• Coordinating Committees
• Digital Initiatives
• Collections & Resources
  • Members
  • Meetings
  • Documents
  • CDC
  • Document Delivery
  • Universal Borrowing
• Technology Initiatives
• User Services

• Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries

• Submit Documents to be Posted
• UW Libraries Directory
• CUWL Wiki

CUWL-CDC Conference Call
August 13, 2001

Minutes

Members present:

Eau Claire - Janice Bogstad Green Bay - Joan Robb
Madison - Sandy Pfahler Milwaukee - James Tobin
Oshkosh - Cynthia Huebschen Parkside - Sylvia Beardsley &
Barb Baruth
Platteville - Judy Wurtzler Stevens Point - Cathy Palmini
Stout - Sue Strehl Superior - Jeneen LaSee-Willemssen
Whitewater - Joyce Huang Colleges - Mary Rieder
Madison CIMC - Jo Ann Carr UWSA - Lorie Docken

The Conference Call of the CUWL-CDCs was called to order at 8:40 am, by chair Jo Ann Carr.

I. I. Strategic Collaboration and Collection Development Approaches.

1. 1. A decision timeline for coordinated review of renewals of Elsevier titles has been established. Libraries should notify Lorie Docken as early as the end of August but no later than September 15. The results will be discussed at the September 17 CUWL CDO meeting. The few campuses that have indicated they may not be able to keep this deadline have been noted. We’ve already identified a few titles, such as Biological Conservation and Behavior Research and Therapy, which are heavily used even though there are duplicate subscriptions. Child Abuse and Neglect has multiple holdings but most cannot be cancelled. When we are finished with the process, we will all get a list of 2002 subscriptions held throughout the state.

2. 2. We may need to discuss further the conditions under which a low-use, unique title will be cancelled by a campus.

3. The impact of Cancellations will be partially offset by rapid document delivery, which is currently being piloted between Platteville and Madison. A full-scale system won’t be in place until spring, at the earliest. The CUWL strategic planning committee will talk about this service and will be recommending the use of Library Automation funding to launch system-wide service.

4. 4. UW-Madison is preparing a letter to all faculty of their institution to explain the budget situation and need for journals cancellations. CUWL-CDC members would like to see a copy of the letter sent out to Madison faculty as it might be used as a basis for similar letters on the campuses.

5. 5. A number of library directors pointed out at the CUWL meeting that campuses have already trimmed back Elsevier titles and that what they’re holding right now are high use titles.


6. 6. Marquette has asked about being included in the cost-sharing conversation with regard to Elsevier titles and this request is being handled by UW-Milwaukee and Madison at this time.

II. II. Cost sharing models and rationale: Identify the benefits of a shared collection; Identify the impact of shared collection for students across the system and throughout the learning lifespan; Identify products which will provide for continued benefits to our shared collection.

CUWL has charged the CDC to develop several models of how local campuses can contribute to the shared electronic collections fund and report back in the fall.

Justifications for cost sharing follow.
1. 1. Shared collections are useful throughout a student’s career, as they move from one campus to another to pursue advanced degrees. The value of a shared collection lies in students having some knowledge of research tools as they move from two-year and undergraduate campuses to subsequent levels of education within the Wisconsin system.
2. 2. Cost sharing and the development of shared resources are very useful in the development of online courses shared between campuses. We should have shared resources to support the shared courses.
3. 3. We should also consider online and telephone reference services, which are directed at one campus but may come from students officially registered at another campus. We need a shared collection with which to work. .
4. 4. In the recent “University of Wisconsin Online” report to the Board of Regents, there is emphasis on enhancing curricular collaboration between campuses and minimizing program duplication in terms of online courses. UW libraries will need to support system-wide initiatives; clearly the UW Shared Electronic Collection is integral to providing online library access.
5. 5. We should also demonstrate instances where we’ve gotten more resources for less money than if we purchased the databases individually. We should clarify that we are trying to put together a package of comprehensive resources that is useful and attractive to all the campuses. We may want to look at creating a list of: 1. shared degrees between colleges and other campuses, 2. courses shared between campuses and 3. online courses. These are areas that are supported by a shared collection.
6. 6. Parts of our argument must be fairly specific, detailing the needs and uses of each resource, in order to justify the use of the current budget and what we might add to it.
7. 7. We may need to use cost sharing to maintain what we already have selected. It may not be used for new services, but as a financial supplement to keep what we NOW consider to be essential, given the ‘flat UW System electronic collections budget through at least June 2003. In future discussions of the advisability of cost-sharing models, these points should be considered. Will we support: 1. Cost sharing to maintaining current collection. 2. Cost sharing to further develop a shared collection. 3. No cost-sharing. It should also be clear that there can be no cost-sharing requests of individual libraries during THIS fiscal year, as budgets have been set. It could be implemented as soon as the next fiscal year.
8. 8. We already have a Collection Development statement, but we should look it over to see if there are any specifics about ‘deselecting’ shared resources and managing duplication of services between products. It seems logical, however, that we follow the same guidelines for deselection that we have formulated for selection.
9. 9. Any ‘collection’ has to remain dynamic in order to fulfill the needs of our campuses. We will need to add and sometimes subtract, and substitute new, databases. New money is essential.
10. 10. Jo Ann and Lori will create a ‘white paper’ for our September 17 meeting, to be edited for the CUWL Directors’ meeting later in September.

The next CUWL-CDC meeting will be held at the UW-Steven's Point library: September 17, 2001, from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Lunch will be brought in. The conference call was adjourned at 10 am.

Respectfully Submitted,

Janice M. Bogstad, Secretary