Library Office Notes |
University of Illinois Library at Urbana-Champaign |
No. 6, February 19, 1999 Edited by: Eun Hae Lee |
| The deadline for submitting items for publication is
Wednesday at 5:00 p.m. Send items to L.O.N., 230 Library, MC-522, E-mail: eh-lee@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu FAX: 217-244-4358 |
| New Location for the Library Billing Office On February 12 the Library Billing Office moved from 12a Main Library to 202 Main Library. We're now located on the 2nd floor, right next to the Main Circulation Desk, across from room 203. Our phone numbers are the same as before the move. Thank you to everyone who assisted, and to our new neighbors, Technical Services. (Susie Duncan) |
*****************************************
FEBRUARY LIBRARY EXHIBITS
"Cupid's Corner"
Undergraduate Library Media Center
"King's Legacy: Materials from the Collection of
Lawrence Stanford King (1946-1994)
Music Library
"Tango: An Argentine Invention"
&
"Mexican Corridos"
Latin American Library Services
"New Years Around the World"
Newspaper Library Exhibit Case
"Racial Justice: An International Struggle"
Main Corridor and Mueller Exhibit Case
(East Foyer)
Nuruddin Farah's Somalia: "Country of Imagination"
Modern Languages and Linguistics Library
(Library Office of Development and Public Affairs)
*****************************************
The Library Colloquium Committee
presents:
"Which guardians, whose culture?
Feminist thinking, libraries and
information"
a talk by
Sarah M. Pritchard
Sarah M. Pritchard, Director of Libraries--Smith
College, will take a
look at how the women's movement and the development of women's studies in the 1970's led
to an outpouring of new ways to look at historical and literary evidence, archival
documentation and public information services, and at how that in turn led to the
burgeoning of feminist thinking in librarianship.
Thursday, 25 March 1999
1:30-3:00 p.m.
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Grainger Engineering Library Information Center
Student Commons - Room 233
1301 West Springfield
Urbana, IL 61801
Sponsored by the University of Illinois Library at Urbana-Champaign
For more information, call 265-8191
or e-mail: mjacobs@uiuc.edu
*****************************************
The Library Colloquium Committee
presents:
1998-1999 Lecture Series
featuring
Sarah M. Pritchard (Director of Libraries - Smith College)
***March 1999***
Rick Jones (Music Librarian - Notre Dame University)
Sonja Jordan (Head, Preservation Unit - Notre Dame University)
***April 1999***
In the coming days and weeks we will be providing you with more details about each of
these
lectures through our web site
http://www.library.uiuc.edu/colloquium/
and various electronic and print media. Please begin to plan now to join us for what will
be
interesting, entertaining, and informative lectures on issues of concern to all library
staff.
Sponsored by the University of Illinois Library at Urbana-Champaign
For more information, call 244-9497
or e-mail: mjacobs@uiuc.edu
*****************************************
Academic Search Position Update
Title: Archivist for Student Life and Culture
Search Opened: 6-18-98
Search Closed: 7-30-98
Search Cancelled: 1-27-99
Interviews Scheduled: Oct. 21 & 30, 1998
Title: Director of Library Development and Public Affairs
POSITION FILLED
Title: Director of Library Systems
Search Opened: 9-24-98
Search Closed: 12-15-98
Interviews Scheduled: Feb. 8, 9; 10,11; 15,16; &17,18, 1999
Title: Director of the Law Library
Search Opened: 10-2-98
Search Closed: 12-15-98
Interviews Scheduled: March 9,10, & 11,12, 1999
Support Staff Positions Opened
Library Clerk II, 50%, Telephone Center, $9.137 per hour
Library Clerk II, 50%, Central Circulation, $9.137 per hour
Library Clerk II, 50%, Central Circulation, $9.137 per hour
Library Clerk II, 50%, Central Circulation, $9.137 per hour
Library Clerk II, 50%, Chemistry Library, $9.137 per hour
Library Clerk II, 100%, Law Library, $9.137 per hour
Library Clerk III, 100%, Undergraduate Library, $9.584 per hour
Secretary III, 100%, Electronic Information Services/Collections and Assessment, $10.237
per hour
Secretary IV, 100%, University Librarian's Office, $11.207 per hour
Support Staff Positions Filled
James Paz, Library Clerk II, 100%, Applied Life Studies Library, 1-25-99
Cinda Pippenger, Library Clerk II, 50%, Telephone Center, 2-1-99
Jennifer Wright, Library Clerk II, 50%, Central Circulation, 2-8-99
(Al Dries)
****************************************************
Minutes of the Library Executive CommitteeJanuary 25, 1999 Meeting
Present: Tina Chrzastowski, Tim Cole, Martha Friedman, Barbara Jones, Frances O'Brien, Karen Schmidt, Bob Wedgeworth, Mitzi Williams
Guest: Bart Clark.
Absent: Tom Kilton, Bill Maher
I. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes:
Cole reported that minutes for the Jan. 11 EC meeting were not yet finished, so this item was deferred.
II. Information Reports:
A. O'Brien announced that Student Life Archivist search had failed to result in an appointment and was going to be reopened. She recommended that the original search committee be asked to perform the reopened search. The EC concurred.
B. Jones announced that Lyn Jones would become Director of Development effective March 22, 1999.
C. Wedgeworth reported that AISS and ILCSO (Electronic Resources
Committee) had put together a proposal for an Illinois Digital Academic Library (see
http//www.lis.uiuc.edu/~sloan/idal.html). Even though Wedgeworth himself had suggested
such an entity during a recent CODSULI meeting, he expressed reservations about the
viability of the proposal as presented by ILCSO.
First, it did not include any resources earmarked for digitization and development of
unique information resources held or managed by academic libraries in Illinois. Wedgeworth
suggested this function should be integral to any such project. Second, the proposal at it
stands recommends administration by ILCSO alone. ILCSO is not appropriately organized or
staffed to create and administer such an entity well. Wedgeworth suggested that an IDAL
should be administered or at least jointly administered by one or more of the major
research libraries in the state, rather than by ILCSO alone.
III. Old Business:
A. Staffing Survey Update:
Clark reported that data collected were being entered even as he was meeting with the Committee. In order to support decisions on proposed new positions by February 15, his plan was to analyze the data using the Hayes model in order to determine an optimum overall staffing level for the Library, and then to use a regression model to determine highest staffing priorities assuming that overall target staff level. Between February 15 and May, the analyses would be widely reviewed and then adjusted as appropriate to create a good basis for future staffing analyses. Though this further refinement would likely identify additional staffing priorities and address nuances, it was not expected to change the highest priorities identified by February 15, i.e., those that needed to be filled in FY 2000.
The Committee was able to discuss with Clark the general nature of factors to be considered by the regression analyses, but he wished to defer detailed discussion pending actual running of the models (scheduled for week of February 1). Additionally the Committee asked for additional information about the Hayes model. For these reasons the Committee decided to invite Clark back for a follow-up discussion on February 8.
Friedman pointed out that no standards of service had yet been developed, though clearly such were needed to support an accurate and complete staffing survey. Wedgeworth and Clark agreed in principle but pointed out that such standards couldn't be developed and incorporated in time for the Library's meeting with CBOC.
Schmidt reported on a preliminary list of library-wide management information report elements that had been developed by the subcommittee of Chrzastowski, Cole, and Schmidt. The subcommittee proposed that the Library Administration should commit to regularly gathering and reporting these data in order to better support future staffing surveys and other management functions and decisions. Wedgeworth suggested that Clark (who hadn't yet seen the proposed list) be asked to provide the EC with an impact assessment at the next EC meeting. Other EC members should also review the draft list and propose additional measures of interest. A final list could then be prepared, preliminary process testing undertaken this spring, and an operative system to gather and report needed data put in place for the Fall 1999 semester.
Further discussion was then deferred to next EC Meeting (Feb. 8).
B. Main Library Reconfiguration Progress Report:
Clark reported that the reconfiguration committee had agreed that the first step would be to move most Technical Services operations to the basement. A contract with the architect who would design necessary changes to that space was nearing completion.
Clark went on to say that the remainder of the plan would depend in part on floor-loading issues. O & M and the architects would be providing additional data and options regarding floor loading. The reconfiguration committee's next scheduled meeting was February 9.
Wedgeworth said that it was crucial the planning committee complete it's work soon enough that impacted patron groups (i.e., departments and colleges served by the Library units affected) could review and respond to the plan before the end of the academic year. The EC and the Library Administration could then take these responses into account when making final recommendations and decisions. Tentatively Clark will report back at the April 26 EC meeting on the plan and on academic unit responses to the plan.
C. Discussion of ICR policy & policy regarding profit-making units:
Regarding profit-making units -- Wedgeworth reported that the Library had no policies in place as this had been an infrequent issue to date and experience was limited. He agreed that it was time to work on formalizing such procedures. He suggested that in regard to IRIS he wished to undertake a pilot study to see if any revenue over and above that needed to insure adequate reserves for IRIS itself could be spent to help fund development of a family of subscription services like IRIS (at least in function). Such a family of services would likely include both ABSEES and the Kolb-Proust Archive in addition to IRIS.
The EC evidenced support for this approach and Wedgeworth suggested the topic be placed on a later EC agenda for further discussion after he's had an opportunity to more thoroughly define the idea. Regarding how ICR funds are spent -- Wedgeworth reported that the Library receives 2 streams of ICR monies 1 stream a percentage of ICR monies gathered campus wide; and the other a stream of ICR monies from grant projects based in the Library itself. Whereas in a multi-department college a portion of the latter ICR monies would go back to the department where the grant project is based, because the Library is a one department College, all that ICR money is given to the college.
Williams asked if the campus had yet asked us to use our ICR money proportional to where it comes from (i.e., to support collections and services in Library units serving the academic units that generated the ICR dollars). Wedgeworth replied that we had not been asked, but acknowledged a trend in that direction under the new responsibility centered management budget system.
Friedman suggested that the EC needed more details as to how much money is involved, where this money comes from, and how we are currently using it, before we could properly discuss any policy regarding how to better manage it. Wedgeworth agreed and will ask Delores to provide that information.
D. Updated Research Time Policy draft:
Per decision at prior EC meeting (Jan. 11), Cole and Kilton had revised the research time policy draft and circulated this revision to Committee members via e-mail. Friedman had then meet with Kilton to propose additional changes, and in Kilton's absence she presented to the Committee as a whole the updated draft she and Kilton had prepared. Maher had also proposed an additional modification to the Cole-Kilton draft which had been circulated to the Committee via e-mail prior to the meeting.
Friedman indicated that she preferred her revision to Maher's as being less prescriptive of time to be allotted by each faculty member for research. Friedman and Kilton had also created an addendum to the policy which described in greater detail the objectives of the workshops to be offered by the Library Administration to unit supervisors. After some further discussion Friedman moved that the EC recommend to the Library Faculty for its adoption the revised document she and Kilton had prepared. Cole seconded the motion. After various minor wording changes proposed by Chrzastowski, Schmidt, and Williams were accepted, the motion passed unanimously. Wedgeworth took the action to ready the final draft of the proposed document for distribution to the Library Faculty. Cole accepted the action to notify Barbara Henigman that the EC wished this topic on the agenda of the February Library Faculty meeting.
IV. New Business
A. Library Committee Assignments:
Wedgeworth suggested that his office provide EC an updated copy of last year's call for committee volunteers for final review by EC before sending out for this year. In regard to concern about staff agreeing to or being drafted to do heavy committee duty without appropriate consultation with unit heads, Wedgeworth suggested that this concern be referred to Administrative Council.
B. EIRC proposal to modify wording of section of Library's patron computer use policy (via e-mail from Kathleen Kluegel):
While agreeing that it was appropriate to want to raise patron awareness of the legal conditions of use under which they accessed online data, Wedgeworth expressed concern that the wording proposed by EIRC gave too much license to vendors to define and interpret agreements with the Library unilaterally. Wedgeworth proposed that the EC should develop alternate language to send back to EIRC for their consideration. The Committee concurred. This topic will be on a future EC agenda.
Respectfully Submitted,
Tim Cole
Secretary, Library Executive Committee
************************
Minutes of the Library Executive Committee
January 11, 1999 Meeting
Present: Tim Cole, Martha Friedman, Barbara Jones, Tom Kilton, Bill Maher, Frances O'Brien, Karen Schmidt, Bob Wedgeworth
Absent: Tina Chrzastowski, Mitzi Williams
I. Approval of Past Meeting Minutes:
Minutes for the December 11, 1998 and December 16, 1998 meetings were approved as submitted.
II. Information Reports:
A. Wedgeworth reported that the Educational Technology Board has recommended to the Provost that he bring together into space available in the Armory the current ETAG, SCALE, and OIR groups. Though the recommendation doesn't directly comment on the proposal to create a Digital Technology Learning Center in the Undergraduate Library, if the Provost implements the recommendation as it presently stands this would mean that ETAG, SCALE, and OIR would not be part of, nor directly contribute funding to, the proposed DTLC in the Library. Meanwhile Bart Clark is continuing an evaluation of minimum facility upgrades necessary to support locating the bulk of the Intel Grant computer equipment at the Undergraduate Library.
III. Old Business
A. Cost-Recovery Laser Printing Update:
Wedgeworth distributed copies of a handout from Paula Watson which detailed current implementation status of the cost-recovery laser printing service for Library users. Current plans call for full implementation of the service in the designated Library units by approximately February 8, 1999.
B. Review of 2nd draft of Library FY 2000 budget:
Wedgeworth discussed details of the required narrative (text of these sections had not been available in first released draft of budget). He described content and format changes from last year and identified sections of the text that still needed extensive work. He also expressed concern that required tables as specified didn't allow the Library to properly show impact of not getting request. He indicated that supplemental tables may be added to better highlight these issues. Finally he also indicated that a key point made in the narrative is that the University can't expect to continue to fund collection budget requests without also adding needed additional support and positions for people who must manage that collection and make it available to end-users.
During the course of the ensuing discussion, Friedman, Jones and others proposed several editorial and wording choice changes to clarify major points made in the text and to insure appropriate emphasis, particularly as to the nature and strengths of our collection and collection policies.
Cole inquired as to how well the major objectives of the Strategic Plan had been integrated into the budget narrative. Wedgeworth indicated that points from the strategic plan had been integrated into the narrative piecemeal as appropriate and that the entire Strategic Plan would be included as an appendix. Since the EC had not yet seen the most recent draft of the Strategic Plan, O'Brien took an action to insure that the latest draft was distributed to the EC for further discussion and review as necessary.
In response to a question from Maher about a note on the FY 2000 budget request table next to the "Additional [academic] Positions" entry, Wedgeworth indicated that the notation was there as a reminder to reconsider exactly how that line should be shown in the table. He indicated that he felt the Library would be vulnerable by leaving the proposed additional positions unspecified in the written budget proposal even though the draft narrative did describe how the additional positions to be filled would be identified (through the staffing survey currently underway) in time for the Library's meeting with the Campus Budget Oversight Committee (Feb. 18). A few committee members commented that they liked that the narrative associated with this line emphasized importance of augmenting public services faculty.
Cole asked about how fall back priorities (in the event that campus did not fully fund requested amount) were to be developed. Wedgeworth indicated that he anticipated separate advice from the SCL, the CLPC, and the EC on this matter. Cole suggested that some discussion and/or coordination of that advice among the 3 groups would be desirable.
Friedman commented that she was glad to see mentioned in the budget our objective to bring librarian salaries up to a level at least third best in the CIC, but indicated she would like to see it even more forcefully stated. Wedgeworth and O'Brien were receptive to this suggestion.
Cole asked about how people in visiting or other unfunded temporary positions would be notified regarding likely prospects for their positions continuing/not continuing to exist under this proposed budget. Friedman recommended that the Library administration should communicate to these individuals in writing.
Committee members asked about how the staffing survey was progressing, and asked whether the EC could gather information or provide any input to facilitate the process. Wedgeworth alluded to a meeting he had had with Maher and Friedman since last EC meeting and suggested that Bart Clark should come to next EC meeting (Jan. 25) to update the EC on staffing survey progress to date.
Cole expressed concern that permanent funding for the 2 new systems positions might be more difficult to sell this year in light of some negative feedback from faculty regarding the DRA implementation. Wedgeworth indicated that he hoped to be able to report at February's meeting with CBOC some progress on discussions he's initiated with the campus, AISS, and ILCSO regarding how improve attention to issues of particular interest to the state's large research libraries. In that context it should be possible to make clear that some of the problems that have so far been experienced during DRA implementation were outside the control of the Library and were in fact due to problems with current organization roles and responsibilities with regard to the online catalog. Among other things the additional systems personnel will help allow us to modify and correct current deficiencies in those organizational arrangements.
At the close of the discussion, Wedgeworth urged EC members to provide any further input before the end of the week via e-mail to Bart, Frances, and himself.
C. Re-Draft of Research Time Policy Statement:
Kilton summarized the main points from division review of July draft of Research Time Policy. He identified 2 main themes concern about accountability for research time taken; and concern about being too prescriptive in amount of time each faculty member should take. Friedman pointed out that the Library has no general policy on overall librarian workload (while many other units have such policies regarding faculty workload) and suggested that it might be better to focus on creating such an overall workload policy rather than focusing just on research time component. Wedgeworth suggested that since the issue stimulating creation of this policy was the concern that junior faculty were not being given enough release time by unit administrators to do research, perhaps the Library Administration ought to conduct a series of seminars for supervisors focusing on supervisor obligations in this regard (and ways to successfully meet those obligations). At the end of the discussion Kilton and Cole were asked to redraft the policy taking into account the issues raised during the discussion and in the written responses from the divisions.
D. Review of Talking Points Document Draft for UL Search Committee:
The Committee endorsed the work Chrzastowski had done to date putting together a package of information to be sent to UL candidates. Maher volunteered to work with Chrzastowski to finalize that package.
IV. New Business:
A. Agenda Items for Jan. 15 Library Faculty Committee Meeting
Given that the Research Time Policy was not yet ready to present to the faculty, the only agenda items recommended by the EC for the January Library Faculty meeting were the presentation of the budget request to the Library Faculty; and a brief update on the status of the new UL search.
Respectfully submitted,
Tim Cole
Secretary, Library Executive Committee
****************************************************************
PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES
January 12, 1999
Present: S. Clark (chair), D. Griffiths, S. Hill, G. Homerding, W. Maher, C. Quinn.
The Committee's status was discussed. All agreed that the Preservation Committee should continue as a committee rather than a subcommittee of the Collection Development Committee (CDC). There was further agreement that, because of the overlapping concerns of the Preservation Committee and the CDC, it would be desirable for the CDC Chair to be an ex officio working member of the Preservation Committee.
The recommendations and new material contained in the second draft of David Griffiths' report, "Preservation of Access to Tangible Digital Publications at the UIUC Library," were reviewed. It was decided that a librarian with expertise in the realm of digital preservation should be asked to assess the report before the final version is sent to the Administrative Council for review.
The Preservation Committee will meet at 9:30 on Tuesday, February 16, in 428 Library.
Respectfully submitted,
David Griffiths
*********************************************************
Collection Development Committee
Meeting Minutes
December, 1998
Present: P. Allen, M. Chaplan, S Clark, P, Danner, M. Friedman, L. German, D. Holiman, K. Kluegel, L. Pausch, K. Schmidt (chair), P. Watson, Jane Williams
Guests: Betsy Kruger, Tammy Kuhn
Newspaper Policy Statement: Tammy Kuhn presented the revision of the Newspaper Policy Statement, containing amendments made in response to CDC input. With some additional minor editorial suggestions, the document was endorsed by the CDC, with enthusiastic support for the work that the document represents. The Committee agreed to have this document brought to the Library faculty as an item of information, presented in conjunction with a general update on the status of newspapers in our Library. Schmidt will take this agenda item forward.
Peg Binding: Betsy Kruger presented information on the status of peg binding items for the Stacks, as requested at the November CDC meeting. It is estimated that it will cost about $60,000 to make peg-binding obsolete, include retro-binding of titles that are now peg-bound. The CDC proposes that $10,000 a year be added to the binding budget beginning in FY2000 to assure that over a period of years this will indeed happen. Kruger also reported that the monograph-rebinding budget needs to be strengthened , as does the pool of money available for replacement monograph "classics" that are heavily used. Stacks is also waiting for the "Missing Items Report" from DRA to help identify additional areas of need.
Budget Discussion: Schmidt reported on the first draft of the Budget Subcommittee recommendations on the FY00 materials budget distribution, and members of the BSC present at the meeting talked about the process by which the numbers were derived.
Collection Development Statements Update: Kluegel and Schmidt reported on discussions they had regarding the way in which our collection development statements might be changed. It was agreed that we need to add basic information about selectors to the collections web site as a first step. We need further discussion on who the intended audience is for our collection development statements, and make sure that our statements answer the "So What?" test. Schmidt is planning to load our current collection statements, even though they are out of date for some collections. The historical information is accurate and the information about the general areas of collecting responsibility is still useful. Pat Allen, Kluegel and Schmidt will bring sample collection development statements to the January meeting for further discussion.
Book Sale Money: After further discussion, it was agreed to table decisions on expenditure of this pool of money until after we have firm information on the FY00 materials budget.
Announcements:
ICON: S. Clark reported that UIUC Library has been invited to be a charter member of the CRL ICON project.
CCMP: Schmidt reported that information on applying for Illinois Cooperative Collections Management Program grants for FY2000 should be forthcoming soon. This next funding year requires that the CCMP identify all funded project ahead of their funding year.
Illinois Information Age: Schmidt distributed information off the web regarding the Illinois Information Age initiative, which seeks state funding for "digital information for all citizens" in Illinois. The grant asks for over $50 million to make electronic resources available to citizens throughout Illinois, and appears to have a good chance for approval. It is unclear what impact this might have on dollars we now have available for purchasing electronic resources. (Information may be found at http/ /www.ila.org/infolit.html)
NATC: Schmidt reported that the 1997 North American Title Count has been received. She is working on a report that compares the 1997 statistics for UIUC with earlier years.
Approval Plans: L. German handed out the latest approval plan reports.
K. Schmidt