March 13, 2013 Meeting of Library Faculty Meeting

Time and Location of Meeting

March 13, 20133:00 pm - 4:30 pm 126 GSLIS

Agenda Details


Call to Order


Standing Items:

Adoption of the Agenda – Paula Kaufman


Approval of Minutes – Paula Kaufman


Introductions – Paula Kaufman


Report of the University Librarian (15 min – Paula Kaufman)


Executive Committee Discussion Items (15 min– Chris Prom)


Discussion Topics: 

  • Listen and Learn Series (Inclusive Illinois) Library Discussion – Jim Anderson, College of Education (Head Education, Policy, Organization and Leadership) and Menah Pratt-Clarke (Associate Chancellor) – 30 minutes
  • Faculty Input for the Technology Prototyping Initiative (15 minutes- Jim Hahn)

New Business





Minutes Details


Call to Order


Standing Items:

Adoption of the Agenda: The agenda was adopted with the caveat that Paula Kaufman may use her prerogative to adjust the order, depending on the arrival of the guests who will be speaking.


Approval of Minutes –

The minutes were approved with a motion by Beth Sandore and seconded by Kirstin Dougan. All approved.


Introductions – Paula Kaufman

Eric Kurt introduced Jake Metz, the new Media Commons Technology Support Specialist, an academic professional.  He has a B.S. in electrical engineering and previously worked in Library IT for 3 years.


Report of the University Librarian

Dean Kaufman reported on a meeting attended by those who report to the Chancellor.  A few notes from the meeting follow:


  • Chancellor Wise spoke about her growing interest in economic development.  MTD had a consultant here who is helping to analyze why economic development efforts haven’t been successful in our community.  We would need a population of 250,000-300,000 to make the community thrive.  Phyllis Wise and Bob Easter will take the lead in economic development and will work with the community to try to attract a major corporation or a cluster of organizations focusing on agribusiness or biomedicine.  The Chancellor stressed the importance of the airport and other communication hubs.
  • Mike Andrechak talked about the budget situation but said there was nothing to report.  The state is recovering slowly, with no improvement for paying us on time at.  As of the date of the meeting, the State owed the University $496 million. It is expected that in the future the state will not be covering as much of the cost of such things as health insurance and pension contributions as it has in the past, which means the campus will have to absorb those costs. Financially, the campus is stable, but the long-term projected revenues, tuition, and the ICR (indirect cost recovery) funding are flat or down.  Expenditures have been down, but are expected to grow as faculty are replaced.  The campus needs to develop and implement a financial strategy now.  Mike said that Fiscal Years 15 and 16 will be game changer years for us.
  • Provost Adesida talked about the campus strategic plan the VPAA has requested by June 30. The Visioning Future Excellence outcomes will be part of that; it is clear that given the financial outlook and the need to invest in areas of VFE, selective cuts will have to be made.
  • State Senator Daniel Biss, a former University of Chicago math professor, introduced SB1900, the Open Access to Research Articles Act.  While the Act aligns with principles we advocate, in practice it would have placed onerous mandated burdens on faculty and on the Library.  The Act provided that no later than twelve months after the effective date of the Act, each public institution of higher education (including community colleges) shall develop an open access to research articles policy. It provides that all public institutions of higher education shall develop policies that provide for the following:  submission, by all faculty employed by the public institutions of higher education, to the employing institution of an electronic version of the author’s final manuscript of original research papers upon acceptance by a scholarly research journal; the incorporation of certain changes and replacements regarding the manuscript; free online public access to the final peer-reviewed manuscripts or published versions upon publication; an irrevocable, worldwide copyright license granted by the author to the public; production of an online bibliography of all research papers that are publicly accessible; and long-term preservation of, and free public access to, published research articles. It also sets forth provisions concerning applicability, other policy requirements, and reporting requirements. Paula Kaufman, Sarah Shreeves, Dick Wheeler, representing Academic Affairs Office of the entire University system, Susan Singleton from CARLI, and Kappy Laing, from Government Relations, met with Senator Biss and discussed the issues the Act raised. Although the Act was patterned after the mandate by Harvard, Kansas, MIT, and others, it goes beyond what is required of those institutions, including providing no opt-out provisions. Biss also met with Alex Scheeline from Chemistry and Matt Ando from Math, who made similar points.  After meeting with us, and with Mary Case at UIC, Senator Biss withdrew the Act and asked his staff to recast the bill to only require institutions to encourage campuses to bring together faculty, librarians and administrators to discuss how to move towards open access. Paula also provided an update on the preparation of the Library’s proposal for the eResearch data service that Beth Sandore is leading on behalf of the Data Stewardship committee.  They will be meeting with Peter Schiffer to hone it down and then will present it to the Chancellor and Provost after spring break (March 26).


Discussion Topic– Listen and Learn Series (Inclusive Illinois) Library Discussion – Dr. Jim Anderson, College of Education (Head Education, Policy, Organization and Leadership),Dr. Menah Pratt-Clarke (Associate Chancellor), Dr. Steve Zimmerman, Dr. Sandra Rodriguez-Zas and Medra Roberts-Southerland from Inclusive Illinois–


Paula introduced Jim Anderson as chair of the campus Diversity Committee and Sandra as member of the committee.  Jim began by mentioning that the committee grew out of the Faculty Excellence which also identified societal issues and ways we could be leaders.  The Chancellor formed a small committee to lead the campus initiative in this direction, which met with Department heads, sponsored breakfasts, and met at the various colleges and the Council of Deans.  Members of the committee are now meeting with deans individually.  The committee is starting now to think about resources that can be put behind the initiatives and a strategic way to distribute these resources, since each area has different needs.
Jim offered that diversity in this effort is defined broadly by faculty, staff and students to include gender, sexual beliefs, racial and ethnicity, etc.  He mentioned that one of the goals is to move the needle to undergraduates, in that some progress has been made on faculty diversity but graduate and undergraduate enrollment has been flat.  He said that none of the big 10 or CIC peers are doing well either and that we want to get a sense of how Illinois can be a national leader.  As they have been meeting with the various departments and colleges at UIUC, they have seen a great variety in efforts.  Some have active plans, some have goals, some have a sense of accountability, but some have nothing.  Two of the questions of the committee are to determine: how to monitor some sense of accountability and how do we get to where we want to be?  They know we want to change the culture, but don’t even have a sense of where we want to be or a target.  He said there will be resources to help in this area.  Right now the committee would like ideas of how to be strategic in this area and needed resources.


Questions and Feedback

  • Qiang Jin questioned if there was a sense of whether students and faculty (who are considered “diverse”) are now happy or comfortable in this environment and if there is some sense of where we are on that continuum and if they mentioned challenges and strategies. Jim responded that overall, we are in the formative stage of this and that it can vary from place to place.  The committee is asking those questions and considering the current climate and attraction for undergraduates.  He also alluded to the campus climate study that was administered last year and that they need to drill down into those studies to see how staff and students feel— and use that to bring other people to campus.  He also mentioned that other campuses are doing much better with recruiting and funding undergraduates, even if the campus would not be seen as a competitor to Illinois. He said that we need to figure out what they are doing and best practices to gain the advantage.  There was a faculty member comment that some institutions make personal and ongoing efforts (such as phone calls, and personal letters and emails) to connect with “diverse” students who have been admitted, and even their parents, in order to recruit them and then strive to show them how they will fit into their campus and be successful, whereas Illinois doesn’t.  Jim said that many campuses devote more resources to that type of outreach and recruitment effort than Illinois, and that Illinois loses a lot of potential excellent diverse students because of that. He also said that there are different perceptions about UIUC even from areas within Illinois and that the University needs to help students feel welcomed and to see UIUC as their first choice.
  • Kirstin Dougan mentioned that one of the issues may not be the background of the student, but whether the student thinks college is even a possibility at all. She suggested the need to market the programs/college to not just the high tiered students, but to the next tiers as well and emphasize that there are funds and jobs in colleges.  Jim acknowledged that they have to work on both fronts and reviewed the presidential award program for high achieving Latinos and Blacks.  He pointed out, though, that even high achieving students don’t come here and that we have to market to different segments of the state too. Unfortunately, he knows that counselors advise students not to apply here, that they are not Illinois material, so there needs to be some intervention there on the part of UIUC and to meet the students and recruit them.
  • Beth Sandore offered that the library employs one of the largest number of undergraduates and that tour groups could include that fact, as well as how various librarians, like Jim Hahn are building programs to attract undergraduate students in developing emerging technologies.  She also suggested that it is not just academics that attract a diverse population to campus but that we should mention other interesting prospects in the library and our partnerships with campus departments too.  Jim Anderson agreed that we don’t let people know who we are or the great things we do to attract students.  He felt that when people know the kinds of resources and qualities here they will be willing to come and there is a great need to do better marketing.
  • Nancy O’Brien, who works with a lot of students from the College of Education, acknowledged that the college has one of the most diverse bodies of undergraduates and graduates anywhere and asked Jim (who is the Head of Education, Policy, Organization and Leadership there) suggestions on how to replicate this model. He responded that it is not going to happen overnight, and that it is important to have goals, and for the faculty to recognize the lack of diversity and to agree to promote diversity.  He provided some ideas of things they tried, such as the McNair scholars programs and the SROP (summer research program, which is a summer intensive program of research with a faculty member). He also mentioned various ideas that failed at first.  However, he said it is important to set standards and monitor them and try everything.  He said they also worked carefully to attract the students and worked throughout to include them in their efforts, including having them promote the programs.
  • Jake Metz asked if the committee has been reaching out to the student organizations and programs on campus to help promote this.  Jim said they are looking at this, including areas of overlap and duplication.  They are looking at a campus wide assessment of what is occurring on campus.  They don’t know how they all work together to provide a larger impact, yet.
  • Sandra Rodriquez-Zas brought up that it is not just recruitment, but also retention—that there are tutoring services in the first year and that the committee is looking at extending to the second year too to help support that.  Jim Anderson included that some institutions, like the University of Virginia, have excellent peer advising programs and the success of especially African Americans of graduating with a 3.0 GPA or better, whereas at UIUC we let students sink or swim.  He suggested options like having alums come back to talk to students.  Qiang Jim mentioned that she has heard students say they feel more comfortable if there is a faculty member of the same ethnicity/race as them.  Jim Anderson responded that undergrads may never have a faculty member of color (either at high school or college).  He suggested that students may mean they want to have that as part of their experience, but noted that faculty mentors who are white still do an excellent job with students from diverse backgrounds, and that not every faculty of color will give you a good experience and vice versa. He said there is a need to find a match with faculty and students— regardless of color and that good advisors cut across the color line.
  • Sandra Rodriquez-Zas asked how TOP (Target of Opportunity Program) has worked at the library and if it has been useful.  Paula Kaufman responded “no and yes” and that it wasn’t until recently that it was a rigorous program.  She shared that the Library had brought in some hires that failed, but that in the past few years the program has been quite successful (more rigorous program).  She said that some librarians, such as Jim Hahn, have also been engaged in LAMP, through the Graduate School of Library and Information Science, to try to recruit minority undergraduates into grad programs in Library and Information Science in the Midwest and that the Library has been paying much more attention to this area.
  • Other members of the committee were present, but due to the short time period, were not able to get into the conversation regarding the recruitment and retention of faculty from diverse backgrounds, including challenges and suggestions.  For more information, please contact a member of the committee at:


Executive Committee- David Ward, on behalf of Chris Prom  

  • The Executive Committee (EC) has been spending time reviewing a draft of guidelines for Peer Review Committees (PRC) and candidates and the responsibilities on both sides.  Being considered are what the role is for each side and definitions and standards.

They looked at the suggestions of the past couple years regarding a change to the tenure review process and whether to do away with the peer review committees, restructure them, or move the evaluative parts elsewhere.  EC decided not to make any changes, but instead, wants to think about how to improve the PRCs.  EC will be refining the first draft and this topic will be on the April faculty meeting for discussion.

EC is also setting up paper preparers and reviewers for the promotion processes and PRCs for faculty being hired.

There is a small group charged from EC to look at job descriptions and to keep the job title changes moving forward.  It was decided to keep the top level titles and modify the working titles.  There is a lot of paperwork for making this small change.  Tom Teper, Mary Laskowski, David Ward, Beth Woodard, Cindy Kelly and Donna Hoffman are working on the revised job descriptions. The process will then expand to people who kept the same title, but need to update their job description. In response to a question pertaining to advice for writing a general, rather than a specific job description, David said that EC is trying to include the major areas of responsibilities in each area, including the responsibilities to the unit and expectations of the unit.  He said they are trying to be broad, rather than mentioning individual projects, for example.  They will be using the document of guidelines they developed for the subject specialist responsibilities and expand that for technical and public services.  That document provides a good scope on how general or specific to be in the job description.

The Associate University Librarian review survey is still open.  David encouraged everyone to fill that out so that the Executive Committee has input for the summaries they write for the Dean of Libraries.

David mentioned, on behalf of Chris Prom, that the University Librarian search is progressing and that the search committee is scheduling on campus interviews in late March and early April for the finalists.  There will be public presentations and receptions for each one.  Chris will share updates, such as the names of the finalists.


Discussion Topic — Faculty Input for the Technology Prototyping InitiativeJim Hahn

Last summer Jim presented at a Faculty meeting and explained the work he is doing with diversity interns for technology prototyping.  He showed slides of the lab space on the lower level of the Undergraduate Library where the students create their projects and discussed how the students are involved in the various projects. He also provided some details about the diversity intern program he began in the summer of 2012.  Two of those first students have since applied to the Graduate School of Library and Information Science.  In an ongoing effort, he wants to get input on areas to pursue in these efforts.  He re-used code developed at UC Davis ( ) to create an augmented reality sandbox demo.


Jim mentioned that he provides an open house at the end of each semester to highlight student projects and also provides end of semester reports. He discussed some of the prototypes that the students completed, such as the ACES and Undergraduate Library wayfinding apps, and the plans to extend this to any high circulating location (such as the stacks).  He also mentioned an Ebsco API article search in mobile display that was created and a goal to do this with Primo.  He plans to work with the Music Library for wayfinding support (reworking the map database to incorporate all library locations with book stacks and multiple floors).  His group will be looking to expand some of the Minrva web services modules to include inventory support for the Music and Undergraduate Libraries.  They are also interested in doing recommender tools.


Of note is that the Library Budget Group approved funding for a technology prototyping service, beginning spring 2013 and the service focus is now being shaped.  He is seeking input from faculty on suggestions and directions for this service.




Paula Kaufman noted that Jim had mentioned Android, but wanted to know about these applications for the IOS system.  Jim said that they do have a code base that does IOS, but that it’s different enough from Android so can be a good challenge for students to learn.  It does pair enough with the pipeline they have created and uses Java.  As a simplified description, he mentioned that the mobile app is a presentation layer and that the middleware that is being developed can go into the Android, IOS, web page, or tablet.  He mentioned that the key work they are doing is the infrastructure that will work with any device, but essentially it is Jim or a research programmer on another grant that does the IOS work.

  • Nancy O’Brien expressed an interest in the inventory aspect and wondered how that might work due to the multiple parts to the collection in the Social Sciences, Health and Education Library.  Jim suggested she come and talk with the students and they will add it to the white board to work on.  Jim said the inventory tool can be done but might require some small tweaks to extend that to multiple places.
  • Beth Sandore brought up an idea that had been previously discussed, but that needs more input; that of creating a good read type App, but understanding the need for privacy and not being intrusive.  She recounted another example: if a patron returned a book and put it in a designated box it could then be counted in the “good read suggestion”. The thought was to create some aggregated data of things being read around campus without being intrusive. One of the questions was whether people might participate in this type of program.  A couple of individuals cited current such practices on the web for recommender services (such as Goodreads/Amazon).  Another individual agreed it would be useful service to show what is trending on campus.
  • Jim is looking for additional ideas or involvement in this prototyping service to create apps or web services that would add value or efficiencies to what is/or isn’t currently being done.  Please contact him for ideas, suggestions or questions.



New Business – None



Paula Kaufman reminded everyone that the next faculty meeting will start early (at 2:30) and will be held in the Illini Union, due to the Windsor lecture occurring at GSLIS at 4:00 on that day.


Adjourned: 4:20

Related Documents