculty.   EC's objective for the retreat is to develop 1) medium-term goals and 2) activities to support them in order to inform decisions. The retreat was tentatively scheduled for October 18th  but will be postponed until later in the fall semester.

 

So what would faculty like to get out of a retreat and what are some useful directions to pursue as we have this discussion?

 

Beth Woodard  asked how do we do this without a Library strategic plan. Chris Prom noted that there still is a strategic plan - even if it is out of date. Chris suggested the retreat could be used as a way to get ideas out on the table that can support decisions we need to make sooner than later. Ideas generated from a retreat could position us better to support a new strategic planning process.

 

Beth Sandore noted that the strategic planning process can seem monolithic and consume a lot of time. So, while the retreat may not need to be driven by a strategic plan, whatever we do, we should take the Library's Vision Statement and align ideas we come up with either as supporting or not supporting the Vision Statement. This might help us re-shape the Vision Statement for when we begin a new strategic planning process.

 

Chris Prom noted that EC had talked a little about the Vision Statement and whether or not it is adequately on target with what the Library Community as a whole thinks our collective vision should be. Chris noted some of the far-reaching plans and visions of other similar institutions, suggesting we could benefit from reviewing how other institutions are staging themselves for the future.

 

Beth Sandore commented that if we are talking about where the Library goes the next three years, the Vision Statement should at least "be in the room" acting as a reality check.

 

Ideas for the retreat:

1.      Lynn Wiley - Discussion of the future of higher education and what sort of ways students are going to connect and learn from each other. Understanding this will affect how we provide services. We need to address both how we respond to users and and how we react internally to meet those needs.

 

2.      Barbara Ford - Conduct a scan of, and discuss some of the things that are happening at, other Universities.

 

3.      Beth Sandore -What is the role of "opportunism" in the context of the services the Library provides. In such a large distributed organizations, it is hard to articulate lock-step priorities.  In some areas it is essential to ensure consistent core services, in others it is not possible or desirable.  Where does it make sense to look to what else is going on across the Campus, the University, in research and service areas?

 

4.      Chris Prom - We should talk about building and leveraging strategic partnerships on campus, for instance around curriculum development.  How can we do a better job of building higher level thinking skills in students such as what can happen when  integrating primary source materials into curriculum?

 

5.      Lynn Wiley - Can we provide a summary of how faculty do their research? Where do they go? What are they looking at, looking for? We need to understand better how core groups like Undergrads, Graduate Students and Faculty approach their work.

 

Old Business (Items for Action or Discussion)

None

 

Ad Hoc Items:

            Lightning Presentations

1.      Research in Progress - Greg Youngen

Greg showed us how he is using visualization tools to display data he collected about Vet Med publishing. Looking at just one year of publication data (2009) Greg's data easily displays through tools like http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes

 and www.wordle.net Greg was originally looking at trends in publishing in Vet Med journals versus non-Vet Med journals and found interesting information about author collaborations. There could be many good uses of visualization tools for other librarians.

 

New Business (Items for Action or Discussion)

Discussion of Reference New Service Model - Recommendation #3 Creating a new Research Support Services unit. (Kathleen Kern and Paula Carns)

 

Questions: How effective do the faculty think the recommended model(s) will be and are they sufficiently forward-thinking? What are the likely barriers to success and how can they be addressed?

 

Kirstin Dougan asked why we need a new unit. Kathleen explained it is a consolidation of other units, not a new unit.

 

JoAnn Jacoby shared a comment that came through EC recently asking about the logistics of responding to different levels of questions and when questions would be referred to the RSS unit. Would units be expected to refer all directional and basic reference questions to the central desk? Kathleen explained basic questions about directions, library policies/etc. would be expected to be answered by everyone and front line staff would be trained to answer such questions.  Level 2 would generally get referred to librarians in the unit, if available, or to the central desk if no one was on hand in the unit to answer Level 3 questions would stay with subject matter experts.

 

Chris Prom asked for clarification on the relationship between Head of Research Support and the Coordinator position

 

Kathleen explained the recommendation of the newly configured RSS unit was for a fifty percent time Head . The100% time Reference Coordinator would sit outside any particular department and coordinate the way reference services are provided across the Library as well as spend time  helping with best practices, helping to set staffing levels, etc. The Coordinator would be someone outside RSS and the position would rotate.

 

Carns:  According to the report, the Coordinator could sit either in the Office of Services or in RSS.

 

Sue Searing noted that this recommendation puts all the expertise together in a way it wasn't available before.  The intention is to get out of the conundrum of whether Reference is capital "L" Library or just another unit.  We want to make it clear that that this is a shared resource that cuts across all units..

 

JoAnn  Jacoby asked what are some of the ways to draw a line that makes sense between reference services offered by Special Collections units versus other units that have materials like microforms that require a high-level of mediation. Kathleen  and Paula noted that many units have "special" materials and with respect to the special materials, the units would continue to do what they're doing. One of the questions for smaller units to answer is how are they also going to provide service at the central reference desk

 

Ad Hoc Items:

            Lightning Presentations

 

Data Purchase Pilot Program - Karen Hogenboom

 

The focus of the Data Purchase Pilot Program is on numeric and spatial data. Things people can 'number crunch.' The program was announced to the campus on September 15th and we are already getting some good responses. Funds to support the purchases are State Funds.

 

Beth Woodard noted that we will probably be asked what data sets have been purchased, are they archived someplace, and will there be a process for getting them? Karen agreed these are questions we should prepare to answer.

 

Announcements

Merinda Hensley - Savvy Researcher is going well. Next week is Data Services week.  Please consider attending.

 

Jenny Emanuel - We have convenient little cards to give away at our desks listing the URL for the Library mobile page, text message number. Anyone wanting cards should contact Jenny.

 

JoAnn Jacoby - On September 29th, there will be a NSM session on follow up assessments.

 

Rudy Leon - Tomorrow starts banned books week. There are a few displays in the Undergrad Library. Also, contact Rudy to find out about how to get some time on big flat screen T.V. to highlight collections from your library that may be of interest to the students.

 

David Ward- Now that we have the Faculty Meeting Agenda Committee completed (David Ward, Joanne Kaczmarek, Lisa Hinchliffe) please get as many ideas to us as you can for issues to discuss during the next faculty meeting.

 

Adjournment

Adjournment was at 4:30PM.