Discussion
LAUC-R members – NextGen UC LAUC Member/Librarian
May 1, 2012
* Comments below are not necessarily
representative of every LAUC-R member but capture the main points of our
discussion. (Verbiage shamelessly borrowed from UCM)
The discussion generated was vigorous, and
may occasionally have drifted from the exact content of the document onto
related topics.
Organizational
Culture:
1. Who
is a LAUC Member? With our numbers
dwindling, we may want to reconsider the definition of a LAUC Member. Possibly there would be a lot of benefit to
including staff members pursuing or holding MLS degrees as well as certain
other job classifications such as archivist or curator working in a library environment.
2. Should
we be seeking more specialization or more cross-training. There is a somewhat mixed message. There might be a specific place for each of
these, but can we define that? Training would
likely be key either way.
3. Are
we a culture of “Good enough?” There is a lot of that creeping into our work
lives. Good Enough Cataloging, shrinking
reference hours, patron created collections.
How can we maintain high quality?
4. Clearly
we seem to be going in the direction of cross-campus communication and
cooperation, how can we improve communications so that we are even more
collegial.
a. There
are already examples of cross-campus cooperation in each area that can be used
as models for communication improvement:
i. TS
– SCP, Thai: Do all of the “players” know all of the players? To whom do we report missing or problematic
records? Should we make this the
responsibility of everyone who might encounter a record, or do we throw up our
hands and say “whatever”?
ii. Reference
- 24/7 chat reference. Could we do better
if we knew more about what was going on at other campuses? Is that too much to expect?
iii. CD
– Bib groups. Could anything be done to facilitate the more introverted among
us in making contact with colleagues at other campuses? Supported expectation.
5. We
have not really sat down to plan for services to distance education students
even though this is imminent. Do we have
time to discuss those events for which we will need to plan?
6. Staff
shrinkages make it difficult to form thoughtful responses to current forces.
7. We
need to be very visible and knowledgeable on our campuses right now. What can LAUC and Administration do to
facilitate this? Representation on
committees? Campus Status?
8. Grants
were mentioned several times in the report.
Could we clarify PI status across campuses…once and for all? Would grant workshops be useful? Facilitated?
9. Cross-campus
communication and cooperation as well as responding to the current world
require a strong awareness and competence with technology. We need to be able to explore new technology
and developments without fear of being unsuccessful. Can grants help support this? How could our environment support this?
10. One
hindrance to cross-campus cooperation is the myriad of products we do or do not
decide to buy across the system. Some projects we have discussed, such as ERM,
remain mysteriously elusive, and some were purchased or created and never widely
promoted. It might be useful to make a centralized tool wishlist and license
list like CDL creates for bibliographic resources. When we are successful in
selecting unified tools, we may be able to cooperate more effectively and speak
with a single voice for necessary changes.
11. Some
of our most important channels of communications exist outside of the UC
Library structure such as professional organizations. Can campuses facilitate this? Supporting memberships?
12. We
would like to be included in major system-wide decisions a little earlier than
being presented with done deals, (e.g. duplicate reduction). Is this unique at
UCR?
13. We
should be leaders in the profession. Is
this an acceptable goal in the current budget climate? What will it take to
maintain a leadership role in the profession?
14. How
can we empower ourselves to be an active voice. (e.g. on UL searches and every
other thing we feel like we could offer useful advice on). For instance the UCR
Chancellor sends out a Friday letter.
Should we have a Thursday letter to the chancellor? Or a Saturday letter?
15. Creative
thinking may need to be added to the prototype job descriptions in the document,
since old models are giving way to new pressures.
Collection
Development/Reference
1. How
can subject outreach be facilitated on campuses? It is difficult to strike and maintain
rapport when one librarian serves more than a hundred faculty members or more
than two-thousand students. Can we brainstorm ways to support this expectation? For instance having more subject librarian
involvement in faculty orientations, budgeting a “lunch with you librarian” (or
coffee if lunch is too much for our dwindling budget).
2. How
could outreach be done/facilitated across campuses? Who would teach subject classes on a campus
if the specialist was on another campus? Would any books remain on non-specialist
campuses for general education? Is there
an example of a system-wide subject specialist now that we could use to
understand this role (e.g. veterinary)?
How pervasive do we imagine this could be? On a spectrum from Nematology to Psychology?
3. It
is clear from the report that the lines are blurring between Collection
Development and reference, especially at the selector level. Is this the case at all campuses? Do all reference librarians have collecting
responsibilities and all bibliographers have reference responsibilities?
4. Ref
- We agree that every newly hired reference librarian might be expected to do
Digital Reference. However, this is a question of specialization vs.
cross-training. Would every librarian
love chat reference? Might some prefer
it?
5. CD-
Are we paying attention to traditional responsibilities as we get busier with
new ones (scholarly bibliographies)?
Should we take time to determine what functions are still relevant, and
how to fulfill them most efficiently?
6. Ref-
Could we disappear all together if we keep shrinking at this rate?
7. CD
- How can we make PDA collections and deposit collections better than “good
enough”?
8. Can
we afford to ignore the deficiencies in MELVYL any longer if the writing on the
wall is that our local catalogs might go away (PDA implications as well).
Technical Services
1. Can
other parts of the organization be involved to make “good enough” really “good
enough”?
2. Lines
between other units of the organization are blurring, but not necessarily with
technical services. What role do (non-technical services) subject specialists
have in technical services for their disciplines? Are technical services
librarians frequently subject specialists? Do they do reference and/or
instruction?
3. PDA
requires records to be quick, complete and have particular ISBN’s, or money is
wasted.
4. Who
should demand better quality records from our vendors?
5. There
is a lot of general material in this excellent section of the report that can
be looked at by all groups.
6. The
catalog is key to all parts of the organization. We can’t ignore our NGTS emails.
Posts
