October 28, 2020 Meeting of Library Faculty Meeting

DRAFT AGENDA

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Library Faculty Meeting Agenda

October 28, 2020 meeting

3:00-4:30pm

Zoom meeting only

1.Call or Order

2.Standing Items

2.1   Adoption of the agenda

2.2   Approval of the minutes of the September2020Faculty Meeting

2.3   Introduction of New Employees (John Wilkin)

2.4   Executive Committee Report and Discussion (15 minutes –Bill Maher)

2.5   Report of the University Librarian (15 minutes –John Wilkin)

3.Discussion Items

4.Lightning Talks

5.New Business

6.Announcements

7.Adjournment

Minutes

Minutes –DRAFT

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Library Faculty Meeting Agenda

October 28, 2020

3:00-4:30 pm

Zoom Meeting Only

 

1. Call to Order

Meeting called to order at 3:02 pm (78 participants)

 

2. Standing Items

2.1   Adoption of the agenda

Adopted as is.

2.2   Approval of the minutes of the September 2020 Faculty Meeting

The minutes were approved.

2.3   Introduction of New Employees (John Wilkin)

No new employees were introduced.

2.4   Executive Committee Report and Discussion (15 minutes – Bill Maher)

Since the last meeting, exec has met three times with full agendas. First they appointed new members and/or replaced some members of Peer Review Committees.

Second, they granted that Kim Cole be granted emeritus status on account of his retirement. We approved initiating of an internal search for intern of the Mathematical Library. We approved of the membership and launching of a number of search committees which were for the Student Success Librarian, Library Assessment Specialist, Metadata Technology Librarian, and the Associate Director of Diversity Equity Inclusion and Access.

Fourth, EC discussed ways to streamline the search committee process as it relates especially with documentations and communications.

Five, EC reviewed and accepted an updated charge for the Wellness Committee. EC anticipates the call for members will not come during the next annual cycle. EC also approved the recommendation of the Outreach Engagement Committee and who should be serving as its chair.

Six, we advised on and then approved a revised proposal to create a two year Task Force on Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Access, which was approved. Seven, we had monthly updates from the ARLs and the directors on the range of topics such as the piloting of a campus program for electronic promotion dossiers and reviewing guidelines for full professor promotion processes. Eight, matters relating to an AI report system for financial information which is in the works. Nine, the committee reviewed a proposed charge for a working group on the Undergraduate Library and Main Library integration. Now that the architectural planning for the conversion of the undergraduate library into a Special Collections and Archives facility is moving forward, attention is needed as to how UGL collections and services will be integrated into the Main library once the library building renovation project is underway. The proposed charge is framed on the assumption that the integration process will need to align with three successive stages. First, moving of the undergraduate collections and services into the main library, while the Archives, Illinois History and Lincoln Collections, and Rare Book & Manuscript units remain in their current locations, though, [secondly] those special collections units will move to the undergraduate library structure once it’s been converted. And three, the undergraduate library collections and services will be fully integrated into the main library. The working group is going to focus only on items number one and two, but with an awareness of the ultimate integration goal of phase three. The working group begins work in November and is to conclude with a final report by May of 2021.

We also discussed an agenda item from mid-September regarding a survey of persons in all three categories of ongoing employment contract of the university library that is civil service, AP and faculty. Our discussions focused on how such a survey might relate to the climate quality study of a few years ago, as well as to the work of their proposed Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Access Task Force.

The EC meetings provide a regular means for John to update us on general campus patterns that may affect the library, especially based on information coming from his meetings with the Provost and his attendance at the Council of Deans meetings. Recent reports noted preliminary information on the budget. If you’ve been reading the newspapers and listening to the radio, you’re probably aware that state funding prospects for the next fiscal year, or not very promising. Accordingly, EC has heard about the likely necessity that our fiscal 2022 budget will need to model some reductions. I’ll leave any more specific information to john on this from his communications with the Provost we understand that the campus will want the library to go through an Academic Program Review process similar to that being done by a number of other colleges. However, this is unlikely to be launched until next academic year, but the Provost’s office will want to see us moving into that program review process.

Questions:

Cindy Ingold: Can someone on EC talk more about the possible survey and climate qual? Maher: We had a call from a faculty member in our September meeting because the faculty member expressed concern regarding the communications culture that intersects with the library and governance. We discussed it again this week, and we haven’t come to a conclusion on it. Partially because one of the issues is how this connects with what the DEIA Task Force is going to do. I see the issues that were articulated in the request we had as not necessarily fitting in in the bucket of climate quality survey done a few years ago and not necessarily fitting fully in the bucket of the DEIA Task Force. Wilkin: It’s tied up with the other things that are being discussed, so you’ll hear more on that I think in the future.

Steve Witt: Question regarding emeritus status and that decision-making process. In regards to communication 12 there’s new language regarding when to grant research faculty status as zero time as opposed to Emeritus. What’s the process within the library for that decision? Is it made by EC or does it stem from the faculty member that is forwarded to the Provost office? Wilkin: I don’t really have a comment and I need time to study this. We haven’t had a request for that yet, so I think the question will be, is this only to bring the faculty like a zero to like a zero percent appointment in the library or is it something we can do through the Executive Committee, or is it simply a formality. But we’ll have a look at that and communicate on what that should be. What I can say is that the process from my past experience for emeritus faculty members is that faculty status does come to EC as a routine standard routing process, and it typically comes to us from the division from which the person had been a member.

Kyle Rimkus: I’m curious about the near and long-term plans for the UGL collection. Is the actual physical collection going to remain its own collection or will it be integrated into the main collection in the long-term and where will they go in the near term? Wilkin: I defer to Mary Laskowski but I suspect it is to be determined. Laskowski: Yes, we have yet to have meetings, but we have begun conversations with regards to de-duplications of collections in the Undergraduate collection as compared to other holdings to the library. Some things have been being transferred into stacks already. There have been ongoing conversations with some other department libraries about what may make sense for various pieces of the collection, but I think for all of the remaining collections that has yet to be determined.

Lisa Hinchcliffe: Bill, can you give a quick overview of these new committees for Wellness, DEIA, and UGL? I’m trying to keep track of when they will start. Maher: The Wellness Committee is new and we’ll be having a call for members in the spring and then decisions will be made in the early summer EC sessions, so they will be underway August 16. The DEIA Task Force is a two year task force and setting it up and the membership is still being drafted. The other working group related to the UGL will get underway in November and is due to conclude its work with a report in May. Hinchcliffe: Thank you. I’m still trying to understand these task forces–were other committees on diversity and accessibility eliminated? Ingold: This task force came together over the summer that would move ahead with making recommendations. The idea is that these responsibilities shouldn’t fall on one person or one committee; they are looking for membership across all units and ranks. There’s still a diversity committee, accessibility committee, etc. Hinchcliffe: I see it’s not fully formulated so that’s why I couldn’t find it on the website, okay.

Kirstin Johnson: I have a question about the Academic Program Review and what that means for the library? Wilkin: So quick read is that it’s a strengths and weaknesses sort of a thing and it’s a really good thing to do periodically. The Academic Program Review programs run on an annual cycle like all of the academic programs do, and the academic provost asked if we should be doing this in the library. I thought it would be helpful in getting some additional scrutiny, and wanted to discuss it in the Executive Committee. It’s a lot of work and would bring in objective external people with the idea of getting some identification of weaknesses and ways the university can help our program excel. We are an academic unit but we don’t do all the sorts of things they do and so it was raised as a question.

2.5   Report of the University Librarian (15 minutes – John Wilkin)

Dean Wilkin met with the Provost earlier in the day and discussed the Provost’s meeting with the chairs of the Library Consultation Working Group (LCWG). The report will go up on the Provost’s website shortly. This is much delayed: the LCWG submitted their report in Spring, just as we became embroiled in preparations for COVID-19. The Provost has been eager to respond and finally was able to make time to meet with the chairs. The Architectural and Engineering RFP is consistent with the LCWG’s recommendations, and their report affirms the directions currently planned for the building project. Dean Wilkin thanked all who contributed to the program statement in the RFP. Tom Teper: I just want to add that we got a lot of input from the special collections division and want to thank everyone.

Dean Wilkin discussed academic searches and a requirement by the Provost to create an annual hiring plan. Many of our currently approved searches have search committees, and we have determined that we have budget capacity for them. Consequently, these are approved by the campus. Soon we’ll be sharing some campus criteria that the campus will ask us to speak to when we have positions going forward. The budget group met today and we continue to do the work that we need to do to review and authorize positions

The Dean emphasized the importance of efforts around diversity, equity inclusion and accessibility and, in particular, climate. He is eager to see the DEIA task force charge completed and the group charged. We have discussed using the task force as a bridge to bringing in the director. The director will be an important hire. The Dean emphasized his sense that this person should be a leader in the organization, not just around diversity efforts, but in what we do as a library.

The Dean discussed our budget conditions. At the University level, the numbers for next year do not look good. While enrollments are very strong and those numbers are good, things are not looking as good for the state, and we’re beginning to gear up in preparation for a reduced allocation from the state. Colleges are being asked to prepare as we did earlier this year, by setting aside funds in preparation for a likely reduction. We have yet to be given our reduction target; however, both the Dean and Susan Edwards have been told the target is likely to be 5% but there is also a possibility for it to be as much as10%. In light of that, we will put a hold on further positions closer until we have determined that we can meet the target.

Hinchcliffe: Can you clarify what might happen with student wages? You haven’t commented on what will happen to people in less permanent positions.

Wilkin: Let me be clear: We are not planning for layoffs. I do not think this is necessary and the Provost agreed. With student wages that is something we can trim now and increase later. We currently plan to do the regular cycle of GAs for next year. We have a permanent allocation based on Library IT fees that covers $600,000 for GAs in waivers. We won’t more than that and we will hire a reasonably full contingent of GAs. Susan Edwards noted that she will send out a message next week regarding GAs and will ask people to respond by the second week of December. We will plan on meeting shortly after that and hopefully have the allocations sent out toward the end of the month of December.

JJ Pionke: Thinking about reductions, what does that look like practically? What will aim for or reduce for these hypothetical reductions whatever they may be? We’ve already cut a lot of things and I’m wondering what else we’ll cut. Wilkin: We don’t simply lop off things: we consolidate and look for ways to be efficient. We look at what we’re doing now and what we’ll be doing in the future. Of course we will become a smaller library, but we’ll reduce staff without reducing services (cf. the Classics Library and Vet Med). The allocation will be smaller and we’ll be able to fill fewer positions. We need time to pivot, but opportunities present themselves. For instance as we move the UGL into the Main we have the opportunity to consolidate for fewer expenditures. As in the past, we know we can do this efficiently.

3. Discussion Items

None.

4. Lightning Talks

None.

5. New Business

None.

6. Announcements

Mara Thacker: You may have seen an announcement about an ACRL Methods Workshop next week on “Research Process, Methods, and Relationships for Academic Librarians.” This is still happening and there are still some slots so feel free to join us, and thanks to Chris Prom for arranging that.

Chris Prom: I have some news for professional development support. That has been increased from $500 to $1000 per person. We’ll revisit this in the spring, but this is an increase of $500 from the numbers announced earlier in the semester.

Spencer Keralis: Glen Worthey will be talking about “Representation in the Digital Record” on Friday 10/30 at noon for the IHR Critical Practice in Text Data Mining Research Cluster.

Ruthann Miller: RBML has a few upcoming events! “The History of Witchcraft” on Oct. 29th at 7pm Champaign.org/live; “Hindsight 19/20s” on Nov. 6th at 11am; and “The Queen, the Book, and the Medieval French Royal Court” on Nov. 19th at 2pm.

Jameatris Rimkus on “The Mystery Recordings of Langston Hughes: A Poet Visits the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign” on Nov. at noon.

Bethany Anderson: The next Archives’ Women in Science lecture will feature Dr. Susan Martinis on November 10, 12-1 pm: https://distributedmuseum.illinois.edu/about/women-in-science-lecture-series/

Wilkin: Expressed his appreciation all the work we’re doing on the virtual events. It is so important to continue to be vitally engaged with the work that we’re doing, He is very pleased with the virtual programming we have been doing.

7. Adjournment

Meeting was adjourned at 3:51pm.