Wednesday, May 2, 2012

A universal digital library is within reach - Los Angeles Times Op-Ed

A universal digital library is within reach 

Copyright law poses considerable challenges, but any barriers to mass digitization of the world's books can — and should be — overcome. 

 by Pamela Samuelson, May 1, 2012 Los Angeles Times Op-Ed

"Since 2002, at first in secret and later with great fanfare, Google has been working to create a digital collection of all the world's books, a library that it hopes will last forever and make knowledge far more universally accessible.

But from the beginning, there has been an obstacle even more daunting than the project's many technical challenges: copyright law..."


Pamela Samuelson is a professor at the UC Berkeley School of Law and faculty director of the law school's Berkeley Center for Law and Technology.

Supporting Readings for Breakout Sessions - LAUC Assembly - May 10, 2012


Supporting Readings for Breakout Sessions:
Next Steps for Planning for Future Librarianship
Thursday, May 10, 2012
University of California, Santa Cruz Extension Silicon Valley
2505 Augustine Drive, Santa Clara, CA 95054


Next Generation Technical Services website

NGTS Background

UC Libraries Systemwide Operations and Planning Advisory Group (SOPAG)

NGTS Organizational Structure

Committee on Professional Governance Final Report 2010

LAUC Assembly blog entries for

Berkeley 2009
            Discussion Points and Outcomes

Irvine Regional 2010
Summaries from the LAUC 2010 Southern Regional Meeting

Santa Barbara 2011
            Breakout Sessions


Brian Matthews' White Paper "Think Like a Startup: A White Paper to Inspire Library Entrepreneurialism" has topics that will tie in with the May 10 LAUC Assembly discussion on next steps for planning for future librarianship.
A snippet from the paper:
“The media and pop culture provide us with romanticized visions of dorm room ideas becoming billion dollar IPOs. And indeed, that does happen sometimes, but startups are more than rags to riches stories. In concise terms: startups are organizations dedicated to creating something new under conditions of extreme uncertainty. This sounds exactly like an academic library to me. Not only are we trying to survive, but we’re also trying to transform our organizations into a viable service for 21st century scholars and learners.”
http://hdl.handle.net/10919/18649 with link to pdf of report

Breakout Sessions: Next Steps for Planning for Future Librarianship


Breakout Sessions: Next Steps for Planning for
Future Librarianship
Thursday, May 10, 2012
University of California, Santa Cruz Extension Silicon Valley
2505 Augustine Drive, Santa Clara, CA 95054

ReadyTalk
[Please use the regular Access Code: toll-free number 866-740-1260
and, when prompted, enter the access code 8249732#]

[For web content, log into http://www.readytalk.com/ and
in PARTICIPANT box, enter the access code 8249732#]
For assistance during the Assembly: 949-278-8263
Support through AIM chat:  UCILibkaned


“I want to use breakout sessions at the Assembly because past Assembly evaluations have asked for more participation by the assembled group.  This is an opportunity for LAUC members on their home campuses to participate in the Assembly as the event is happening.  If we can't reach a conclusion about all the discussion items suggested by the Breakout Session on the Future of Librarianship, then at least we can have a closing arc to the discussions that began at the Berkeley Fall Assembly 2009 and through Irvine Regional Assembly 2010 and Santa Barbara Assembly 2011. 

How do we leverage our training and experience as librarians in order to take advantage of this new organizational structure?

I'm concerned that not only do we lose the knowledge base but also the skills are missing when librarians retire or leave the University of California.  We do not have to resolve these issues at the Assembly, but I have asked the Committee on Professional Governance to facilitate discussions on the campuses, the results of which will be added to the final CPG report.  We will continue to use the blog entries for this feedback as well.  It is a bit ambitious to try to have both on-site and remote participation at the Assembly, but Assemblies may look like more and more like this in the future.”

Mitchell Brown
LAUC President 2011/2012

M.     Breakout Sessions on what are the next steps for planning for future librarianship.
The session will follow on the discussion from campuses on librarian attributes from the Committee on Professional Governance Final Report 2011.  Librarians talk about what they want to be doing/or think they should be doing in the future and more specifically how they plan on actually doing these activities to support the initiatives of the UC Libraries and the University.  How can we mobilize the “skills” identified for the next generation of academic librarians and how do they plan on acquiring these skills?  On the job training, mentoring, recruitment, collaboration with other institutions with specialized knowledge and expertise [both with and outside of UC]
i.         Shared Service Models
ii.       Lighting Teams – The New Working Model?
iii.      Communications Models
iv.     Training and New Skills


LAUC Committee on Professional Governance
Suggestions for Questions/Discussion points for LAUC Assembly, Santa Cruz
May 10, 2012


Breakout Sessions with Next Generation LAUC Members

 Librarians talk with next generation librarians about what they want to be doing/or think they should be doing in the future and more specifically how they plan on actually doing these activities to support the initiatives of the UC Libraries and the University. What “skills” will the next generation of academic librarians need for the 21st Century and how do they plan on acquiring these skills? On the job training, mentoring, recruitment, collaboration with other institutions with specialized knowledge and expertise [both with and outside of UC]

Your group will have 35 minutes to discuss one of the topics listed below.  Each group will have a designated note taker and a group facilitator.  At the end of the discussion period, each group will then have 3 minutes to report to the Assembly a brief summary of the group’s discussion and/or highlight one or two significant points made by the group.  The notes as well as a list of participants will be collected by the facilitator and submitted to both the LAUC Secretary for the official minutes of the Assembly and to the Committee on Professional Governance for further analysis. 


i.            Shared Service Models

Concrete suggestions on how to keep pace with ever-increasing user expectations in an era of shrinking resources and budgets (and maybe personnel).

Collections & Scholarly Communication

Concrete suggestions for maximizing the collections of all the UC libraries in the future – which assumes we will never again have the funding we need – and which assumes librarians will be making tough choices every day.


ii.            Lighting Teams – The New Working Model?


Working with smaller teams with a smaller project focus for quicker results?

Can we leverage work on different committees to support planning across the state?

Concrete suggestions for project team structures, projects, or management styles that worked well (examples)?


iii.            Communications Models

To which new groups should UC libraries be reaching out with communication models – and to what end? What are the gains broader communication?

iv.            Training and New Skills

Give some examples of successful training initiatives, at your institution or elsewhere. What do they do and how is their success measured?

OR

What are the advantages of different training models and to what extent should UC librarians be directing their own local professional training?


Details for Meeting Discussions

Facilitator:
1.       Solicit participation from all team members
2.       Keep your colleagues at the table focused on task
3.       Help the table to synthesize individual responses into a collective response
4.       Shift conversations away from unproductive tangents back onto main topic(s)
5.       Encourage quieter group members to participate
6.       Ask probing questions as necessary
7.       Paraphrase what people say to make sure you understand their main points
8.       Redirect the group if the discussion goes off‐track
9.       Encourage divergent views
10.    Keep track of time

General Ground Rules for all participants
1.       Speak openly and honestly
2.       Listen carefully to what others have to say
3.       Treat everyone with respect
4.       Keep comments brief and to the point
5.       Stay on task

Note Takers
1.       helps capture and track the key points throughout the discussion
2.       assists in the group prioritization process
3.       identifies each of the top points with some sort of star or similar indicator
4.       assists table facilitator


Technical requirement for the ReadyTalk sessions


The technical requirement for the ReadyTalk sessions are:
  • phone line, with analog or digital for audio
  • For web access, a computer with wireless or Ethernet connection.
  • For group viewing, a digital projector.
The session will run like a webinar, such as the session from CRL, NISO or WebEx.  There is no VOIP option for ReadyTalk so the audio portion will not be carried through the web connection.
Feedback from the divisions can be shared through chat in the web access or through the conference call. 

Complete list of system requirements   

Operating Systems
Supported Browsers
Presenters
Participants
Microsoft Windows
XP, Vista & 7 (32 and 64 bit)
Internet Explorer
(6.0+, 7.0+, 8.0+ 32-bit*)
Firefox
(3.6+)
Chrome
Java
1.3.1+ recommended
Flash 9.0.115+
OR
Java 1.3.1+
Apple Macintosh: OSX 10.5+
(Intel-based processors)
Firefox
(3.6+)
Safari
(5.0+)
Chrome
Java
1.3.1+ required
Flash 9.0.115+
OR
Java 1.3.1+
Linux 2.6+ kernel
32 and 64 bit; x86 CPU required
Firefox
(3.6+)
Chrome
Java
1.3.1+ recommended
Flash 9.0.115+
OR
Java 1.3.1+
Apple iPad: iOS 4.3+
(iPad, iPad 2)
n/a
n/a
ReadyTalk Mobile
for iPad app

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Dear LAUC Members,

I am happy to announce that the Agenda and Registration for the May 10, 2012 LAUC Assembly are now ready.

Visit http://www.ucop.edu/lauc/ and click on the Assembly Registration Link and explore the Assembly’s Website


Librarians Association of the University of California
Assembly 2012
Thursday, May 10, 2012
University of California, Santa Cruz Extension Silicon Valley
2505 Augustine Drive, Santa Clara, CA 95054


Registration Deadline: April 27, 2012

Local Contacts:

LAUC-SC Chair, Annette Marines
Registration, schedule and accommodations
831-459-3255
amarines@ucsc.edu


With best regards,

Mitchell Brown
LAUC President 2011-2012

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

NGTS Update: August 2011 Power of Three Groups Launched

The NGTS Management Team has held kickoff conference calls with POTs 2 through 7 to review their charges and provide an overview of the interdependencies between groups. Charges have been revised and reposted to the SOPAG website. We fully expect the charges for each of these groups will continue to be refined as work proceeds.

The POTs are currently developing high-level task lists and timelines as well as identifying what lightning teams will be needed. These will be submitted to the Management Team in early September. Once they have been reviewed, an overall implementation timeline will be shared with the UC Libraries community.

Keep up-to-date on developments and ideas posted on the NGTS blog.

You can also subscribe to the RSS feed or track #ucngts on Twitter.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Breakout Sessions

ADMINISTRATION

  • - Future administrations should be good at brokering resources- including human resources
  • - Concrete suggestions for library admin. to compete for funds- quantify the value of the library. Collect meaningful data & present it in a meaningful way
  • - Measure impact of library on things like student outcomes & faculty research-
  • - Research funds- university skimming some money off the top- even a small portion of this going to libraries can help

OUTREACH

Question- to which new groups should UC libraries be reaching out & to what end?

  • They felt this was extremely different by UC library & not easy to answer.
  • Subject librarians- at what point do the liaison activities end & the outreach librarian picks up?
  • Start a listserv to get each other involved on this topic.
  • Good targets for outreach: students that work in the libraries, library staff- involving them more & drawing on their expertise
  • All the outreach efforts that are done are very important & bring good attention to the libraries- help people to understand what libraries do & what they can offer

INSTRUCTION

Where do we see instr. services headed in the future & what skill sets are needed by librarians?
  • Strong foundation in pedagogical theories & knowledge of the resources
  • strong knowledge of reference resources
  • Some competing pressures: need to make instruction scalable, how can we also make instruction more integrated? Where do we get the skill sets to produce things like online tutorials & mobile apps?
  • Need to be more prof dev opps to help keep up with the technological expectations of the students & keep the skill set strong.
  • Generally feel did not receive a good foundation in learning instruction in library school

USER SERVICES

Are user expectations increasing? Given the shrinking budget situation
  • Users want to communicate via email, chat, virtual reference, all hours/times of the day. Want their answers immediately. Want more access from home & more convenience in terms of research assistance.
  • Users also have an expectation of receiving specialized consultations w/ librarians. Especially grad students- how do we provide those services if there aren't enough subject specialists or generalists?
  • How do we address these needs/improve our skills? Being flexible as much as possible, learning innovative approaches, the CDL cataloging materials online- having access to this is helpful.
  • Merging the desk with information & reference/research assistance. A shared service desk.
  • At UCSC- completing a renovation- there will be a shared service desk for circ/reference services. Working to set standards for patron expectations, how the work will be shared & referred, how do we schedule/train all people that will work at the desk?
  • Need to get direct feedback from our users.
  • Important to ID the methods for identifying & interpreting user expectations. Conducting regular surveys, student/faculty focus groups.

COLLECTIONS
  • Binding & preservation. Given the new next gen climate, how do you know what to bind? How do we plan for that?
  • Subject specialists systemwide, rather than on each campus
  • Summing up our role- we need to be promoting open access publishing, shared collections, e-books to faculty, admins, publishers. But we also need to determine how to make it work so that they don't lose out, given the changes & budget problems libraries are facing.

TECHNICAL SERVICES
  • The skills a cataloger will need in the future....what qualities.
  • flexibility, project management skills
  • Skill set- moving from traditional cataloging to metadata cataloging
  • Use the current expertise to help build efficiency standards for best practices
  • Transferrable skills that we current have. Collaborating catalogers/curators/subject specialists

TECH & DIGITAL INITIATIVES
  • the needs in the future to have more digital curation skills to help facilitate digital archiving
  • skills in metadata & deal with metadata standards
  • raising overall literacy in the profession, dealing w/ apathy & technology phobia among colleagues- helping others to learn
  • assessment- when to decide how to stop supporting something if it's not working
  • administration- how do we operationalize digitization on a large scale? The idea of the systemwide repository- we need a solution- can't support 10 dig. repositories.
  • we need to be ok with non-perfection, and launching products even if they aren't 100% ideal
  • - There needs to be some kind of incentive for librarians to learn new technology skills
  • - we need to share best practices in technology among each other.

SLASIAC Library Planning Task Force: Gene Lucas

Gene Lucas is the Executive Vice Chancellor, UCSB and SLASIAC chair. SLASIAC is the Systemwide Library and Scholarly Information Advisory Committee; read more about them here.

The task force was charged by the Provost of the University:
  • Greater systemwide or regional consolidation of library services and systems
  • Systemwide strategies for developing and managing both print and digital collections
  • Greater reliance on open-access materials
  • Reduced expenditure on high-priced serial publications
  • Overall use of library space
Task force members were administrators, faculty members, and ULs from throughout the UC system, plus the program officer from the Mellon Foundation and the Director of Libraries from MIT.

Context of the problems: anticipated budget reductions, increasing costs (esp. journals), employer contributions to benefits (esp. pensions), and running out of shelf space. Between 2006-07 and 2017, there's a projected drop of $52 million in the total UC library budget. The reduction in the acquisitions budget for all the UCs (21%) is bigger than the total materials budget for UCD and UCI combined. A 21% cut in the operations budget (in terms of FTE is nearly as large as the total staff of the UDSB and UCD libraries.

Cost-saving strategies include:

Shared library services (already resulting in current annual savings of $114 million per year). Not just shared digital initiatives like NGM, but shared services to conserve space: avoiding unnecessary duplication of new print materials, removing unnecessary duplicate copies in existing print collections, trying to acquire e-journals and e-books wherever possible. Removing unnecessary duplicate copies of print backfiles of journals reliably available in digital form will add as much as 13 years to capacity of existing campus and regional facility stacks, but costs money (in the millions of dollars) to implement. However, this is considered relatively inexpensive. Identifying and removing unnecessary duplicate copies of books is less effective, takes more time, probably not as high priority as removal of serial backfiles.

Shared licensing of digital collections - already saves us $55 million a year. More than 25 candidate projects are described and prioritized in the NGTS initiative.

Possible future developments: systemwide approval plan, systemwide shelf-ready processing, expansions of shared cataloging, avoiding duplication of foreign-language materials. Graph of how the system might save $52 million through 2014, in three phases.

How does this fit into the UC "Working Smarter" initiative? This is the library's contribution to Working Smarter [maybe not the only contribution, I'm not clear on this].

Next steps: next week, consult with SLASIAC. March-April: finalize interim report and submit to the Provost. March-June: consultation with Academic Senate, campuses. April-September: Council of ULs oversees additional detailed planning and analysis. Sept-Oct: Results of consultation and detailed planning incorporated in Final Report. Fall-Winter 2011-2012: implementation begins.

Issues for continuing discussion: financing (funding sources? Loan financing?) and governance. Existing systemwide bodies may need to have their roles defined or redefined, including the Council of ULs, SLASIAC, Shared Library Facilities Board, LAUC, Academic Senate Committee on Library and Scholarly Communication. New governance structures may need to be created, if required.

Summary:
Libraries will be out of shelf space in 5-7 years, likely operating budget reductions of up to 21% ($52 million).

The solution: shared services to help conserve space, achieve efficiencies, continuing and accelerating the libraries' Next Generation initiatives. During 2011, consultation continues, the Council of ULs will oversee detailed planning and analysis. Continued discussion is encouraged about financing and governance.

Gene Lucas, SLASIAC Chair

Findings & Recommendations of the Library Planning Task Force

This is the 1st group slasiac is talking to about the results of this task force. Appreciate any & all feedback.

-Work of the task force builds on the UC libraries' Next gen initiatives
- Take force was charged by the university Provost:
- greater systewide or regional consolidation of library services & systems
- systemwide strategies for developing and managing both print & digital
-greater reliance on open access materials
-use of library space

-meeting fairly frequently since early summer
-Context of the problem(s)
-anticipated budget reductions
-increasing costs
-acquisitions
-employer contributions

-2016-17 projects to have less than 200 Million for total UC Library budgets (w/ estimated effects of retirement contributions & proposed state fund reductions)

-We will run out of space by 2016/17 for physical collections, unless we do something soon about this.

- To reduced 21% FTE equals the library staff FTE for UCD and UCSB

The University & its Libraries Can Act Together to:
- more effectively manage shared services
- support the faculty in addressing the rising cost of academic publications

Shared Library Services:
- are a proven strategy, already resulting in current annual savings of 114 million/yr
- build on the solid foundation already est. by the ULs w/ the next gen initiatives
-appear to be capable of immed. savings of about 15 mill/yr, while addressing the space problem
-have potential to address entire 52 mill shortfall
- require libraries to conduct additional detailed planning

- To conserve space (1)
-acquire digital formats when possible
- coord. collection dev. & acquisition processes to avoid unnecessary duplication of new & current materials

-(2)
-removal of unnecessary duplicate copies of print backfiles of journals reliable avail in digital form
-relatively inexpensive
-minimum academic impact
- implement only as space needs require, after assessing impact of prospective strategies
-could add as much as 13 yrs to capacity of existing campus & regional facility stacks
-ID and removal of unnecessary duplicate copies of books
-expensive
-less effective- frees less space than academic journals

Shared Services to Increase Efficiencies (1)- current initiatives
(2)- possible future developments
-systemwide approval plan
-systemwide shelf-ready processing
-expansion of shared cataloging
these 3 come out to about 14 million

Next Steps
-Consult 3/14/11 with SLASIAC
-March-April finalize interim report & submit to provost
-march-june, consultation w/ academic Senate, campuses
-April-Sept, Council of ULs oversees additional detailed planning & analysis
-Sept-Oct, results of consultation & detailed planning incorporated in final report
-Fall/Winter 2011-2012- Implementation begins

Issues for Continuing Discussion
-Financing- IDing funding sources, assessing feasibility of loan financing, capturing savings & cost avoidances
-Governance- reviewing functional requirements (see interim report), (re)definig roles of existing systemwide bodies (council of ULs, slasiac, shared libraries facilities board, lauc, academic senate committee on library & schol comm), IDing requirements (if any) for new governance structures.

Summary
- The problem
-libraries out of space in 5-7 yrs
-likely operating budget reductions of up to 21% (52 million)
-Shared services to help conserve space, achieve efficiencies
-builds on past success
-continues & accelerates the libraries' next gen initiatives
-during 2011
-consultation continues
-council of ULs oversees detailed planning & analysis
-continued discussion is encourages
-financing
-governance