Joint Meeting of the

Collection Development Committee & Reference Coordinators’ Committee

Tuesday, March 30, 2004

 (UW-Stevens Point, LibraryLearningCenter)

 

MINUTES

 

Library	CDC Members	RCC Members
UW-Colleges	Todd Mountjoy Mary Rieder	Marc Boucher
UW-Eau Claire	Jan Bogstad Roni Carey	Mimi King
UW-GreenBay	Joan Robb	Ann Kasuboski
UW-La Crosse	John Jax Galadriel Chilton	Randy Hoelzen
UW-Madison	Susan Barribeau JoAnn Carr Richard Reeb	Ed Van Gemert
UW-Milwaukee	Karen Jander Janet Padway	Linda Kopecky
UW-Oshkosh	Cynthia Huebschen	Sarah Neises
UW-Parkside	Kim Bartasz Sylvia Beardsley	Cynthia Bryan
UW-Platteville	Judy Wurtzler	John Berg
UW-RiverFalls	Curt LeMay	Valerie Malzacher
UW-Stevens Point	Cathy Palmini	Patti Becker
UW-Stout	Bill Johnston	Janna Reeg Steidinger
UW-Superior	Ella Cross	Ella Cross
UW-Whitewater	Sharon Knight	Barbara Bren
UW System	Lorie Docken and Paul Moriarty

 

 

 

Meeting objectives:

• Review the background and development of the UW System Shared Electronic Collection

 

• Discuss possible refinement and revision of CUWL’s “Guidelines for a Shared Electronic Collection”

 

• Discuss the Shared Electronic Collection in terms of maintenance and future development

 

10:00   Welcome & Introductions

            Lorie Docken welcomed the two groups and said it was an historic meeting – the first time both the CDC and RCC had met together although it had been under discussion for a year or two.   Since there were two groups in attendance, she agreed to facilitate the meeting and Paul Moriarty would take care of the minutes. 

 

            After general introductions, there was a call for additional agenda items.  Lorie reminded the group of the draft book bid draft that recently emailed by Lori Voss.  The group quickly discussed **(omit next word) of the book bid draft.  Except for UW-Milwaukee’s suggestion that UK books not be included in the bid, there were no additional comments on the draft.

 

            Lorie suggested **(omit next word) that the following breakdown for the meeting:

 

Morning would be devoted to:

·        General discussion **add “of” or “on” how the shared electronic collection was developed so everyone has a common understanding

·        Discussion on how to revise the “Guidelines for a Shared Electronic Collection”

·        Ewa Barczyk, chair of CUWL’s Collection Management Task Force would join the meeting by IP Video to discuss the work of the task force.

 

            Afternoon would be devoted to:

·        Discussion of the existing collection and how it will be going forward

·        Recommendations for July, 2004 renewals

·        Next steps

·        Next meeting

 

10:15   “The University of Wisconsin Libraries Strategic Directions for 2003-2005”

 

            Lorie Docken gave a brief history of the development of CUWL’s Strategic Directions document and explained that **add “a” number of new and ongoing initiatives specifically relate to both the Collection Development Committee and the Reference Coordinators’ Committee. 

 

            The document was originally written for 2001-03 and was revised last year.  The general theme is “One System, One Library” and the document has set the direction for CUWL for the last 4 or 5 years.

 

            The action statements and goals specifically relates to:

·        Development and access to collection

·        Role of librarians

·        Resource sharing

·        Digitization projects and repositories

·        Shared Electronic Collection and cooperative collection development

·        Different publishing models for scholarly publication

·        Reference activities (online tutorials and virtual reference)

·        Funding

·        Storage

 

10:30   Development of the UWS Shared Electronic Collection (SEC)

 

            Joan Robb, CDC member from UW-GreenBay, presented a summary paper on the development of UW System’s Shared Electronic Collection.  Joan’s summary provided an historical background and general understanding of how the collection was developed over time.

 

            The focus of the collection has been on electronic resources that support the basic research needs and the common curricula of the UW campuses and to serve the needs of distributive learning.

 

            Ed Van Gemert, RCC member from UW-Madison suggested that Joan’s document be added to the UWS web site.  In addition, it was suggested that UWS update its list of contracts with corresponding ILL policy and stipulations and also add that to the web site. 

 

            Lorie said she would work with UW-Madison since they are also updating their licenses and will talk to Tom Murray and the CUWL Electronic Communications Task Force about options for including the various documents on the CUWL D2L site.  Currently, contracts are held by a number of agencies (UWS, WiLS, UW-Madison, CIC, etc.).

 

 

10:45   Review of SEC Budget

 

            Lorie Docken reviewed the budget which includes a projection over the next couple of years.  The budget comes from a special allocation approved several years ago by the legislature.  In addition, this year the campus libraries agreed to contribute a total of $100,000 to supplement the SEC budget.  The breakdown by campus is listed at the bottom of the budget sheet.

 

·        The budget is developed using both a 6% and 8% inflation amount

·        The budget is OK for 2003-04 and 2004-05

·        At the current rate, there will be a budget deficit in 2005-06

 

            John Jax asked how the state made selections for BadgerLink.  Lorie indicated that she understood that a team helped develop the RFP process but it was a “closed” process.

 

            Karen Jander, CDC member from UW-Milwaukee, indicated that ProQuest interface will replace the Softline interface to the Ethnic News database.

 

            JoAnn Carr reported that with the new ERIC service, after July, 2004 we would no longer need to purchase E-Subscribe with a projected savings of $ 29,100.

 

11:00   Report on the goals and directions of CUWL’s Collection Management Task Force

 

            Ewa Barczyk, chair of  CUWL’s Collection Management Task Force, joined the meeting by IP video to report on the work of the task force.  The formation of  task force, which will shortly be having its first meeting, is **add “a” direct outcome of the strategic directions document.

 

            Task Force Members include:

                CUWL representatives:

          Ewa Barczyk, UW-Milwaukee, Chair

          Barbara Baruth, Parkside, UW-Parkside

          Ken Frazier, UW-Madison

                CUWL Collection Development Committee representatives: 

          Jo Ann Carr, UW-Madison, CIMC

          Joan Robb, UW-GreenBay

                CUWL Faculty representative: 

          Tony Gulig, UW-Whitewater

 

            The task force was developed because of shrinking budgets which result in libraries purchasing fewer books and journals at a time of an explosion in information.  The current model is not sustainable and we need a new approach to acquiring books and electronic journals.   There is a need to expand the collaborative model and come up with different strategies.  There needs to be a reduction in duplication in order to expand the breadth of the collections.  There also needs to be a greater emphasis on document delivery and interlibrary loan.

 

            The task force has a lot of advantages, including:

 

·        Long history of library cooperation

·        The existing Guidelines for a Shared Collection and the work of the CDC

·        Common library systems (e.g. Endeavor’s Voyager system, ExLibris’ SFX and MetaLib, ILLiad, WiLS)

·        Existing data on usage (although additional data will need to be gathered).

·        Document delivery and excellent ILL infrastructure in place

 

            There was a general discussion on previous overlap studies and the need for collection analysis.  Mary Rieder encouraged the task force to work with the Library Automation **(typo corrected in next word) Managers in gathering data.  Lorie Docken said the task force may consider using external collection analysis tools as well.

 

            Ed Van Gemert stressed the need for educating the university community on the need to move away from building local collections and to involve faculty and provosts.  Ewa agreed there was a need to stop **add “the”  “silo” approach.  This will require faculty involvement, rapid delivery, broad education involvement and advocacy on each campus.

 

            The CDC and RCC members appreciated being updated on the work of the task force.

11:30   CUWL “Guidelines for a Shared Electronic Collection”

           

 

            There was a general and philosophical discussion of the “Guidelines,” including refinement and revision suggestions to shape the future SEC development.  The following comments and suggestions were made:

 

·        The collection focuses on actively used collection by undergrads and graduate students.

·        References to concept of “distance learning” should perhaps be expanded to “online learning.”

·        Access to training databases is an issue for those titles limited by number of concurrent users.  Perhaps consider this in license negotiations

·        There is a real need for vendors to provide meaningful statistics and use data.

·        Would be nice if full text books linked to reviews (perhaps a new criteria)

·        SFX and MetaLib may affect the criteria

·        While statistics are unreliable, they do demonstrate relative use.

·        There is a need for standards for statistics.  There was a discussion of the “Counter” statistic standard.

·        Need more systematic assessment.  (LibQual is not very specific)

·        Collection Development librarians should come to the meeting with “evidence” from their library.  They need to work with reference coordinator in their library.

·        Good way to get faculty input is to indicate “we will cut title unless we get positive feedback.”

 

            There was some discussion on the need for new licensing approaches for the Shared Collection.  Richard Reeb suggested that those titles that have low use on a number of campuses could perhaps be licensed for some of the campuses, rather than all.  Those subscribing libraries would then make the material available via document delivery to the “non-subscribing” campuses.  Obviously there would be staffing and other costs associated with this model.  The initial reaction was mixed.  Joan Robb indicated that such an approach would detract from some of the principles as stated in the Guidelines, specifically the principle that the Shared Collection provides equitable access to a set of resources across UW System.  While the discussion and debate was productive, it was agreed that we would not pursue any radical shifts in the Guidelines pending the forthcoming discussions of the CUWL Collection Management Task Force.   

 

12:30  Lunch

 

 

1:00     Discussion of the Shared Electronic Collection: 

 

            Lorie Docken distributed revised summary spreadsheet of the Evaluation Reponses.  Lorie suggested that since time was limited, there should be a brief discussion of the collection but then discuss renewal recommendations and evaluation criteria.  Specifically, she suggested focusing on a) the major, expensive titles (ABI/Inform, Project Muse, Lexis-Nexis, and ISI Web of Science); b) those titles that received 5 or more “non-renewal” votes on the Evaluation form; c)  a quick overview of possible new titles; and d) those titles that renew in July 2004.  

 

Major titles:

 

            ABI/Inform

 

·        Discussion of ABI/Inform versus upgrading to Ebsco Business Source Premier

·        Ebsco has comparisons – Premier more comparable.  Ebsco has done a lot of the homework and are now competitive,

·        Perhaps order individual titles (e.g. Wall Street Journal)

·        Some libraries have cataloged some of the full titles

·        La Crosse received a single free username and password to Wall Street Journal because so many faculty subscribed to the title.

 

            Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe

     

·        Difficult interface

·        Difficult to incorporate with SFX

·        Has high use

·        Vendor not responsive to suggestions

·        Difficult public relations situation if dropped

·        Consensus was to retain

     

            ISI Web of Science

 

·        $200,000 plus $50,000 for technology use paid by libraries

·        Multi-disciplinary

·        Articles are included quickly

·        Very useful for upper level science classes

 

            Project Muse

 

·        Local subscription decisions often made based on availability of Project Muse

·        Not evenly used across the system

·        Obtain through consortia with Minitex libraries (50% discount)

·        Will probably get more use with SFX

·        Would need a list of alternatives

·        Expect price increase in 2005; JH Press is redesigning its pricing models.

 

            Agreed to recommend renewal of all the titles but take a look at ABI/Inform compared to Business Source Premier. 

           

 

TITLES Receiving 5 or more non-renewal “votes:”

 

            ACLS History E-book Collection  ($ 8,420)

·        Electronic books are a good concept but currently flawed in practice

·        Many titles are widely available via UB

     

            Science online ($ 43,110)

·        More accessible online

·        Very expensive – especially compared to similar online journals such as Nature Online and the New England Journal of Medicine

·        Madison and Milwaukee would continue to purchase individually

·        Uneven use – most use at Madison

 

            MathSciNet ($ 17,004)

 

·        Madison will check on overlap with Web of Science & Applied Science

·        Very popular with math faculty.

 

As these titles renew in January, no action was taken.

 

     

Possible NEW Titles:

 

            In reviewing the collection in general and especially the renewals, Lorie Docken noted that libraries have also suggested the following possible new titles on their Collection Evaluation forms:

 

·        PsyArticles – full text (campuses need to continue PsycInfo).  Several campuses receive the content, but there is great interest in adding to the shared collection.

 

·        Britannica Online   -  cancelled a few years ago because of low use.

 

·        ProQuest Historical Newspapers  (considered in the past – interest but expensive)

 

·        Inspec -

 

·        More J-Stor – added one collection last spring.  Concern of adding additional collections as the access fees are paid by libraries. 

 

·        X-refer – (perhaps do a trial subscription)

 

·        Retrospective content for Web of Science and Readers Guide

 

·        Gale literature resource (considered in the past but expensive)  It does include contemporary authors.

 

·        Readers Guide retrospective (not all campuses get Wilson)

 

·    New York Times

 

 

JULY 2004 renewals:

 

            The following are the recommendations to CUWL for the July, 2004 Renewals

     

·        CIS Statistical Universe (base tables) – RENEW (8 yes - 6 no)

                        Will look more carefully next year

 

·        Academic Universe – RENEW  (13 yes – 1 no)           

 

·        Access Science – CANCEL (13 yes – 1 no)

 

·        Groves Art online – CANCEL (7 yes – 7 no)

                        (Did not receive required 8 votes.  Will look at Amico and Art Store as alternatives)

 

·        OED – RENEW (9 yes – 5 no)

 

·        E-subscribe – no need to renew.  With the new ERIC, users will be able to search the database and directly access full text. 

           

These renewal decisions result in a savings of $ 75,846

                  E-Subscribe            $ 29,100

                  Access Science      $  32,420

                  Groves Art Online  $ 14,326

 

 

             In addition, it was unanimously agreed to recommend to CUWL to add PsycArticles beginning with the new subscription cycle, August 1, with the understanding that the campuses will continue to subscribe to PsycAbstracts, the citation database.

 

 

3:00     Future assignments & Other Items

 

·        It was agreed to consider an alternative CINAHL vendor and check on prices for the same content.  (Ovid interface is much nicer)

 

·        Consider alternatives to Biological Abstracts  (Consider Ebsco but check out advance searching capabilities).

 

·        Reference Coordinators’ Committee will review the reference titles on the suggested list of new titles (e.g.  X-Refer, Gale Literature, NY Times).

 

·        Madison (Travis **his last name is “Warwick”) will check on the MathSciNet overlap

 

·        RCC will look at CINAHL in regard to interface, coverage, and pricing)

 

·        John Jax will review ABI/Inform

 

            Lorie Docken reminded everyone to look at the specifications for the non-mandatory, multi-vendor book bid.  It is an annual contract with up to three annual renewals.  Check on deadlines.

 

            Future Meetings:

 

·        Each group will have separate conference call meetings later this spring.

·        Future meetings will include both groups with joint meetings in the morning and breakout sessions for each group in the afternoon.

 

Adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

 

Paul Moriarty