Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries
Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries
Present: Pat Wilkinson (Chair), Ewa Barczyk , Barb Baruth, Marc Boucher, Kathy Davis, Lorie Docken, Anita Evans, Ken Frazier, Jean Gilbertson, Chris Goss, Peter Gottlieb, Tony Gulig, Leanne Hansen, Joyce Huang, John Krogman, Mordecai Lee, Valerie Malzacher, Ed Meachen, Paul Moriarty, Bob Rose, Kathy Schneider, Brenda Swannack, Felix Unaeze,
Guests: Michael Doylen (UWSAC), Jana Reeg-Steidinger (UW-Stout), Lee Konrad (UW-Madison), Richard Reeb (UW-Madison)
Call to order
Wilkinson called the meeting to order at . All attendees introduced themselves.
Unaeze announced that the new Provost will start at UW Superior on February 1. Barzcyk brought brochures for the Harvard Leadership conference that she and Huang attended. Wilkinson said remodeling of the Archives area at UW Oshkosh has been completed.
Boucher moved to approve CUWL minutes from November 10-11 and the CUWL Executive Committee minutes from December 7. Unaeze seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Boucher requested slight change in the agenda to accommodate his need to leave early. Boucher moved and Gottlieb seconded approval of the revised agenda.
Diversity Committee, Next Steps (Anita Evans)
Evans restated the need for the committee’s report/document to be a living document – not shelved. In order to do this, we should:
1. Share the document widely. Evans suggested that CUWL directors add a link to report/page from his/her library’s internal personnel page. There was a suggestion to provide the link for inclusion on the campus office of diversity and/or the provost’s page.
2. Put document on the CUWL/UWSA website. Docken will look into the best options.
3. Get the report
into a better appearance for the web. Docken will ask a student to do some work, but it cannot be
an elaborate website. In terms of
updating and maintenance, Rose said somebody needs to be assigned specific
responsibility for watching over the web content. CUWL agrees that reviewing links, adding new
content, and soliciting content from CUWL could be done once or twice a
year. Frazier will try to recruit
someone from the
4. Better understand
the “Pipeline” issues.
5. Have a one day
program for UW librarians. Tracie Hall from
6. Increase visibility of the issue within WLA. Unaeze is willing to attend a WLA board meeting and so is Tracie Washington from ALA. Hansen said that WLA has a strategic planning meeting every three years. The next meeting is in March, so timing is good for us to get involved. Perhaps WLA needs to have an interest group that tries to improve the feeling of inclusiveness in WLA. Hansen suggested that conference committees be encouraged to include speakers on diversity issues. Hansen said that WLA is considering collapsing existing groups rather than expanding the number of groups. Rose said that WLA needs to be aware that people of color do not feel welcome at WLA. WLA needs to be a more welcoming organization.
7. Partner with other professional groups and associations. The new webpage should help raise awareness of other resources.
8. Send a CUWL librarian to the Conference for Librarians of Color and provide funding support. The attendee would be responsible for reporting on the conference, focusing on recruitment and retention issues. Docken asked for a funding proposal.
9. Survey member libraries on their progress in diversifying their staff in three years. Waiting 4 or 5 years is too long.
Frazier said that UW-Madison has benefited from the
discussions of this committee. SLIS at
Working Group on CUWL Subgroups (Bob Rose)
Rose and his committee want to know how CUWL members might feel about a radical restructuring of how CUWL subgroups are formed and structured, as opposed to just making minor refinements. Does CUWL want to take a fresh look at all aspects of this? For example, might there be a Steering Committee to oversee all CUWL committee work and focus on strategic issues. The idea would be to have the overall organization work more effectively. Moriarty said it might be more efficient for UWSA staff to interact with a CUWL Steering Committee, especially if it is authorized to establish small groups to work on specific projects/issues. UWSA has limited support for CUWL groups (currently there are 13). Docken said that it would be important to have representatives from various functional groups on an overall Steering Committee. It’s important to facilitate and improve cross-functional discussion. Swannack asked how the Steering Committee would differ from CUWL itself. The Steering Committee could meet regularly and deal with any nitty-gritty issues that need to be addressed. It would have at least one CUWL member on it. Docken said that we would continue to have task forces for specific projects. Rose clarified that the Working Group on Subgroups may not end up suggesting radical change, but would like to consider it. Wilkinson talked about the standing committees we currently have. What about them? Gilbertson said that if the work of the standing committees now consumes a lot of staff time, perhaps those activities could be handled more creatively and efficiently. Hansen recommended going for a radical rethinking about CUWL committee structures. Barczyk said there is a need for better communication among and across the various groups. Gottlieb suggested taking a broader look at the whole organizational structure. He expects that UWSAC will continue to meet twice a year because it also has non-CUWL business to deal with. Rose said that, at the very least, communication needs to be improved. Wilkinson agrees with taking a serious look at restructuring. Evans thinks there’s been very good work by standing committees, but we need to clarify which groups actually need UWSA support. Swannack feels strongly that some groups need to have face-to-face meetings. CUWL members agreed that the Working Group should go ahead and explore a broader level of structural change.
Update on BadgerCat (Valerie Malzacher and others)
Malzacher wanted to bring CUWL members up to date on the project, especially on issues specific to UWSA, resource sharing across UW System libraries and the possible future of the project.
BadgerCat is poised to go live on
March 1. BadgerCat is a subset of WorldCat,
so this should not necessarily be a huge transition for many campuses, even with
a mid-semester go-live date. The intent
is for individual campuses to keep things as locally configurable as
possible. She referred to the
instructions sent out by Schneider on January 27. Malzacher reviewed
the presentation options for BadgerCat vs. WorldCat on each campus.
She reviewed the scopes and the timeframe for when logos and scopes will
change, emphasizing that each campus can choose which scopes to show to its
users. More scopes can be added
later. There have been several
discussions with OCLC about how BadgerCat will
interface with UB, about interim solutions as well as the ultimate and best
solution Having a Smart Button to get users
directly to the UB screen when appropriate is the best solution. OCLC has been asked to make BadgerCat take users to UB if an item is in a UW system
library and to take users to ILLiad if the item is not
available in UW system. Our campuses
present ILLiad differently to our users so there is a
need for some ongoing local customization.
OCLC has committed itself to working on NCIP standards for
In terms of the future, Malzacher thinks
OCLC is taking a serious and thoughtful approach to the integration with UB
issue. OCLC needs to look at this with
an eye to the future and the role of the OCLC database in the overall expansion
of resource availability to users. Instruction
and reference folks need to understand what BadgerCat
is and its functionality, in terms of how we present our catalogs to
users. Frazier said that some concerns
need to be resolved before discussing BadgerCat with
library staff at large. Konrad said that
Konrad reiterated that some
technical issues at
Wilkinson, Frazier, Docken, and Schneider will meet with Sally Drew and Richard Grobschmidt tomorrow afternoon to review potential for BadgerCat on a statewide level.
Frazier is hopeful that the state will embrace more statewide resource sharing and that the universities will be a key part of that. He suggested having an assessment after rollout.
UWSAC Report (Michael Doylen)
Doylen talked about the current emphasis on system-wide cooperative projects among archives operations:
1. A database system to improve combined UWSA access to archives collections and provide functionality to circulate materials through that system
2. A database project for ARCs to create a centralized index for records, specifically genealogical records. These have typically been created only on a local level, with no standard vocabulary or combined search functionality. Ideally, there should be a single database with consistent data entry. There is a committee looking at fields that should be in the records. Rose asked how this relates to local catalogs. Doylen said the technical infrastructure is still being planned, but he expects to have a web tool that searches across ARCs or by each ARC.
3. UWSAC wants to improve records management and expand knowledge of records schedules and record retentions across the campuses. At this point, this is a fairly decentralized activity across UWSA. There is currently no general records schedule in place across UWSA. This issue has not been looked at for at least 12-15 years.
Wilkinson added that UWSAC has been incredibly helpful in the success of UWDC projects. Boucher asked whether the second database project would be publicly available. Doylen said that that is the primary reason for the project.
Gottlieb distributed a written report at the meeting. All UW libraries, with exception of
Reporting on facilities planning at the Wisconsin Historical
In response to a question, Gottlieb clarified that the WHS pamphlet collection is not part of archives. The pamphlets are not lent directly to other campuses.
The committee working on this project is regrouping and making a first attempt at a business plan. The metadata server for WHO will be at UW-Madison. There will be a front end portal for searching. WHS will host the content for institutions that cannot host their own content. WHO is working on a shared license for the ContentDM software that will allow more libraries to participate and add content. They hope to have something to show by summer 2006. Since the IMLS proposal was dropped, there is a serious need for collaborative funding. There are a number of WHO working groups that are highly productive and industrious. That work is valuable, regardless of whether WHO moves forward as originally planned. Frazier said that everyone expects to continue putting content online, but a primary goal of WHO is to have a serious plan for retaining that content online into the future. Smaller organizations do not necessarily have that assumption built into their work or plans. Frazier asked if the UW campus libraries can assist in sustaining the ongoing costs of WHO on an annual basis - perhaps $1,000 a year per campus to maintain this content and infrastructure into the future. Boucher said that UW Archives seems to be a great partner for WHO. Schneider indicated that archives is already involved in the planning process. Wilkinson asked how CUWL would address Frazier’s question about possible funding from UW campuses. Schneider said that funding is needed by next year. There was a decision to discuss this further at the summer CUWL meeting when there is something online to look at. Rose asked if every campus would need to contribute. There is currently no formalized plan or proposal for a funding model for UW system libraries.
UW System Update (Ed Meachen)
Meachen pointed out that UWSA library automation and shared electronic collections account for 30% of overall UW system funding. UWSA is putting together a response to CUWL’s letter to Cora Marrett asking that the library funding be protected. Meachen reviewed the cuts taken in the UWSA budget in past few years.
Frazier and Wilkinson recently met with the Board of Regents about the UW Digital Collections. In early March there will be a twenty minute IT presentation for the Regents. The focus will be on student learning and improvement of the student environment, which is directly related to libraries. The Regents will be interested in seeing the direct relationship/interrelationships between student IT systems and library-related systems, infrastructure, and content. A couple provosts will participate in the IT presentation for the Regents. Meachen expects the huge growth of course management systems to be a primary discussion topic. Boucher asked about status of the new BadgerNet. Meachen said that at least four establishments are unlikely to participate directly in the BN converged network. There will be a robust research network connection for the UW-Madison campus. That has already been approved for exclusion from the SBC project. Frazier asked who would do the IT presentation for the Regents. Meachen would like provosts to speak for themselves, but he’s also interested in a faculty member and student speaking. Frazier told CUWL about his recent presentation to campus facilities about the changing use of library space as student learning environments. He will share his PPT slides with Meachen.
UWSA Budget Update (Chris Goss)
Goss said that the outlook is grim for 07-09. System expects extensive structural
deficits. The areas of focus for the
President and Chancellors are to: increase student access to the UW, increase
the number of faculty, increase faculty salaries, and address increased utility
At this time there is no plan for a library DIN for 07-09. In order for libraries to get into the 07-09 budget, they will need to work directly with their
individual chancellors who will convey the message to President Reilly. Goss clarified that he was talking about
requests for new state funds. Rose asked if there should be a common message for
individual CUWL directors to pass on to their chancellors. Krogman said that
the some portion of the student technology fees at each campus should be used
for library-related purposes. There were
questions about how to make that argument. Krogman’s
observation is that students support the use of those funds for libraries. At this time there appears to be significant
variation in how each campus uses those funds.
Most CUWL directors have worked to get some or more of those funds.
Huang said that on many campuses a specific portion of student tech fees goes
to libraries, sometimes earmarked for specific purposes. Could CUWL propose a system-wide
interpretation for use of student tech fees by libraries? It sounds like some UW libraries have been
very successful in getting access to some of that funding. Barczyk said that a
large amount of tech money is decided by a student panel after the basic
ongoing costs are excluded. Frazier
talked about need for acquisitions funding for the UW libraries and that it may
not be possible to have one answer/response that applies across all the
campuses. Frazier said that
Budget Reduction Templete (Chris Goss)
Goss put the comprehensives and Colleges together without
Library Automation Report (Lorie Docken)
A conference call with Endeavor has been scheduled. Docken has been in direct contact with Linda Voyles. Voyles conveyed the challenges Endeavor has had in addressing our concerns. Endeavor representatives will be invited to the Spring CUWL meeting.
Moriarty referred to his memo on hardware replacement. On February 8 there will be a face-to-face
meeting regarding hub operations. There
is now a good assessment of the cost advantages of expanding the hub
model. There still needs to be a
discussion about the service level agreement for the hub. Also, there needs to be better-structured
communication channels for the hub.
There have been some discussions with EauClaire
about a regional hub in that area and
Collection Management Task Force (Ewa Barczyk)
Barczyk thanked Baruth for collating the survey responses and
comments. Other vendors are becoming
aware that UW system may soon be looking for a vendor beyond this pilot
acknowledged that the Yankee GOBI trial was too short for campuses to make any
real changes in basic workflows. One
interesting discovery from the survey is that Amazon is already a major vendor
across the UW system. Having a separate
contract for rush acquisitions could result in higher discounts. During the
Barczyk reviewed the four recommendations to CUWL included in the Task Force’s report:
1. Pursue contract for primary vendor for all UW libraries for books, media and rush purchases. It’s likely that there will need to be a different vendor for each of these. Look for the best possible discount. Look for a vendor that might be interested in joint development of an improved interface.
2. Create a Task Force to work on a book bid for vendors for books, media, and rush. The current contract for a book vendor expired in November 2005. It has been temporarily extended until there is a bid process is determine new vendors. This needs to be done this Spring.
3. Develop a concise policy and guidelines for collaborative collection development based on existing models elsewhere. Does this include journal decisions? Yes, journals fit into the Collection Management Task Force’s overall charge, but initially the emphasis has been on books. Boucher asked how prescriptive such guidelines might be. Barczyk said that the group would look at general guidelines and recommendations first. Frazier said that some staff members are more comfortable operating within general guidelines and want to have them. It’s worth putting together something. We are looking at institutions making a commitment to collaborative collection development and minimizing unnecessary duplication. Barczyk mentioned the collaborative collection development efforts to date thus far by the CIMCs and the Colleges. She also referred to a recent Chronicle article about consortial buying by libraries. Libraries need to experiment with statistics that report collective holdings.
4. All campuses need to consider providing article delivery on demand in lieu of ownership for some journals, especially high cost, low use titles. We need additional models for expanding document delivery and individual article buying from publishers and commercial document suppliers.
Rose moved to accept the Task Force’s recommendations as stated in the report and Unaeze seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Roundtable Discussion: journal collections & cancellations across UW System (Richard Reeb, CDC Chair, participated in this agenda item)
Reeb passed out a serials overlap summary for UW system and emphasized the need to keep journal expenditures under control. For 2006 subscriptions at UW-Madison $250,000 in savings is being achieved through cancellations and conversion to e-only. Each year we need to look for more titles to cancel. We should assess the titles held by all or almost all UW campuses and consider pursuing system-wide electronic licenses for those titles. We should consolidate usage data for specific journals or publishers (like Elsevier) across the UW System and identify additional titles for which document delivery could replace local subscriptions.
Frazier said that we need to be more drastic in our
thinking. We need to consider our concerns about journals and journal
subscriptions as a five-year problem rather than something we deal with piece
by piece each year.
Mordecai Lee referred to the importance of journal tables of contents. He noted the difference between looking at journals for current awareness and needing to find a specific journal article.
With regard to going to online in lieu of print for subscriptions, Docken said that the serials group has tried to identify more journals for possible system licensing and has also looked at cost models. She reminded CUWL directors of the remaining duplicate print ACS journal subscriptions across UW system. Might going to e-only for those titles be one way to reduce costs? Wilkinson asked how OhioLink handles journal subscriptions and journal access. Everyone agrees that OhioLink is probably not a good model because it has a very high level of centralized funding for electronic collections.
Rose mentioned the
Meeting attendees agreed to ask the Task Force to look at alternative economic models for funding acquisitions and rapid article delivery for UW system libraries.
Organization of UW Colleges and their libraries (Marc Boucher)
The UW Colleges are one “campus” with multiple locations. The Colleges have a shared catalog with
UB/book retrieval functionality. Each
physical campus has a library and library director who reports to the dean at
that campus. There are 13
libraries. There is no “Colleges”
library director overall and there is no central administration for the
libraries, but they need to work together.
They share one library support services (LSS) unit/staff (cataloging/automation). There is a Library Council that is comprised
of the professional librarians from all 13 campuses plus LSS and serves a role
equivalent to what CUWL does for the UW System. The chair of the Library Council is elected via
a democratic process. Each campus
provides a budget line for its library.
The UW Colleges have a number of library-related committees. The UW College representative to CUWL is
elected by the Library Council. As
College representative to CUWL, Boucher tries to discuss CUWL issues with the
Library Council ahead of time to inform his voting, but ultimately he makes his
own decision on how to vote. Gilbertson
asked about possible ramifications of the Extension/Colleges administrative
merger. It is too soon to know. One campus (at this time it is
Distance Learning Reports Reminder (Marc Boucher)
CUWL directors should get distance learning reports from their staff and share that information at either the summer or fall CUWL meeting.
Taskforce on Library Integration with Learn@UW (Valerie Malzacher)
The revised draft charge for this Task Force was approved by the CUWL Executive Committee prior to this meeting. Malzacher reviewed the charge and specific tasks related to the charge and the CUWL directors discussed potential members for the Task Force. Members will include a representative from the Learning Technology Development Council, a representative from the UWSA D2L Integration Subcommittee, a public services librarian, a UW-Madison staff member knowledgeable about that campus’ Library Course Page project, a librarian with e-reserves experience, a Library Automation Manager, a CUWL representative, a UWSA OLIT representative, and a faculty member. The committee co-chairs will be Marc Boucher, who is the CUWL rep, and Jean Ruenger-Hanson, who is the UW-Madison rep.
Strategic Directions 2005-2007 - public document (Joyce Huang)
Huang presented the document and moved that it be approved by CUWL. Gulig seconded. CUWL voted unanimously to adopt the document.
WiLS Report (Kathy Schneider)
There will be a generic website for AskAway where anyone can start with a question. Reference and Loan will handle questions from users from institutions not affiliated with AskAway. R&L will just have total numbers, no details on those users.
Schneider has print copies of OCLC’s latest report available for CUWL Directors. Frazier said that the survey results are very interesting and authoritative. All directors should review this.
Schneider announced the two keynote speakers for WilsWorld this summer.
WiLS sent out a “What has WiLS done for you lately?” letter to all members. There have been positive comments from those who have responded thus far.
WiLS members can now go directly to MINITEX with their borrowing requests.
A recently hired WiLS staff librarian recently suggested that when WiLS scans a UW-Madison dissertation for lending, a copy should be put into the Institutional Repository MINDS@UW. WiLS is also going to add other materials to MINDS@UW for a Wendt Library project.
There were no questions for Schneider about the resource sharing reports.
Good luck at tomorrow’s Legislative Day activities.
The joint ITMC, LTDC, LAMs, CUWL conference
will be April 10-11 at the Heidel House in
In terms of possible agenda items for the spring CUWL meeting, Wilkinson mentioned the election of two comprehensive representatives to the WiLS board. We also need to elect officers for next year. Malzacher is in charge of nominations for secretary, incoming CUWL chair-elect, and the WiLS board representative. Other agenda items mentioned included D2L, Endeavor reps meeting with LAMs, the Group Catalog, and updates from the Working Group on SubGroups, the Digital Repository group, the CDC, and the Collection Development Task Force.
Rose wants to delay his Subgroup’s final report until summer.
Wilkinson said that someone will speak about the future of the ILS at OCLC. He will provide a brief report on that for CUWL.
Boucher moved to adjourn the meeting and Lee seconded.
The meeting was adjourned at .
Submitted by Jean Gilbertson, CUWL Secretary