Coordinating Committees

CUWL USCC Meeting

Teleconference, April 11, 2008
10:00-12:00

Present: Steve, Dave, Renee, Jana, Valerie, Nick
Absent: Barb, Leigh, Ella, Jill, Lisa

1. Announcements
Steve:

  • Reminder about the task force blog (under Tech Initiatives group). The task force chairs will be doing a session at this summer’s conference.
  • Working group reports are due April 18 (Friday). They should include a synopsis of work, what has been accomplished and what will be forthcoming.
  • There is an important distinction between cuwluser@maillist.uwsa.edu and user@maillist.uwsa.edu. The former is for the larger group (anyone who signed up to receive info on our work) while the latter is just the members of the USCC. Draft minutes and the like should go first to the user@ list for review before being sent to the larger list.
  • Distance Library Services is a standing committee of the USCC and will meet every other month. It includes representatives of the other CUWL Coordinating Committees, but was felt to be most appropriately “housed” as part of the USCC. Leigh and Heather Welldon are the co-chairs. It is a discussion forum for problems and concerns related to distance learning and initiatives.

Jana: Noted that the correct spelling of Anne Kasuboski.  Her name was spelled incorrectly in the previous minutes

2. Reports of the Working Sub-groups
Information Literacy (Dave):

  • Dave reported that Molly Mathias had joined the working group.
  • IL will be meeting the week of May 5. The hope is that the mini-groups will have an evaluation/description of 3 standardized IL tests.
  • A survey is going out to UW Librarians to check on info. lit. programs and evaluation. The survey will seek to determine which of the 3 standardized tests are be used and/or if other forms of evaluation are being utilized.
  • The three tests are: iSkills, project SAILS, and ILT.

Metalib Assessment (Steve and Valerie):

  • Literature Review has been completed with the complete listing available on the wiki. The group bolded the most useful sources.
  • The group has divided into smaller groups. One will review the 12 or so best sources from the Lit. Review in more detail. One group is looking at ways to do quantitative assessment of Metalib in addition to qualitative assessments. They are looking particularly at Quick Search stats and User Records in hopes of identifying what people like/use in Metalib. Valerie noted that a surprising number of users at River Falls are making their own Metalib accounts (nearly 1,000 registered users), but she was uncertain how many are one-time use accounts.
  • The group is developing a protocol for 1-on-1 usability testing with students. The usability testing will seek to survey what they use, then have them attempt particular tasks utilizing Metalib.

New Reference Models (Renee):

  • The group is meeting next week at the WAAL Conference.
  • They are working on a literature review and putting together a survey.
  • The survey will cover traditional vs. non-traditional methods of reference, staffing and use of reference desks, print vs. electronic reference sources and possibly other topics.

Web 2.0 (Nick):

  • The group has met via teleconference and has sent out surveys to the UW Libraries attempting to determine Web 2.0 tool usage. The results for all but Milwaukee and Superior are available on the wiki. Most libraries are using at least some Web 2.0 tools or applications, but the type and usage varies significantly between institutions.
  • The next step is to establish a literature review. The group will be meeting next week via teleconference to establish the details of the literature review.
  • Discussion of the Web 2.0 roundtable will also occur at next weeks meeting

Steve interjected with a discussion of a new Web 2.0 applications, Jing, that could be of use to libraries, particularly our efforts to provide simple training/BI streams. Jing is basically a simple version of Captivate and various screen capture software.  It allows the creation of simple streaming videos on the fly—you can capture what you are doing online and send it to a patron so they can watch the process as it happens. The application is free and the company provides a small, free space to store the clips with additional storage space for sale relatively cheaply. 

UW-Madison is purchasing 25GB of storage for Jing clips for about $70. They envision using Jing to capture and share demos.  Steve emailed us all a demonstration of demonstration of Library Thing they did using Jing. We can all use Jing to share demos among our own staff and across the UW-System. Steve noted that it is easy to use, but it does have lower production values than Camtasia.  This may be a worthwhile tradeoff, since we don’t need great production values for demos that we are making on the fly.

3. Discussion of One System, One Library Conference
Set for Tuesday and Wednesday, June 3 & 4.  The schedule of sessions and events is fairly firm and available from the CUWL wiki.  CUWL is asking directors to compile a list of attendees by April 18 and which sessions they hope to attend if possible. Coordinating Committee members are strongly encouraged to attend if they can.

Discussion of individual sessions that involve USCC members (What to cover and who should cover it). There will be computers and projectors in all breakout and roundtable sessions.

  • Mobile Librarian: Methods of library delivery and outreach
    • Librarians in residence halls
    • Chat reference and laptops. Visibility in other buildings/parts of campus. Visibility in other parts of the library (stacks, periodicals)
    • Appropriate title?  Trying to make the library more collaborative and integrated.  Get outside of the library and “library think”
    • Possible Presenters?  Stephen Smith (Superior—outreach librarian)
    • Dave’s “research guy” persona is working well
    • Stout’s “super-librarian” capes have increased recognition
    • Madison is holding Jeopardy style games in the residence halls
  • Metalib Assessment
    • Steve & Valerie will meet to coordinate this session

Roundtable discussions are less formal than the breakout sessions, but the facilitators can still have slides and/or handouts to inform and stimulate discussion.

  • Web 2.0: We’ll use the evaluation survey as a jumping off point for discussion.
  • Liaison: Tom and Jennifer have a strong background in this.
  • Future of Ref. Desk: Renee & Jill to facilitate. There was a discussion regarding the title and if it was too restrictive, but the group agreed the narrower focus is okay as it will help keep discussion from ranging too far afield.