Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Notes on LAUC-SB “Next Gen LAUC” Discussion Session.
Notes on LAUC-SB “Next Gen LAUC” Discussion Session. Permission to post was granted by Yolanda Blue, LAUC-SB Representative to LAUC Committee on Professional Governance.
LAUC-SB held 2 feedback sessions. The first session was part of our membership meeting on January 4. There was a lot of discussion and comments. We decided to schedule a second meeting on March 7. For the second meeting, there were breakout groups covering issues and concerns regarding Reference/Instruction; Collection Development; and Technical Services. In addition we discussed in each group professional governance, professional development and trends for the future. The different facilitators for each group took draft notes.
Summary from Reference and Instruction meeting, "Next Gen LAUC", Wed. Mar. 7
- There was a general consensus that we should reach out more to the Library folks outside the Librarian series who:
(a) have an MLS (or equivalent)
(b) are working on one, or
(c) are thinking about working on one.
They can't vote or be officers (without major changes to the bylaws), but they could participate in programs and projects.
Put out a call via the "Library" listserv for persons in the categories above to self-identify, and add them to the "lauc-sb-plus" listserv, so that they'll get all the news and invitations. At present, about the only person who is "plus" on the listserv is David Gartrell, but there are several other possible.
Supervisors of non-librarian staff would have to be encouraged to allow their people to participate in these programs. The new AUL for Organizational Development and Effectiveness could help with this.
- More use could be made of internships, either for UCSB students interested in pursuing library careers, or for local non-UCSB students who are pursuing the MLS through distance learning.
Contact campus Career Services for assistance with UCSB student internships.
Put out a call on the listservs of library schools doing distance degree programs.
- There are lots of meetings/workshops/classes out there at which the Library should have some representation, but many fall through the cracks.
Create an open calendar of meetings (using the Library Wiki, perhaps?) so that everyone can see a list of upcoming meetings/workshops/classes events. It would help members coordinate travel - both in terms of travel sharing and room sharing, and also in terms of "I'll cover this meeting if you cover that meeting." It would also help the library administration to identify programs we should be sending a representative.
More and more meetings (both conferences and committee meetings) are being held virtually. This trend is likely to continue. We should encourage more participation this way.
Investigate where RPD could allow members to use their prof. dev. funds to pay for organization memberships. Since frequently one need not attend meetings to be active in a society, this might allow some members to broaden their professional activities.
- New and prospective librarians need more help to get professionally involved.
Have RPD promote mentorship in this area, offering opportunities through the expanded "lauc-sb-plus" list (see above.)
Reference and Instruction
- We need more help in developing Outcomes for library instruction and evaluating learning effectiveness.
Reach out to Educational Psychology faculty and/or the Gevirtz Graduate School of Education for assistance.
- The Library (along with the rest of the campus) is periodically evaluated by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). Can we make use of these evaluations? The next one is coming up in 2013, we believe.
Review the last WASC library evaluation, especially the Educational Effectiveness document, and see if there are recommendations we haven't yet and should implement.
- More should be done to encourage "thinking outside of the box".
Encourage members (with time and administrative support) to form cross-departmental ad hoc committees/working groups/task forces to pursue innovative projects.
- We need to (at least) keep up with the technologies being used by our patrons.
The Library should acquire new devices (especially in the area of tablet and other mobile devices) for librarians to experiment with in delivering library services.
The new AUL for Information Technology should be encouraged to find ways to give librarians more control over their own workstations so that we can try new software without having to make the IT support team jump through hoops to get it installed.
Summary from Collection Development meeting, “Next Gen LAUC, 3/7
Trends in Collection Development
Issues and concerns (discussion points for explorations)
- Go beyond patron driven acquisition of packages (PDA)(not to be patron driven)
- What are collection manager’s role regarding big packages (small publishers do not get represented in big packages
- University Press approval plans circumventing individual selecting
- Massive licenses are being looked at by CDL / UC budget strategies
- UC looking at contracting out (there are less collection managers)
- Administration may decide – collection management is very expensive
- The need for discovery tools to browse virtually online table of contents, previews and indexes for faculty research
The need for good online tools to enhance research decision making by faculty
(Caveat – Publishers will calibrate how much they will show) What are publishing the trends?
- Scholarly communication (life cycle advocacy roles)
Scholarly communication requires experience in:
- consultation roles for collection managers, faculty liaison, outreach, specialized reference services and student advisement (graduate students/undergraduates who need help with topics)
- setting up deposit account
- helping faculty create accounts
(caveat: how to determine the number of FTEs needed)
- Being realistic that advocacy roles may be more limited
- Collection Development Committee (CDC) vs.California Digital Library (CDL) (looking at the big picture) ? There are different lines of responsibility which makes it more challenging
- CDC should focus on the best collections we can get for our user community
librarians must articulate
- Individual selections and the need for enhanced roles for subject specialists not as much for generalists (example: Janet buys 99% through GOBI which allows selections titles
- How do we address what method is cost effective (big packages)
- How to deal with large packages (serials and books)
- It is critical to support specialized areas which are unique on each campus
- How to address new campus specializations (curricular programs i.e. criminal justice and chicano gangs)
- The value of collection management
- The work of subject specialists is very important and there is a slimmer staff.
- Core collections do not require specialization
- Parameters, and set up profiles for the 9 campuses
- Sharing monographs as a possibility for collaborations
- A strategic plan for collection development
- How to make electronic browsing more successful to meet collection needs?
- Enhanced records, more collaborative collection building (profiling – e book packages allow for more collaboration)
- Should there be a bibliographer as a subject specialist on each campus? For example at UCSB there is a need for a Germanist.
- Should there be a regional specialist that serves more than one campus with that
level of expertise. The specialist would be located on one campus. This specialist
could create e-online guides, visit campuses once a year, and create an online tool
for conversations with faculty.
- Balancing workloads
- JSC survey for faculty
Recommends online purchase subscriptions
Next Gen UC Librarian Feedback – LAUC-SB – March 7, 2012
TECHNICAL SERVICES-ISSUES/NEXT STEPS TO IMPLEMENT
· More routine, less challenging work is being out-sourced, what is left is the more complex, challenging work.
· Technology, judgement & skill sets.
· We are pushing the librarian work out of the series and pushing it down.
· Our job responsibilities include so many different kinds of tasks/disciplines/skill sets now that it is hard to concentrate on any one task – lots of gear switching.
· Since we have more LAVs and Systems Programmers doing high level work, it makes sense to bring them into more major discussions that currently only LAUC members participate in.
Professional Development/Continuing Education
· We can promote workshops and formal training, however, we need to be able to attend professional training and meetings ourselves. The library should be paying for librarians to attend these trainings/workshops and not expect it to come out of our $1,000 professional development fund.
Trends in library services that go beyond what we already do
· Copyright/Licensing issues – including Risk management, Access to Administration – indemnification and other parts of the license. – There is a need to start to put a strategic focus on our approach to Intellectual Property.
· Digital Preservation – including maps & images
· Setting up a methodology for doing shared cataloging across the UC Libraries (eg. Tibetan cataloging)
· We have lost over 1 FTE of professional level cataloging
· We need to be able to provide access to our highly visible and well-received Special Collections program.
· We want the support and recognition for technical services from Administration.
· We have an increasing amount of Online Resources
· RDA/FRBR implementation date by the Library of Congress is set for March 31, 2013. We need more training than the Study Group we have formed in the Cataloging Department.
· Need standards for the 1 record UC uses from OCLC.
Labels: assembly2012, bibliographic control, Collection_Development, LAUC, next generation technical services, NGTS, Scholarly_Communications, University of California