Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries

Council of University of Wisconsin Libraries
UW Madison Memorial Library

July 22, 2008
Minutes

Attending:  Kathy Schneider, WILS; John Pollitz, Eau Claire; Lisa Jewell, UW System; Ed Meachen, UW System; Pat Wilkinson, Oshkosh; Kristin Eschenfelder, Madison, Faculty Representative; Vanaja Menon, Parkside; Barbara Bren, Whitewater; Ewa Barczyk, Milwaukee; Valierie Malzacher, River Falls; John Krogman, Platteville; Bill Johnston (for Paul Roberts), Stout; Richard Reeb, UW-Madison; April Goodwin, UW-System; Jean Gilbertson, Madison; Marlys Brunsting, Green Bay; Leanne Hansen, Green Bay; Anita Evans, LaCrosse; Mark Rozarynowski, Colleges (Baraboo-Sauk County); Steve Frye, Madison; Kathy Davis, Stevens Point.; Ron Hardy, Oshkosh; Kathy Pletcher, Green Bay;  David Null for Peter Gottleib ; Lisa Strand, WLA Foundation; Lee Konrad, Madison, Nola Walker, Madison; Mary Rieder, Colleges.

Barczyk called the meeting to order at 9:30 am. Michael Pickart, UW-Stout, was elected as the Faculty Representative to CUWL Executive Committee. Ewa welcomed April Goodwin, UW-System.  Introductions and updates from each campus were given.  Several new directors have been hired:
UW Whitewater, Myrna McCallister, from Indiana State University, Terra Haute. She will begin on Aug. 15.
New directors at UW Colleges:
Todd Roll, UW-Richland
Michelle Washington, UW-Washington County
Dave Dettmann, UW-Marathon County
Peggy Turnbull UW-Manitowoc
There are new facilities at UW-Sheboygan and UW-Rock County.

Consent agenda
Davis/Pollitz moved/seconded to approve the Minutes, April 21-22,  2008.  Motion carried.
Gilbertson/ Menon moved/seconded to accept the Executive Committee minutes, June 23, 2008.  Motion carried.

UW System report (Meachen/Jewell)
Meachen reported on the State budget. The UW-System is still expected to handle a $25M lapse. Much of this lapse will be covered by utility savings.  System chief business officers met and are still discussing other sources to fund the lapse. The Supreme Court has ruled on the software license violations and $100M is to be paid to the company. A study group on the learning object repository by D2L as demonstrated at Green Lake has been formed. There are no plans to use common systems funds for this project.  The expectation is to ask for library automation funds. Meachen reported that due to a resignation, there is a search underway for an interim Director of Learning Technology Development. There will be a meeting on July 28, 29, in Stevens Point, on new learning technologies, including the next generation of online tools, D2L, web 2.0, etc. Learning Objects Repository (LOR) Task Force members are:  Lorna Wong, Andy Speth, Chair, Mary Mielke, Lisa Jewell, Penny Ralston-Berg, Patricia Fellowes. The upgrade for the metalib server will be paid from library automation funds. Jewell distributed the updated CUWL membership list and explained its new format.    

There was some discussion on the repository and its connection with the course management system. It was agreed this would be ideal and we want to avoid building silos. Eschenfelder requested faculty representation on the committee. Kathy Pletcher has met with UW-Oshkosh staff to get a general sense of needs.  .

Review of June 3-4 CUWL Conference

The results of the survey can be found at:  https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/groups/CUWL/cuwlccchairs/public/Results/SurveySummary.html

Barczyk thanked the Chairs of the Coordinating Committees for their excellent work in planning the Conference.  Frye recommended doing planning one year in advance and including other members of the coordinating committees, not just the chairs. Other considerations were to plan events for the evening.  Having two running days would be provide an opportunity for the Coordinating Committees to conduct a face-to-face meeting.  There was discussion about the preferred location, keeping the budget at a minimum, and planning dates/locations more than one year out.  It was agreed we will host another conference next year. It will be held on June 3-4, 2009 at the Pyle Center, Madison, since arrangements were made for that location and date over a year ago. The conference organizing working group is to be established by CUWL Executive Committee.
. 
Coordinating Committee reports

  • Collections and Resource Sharing (Reeb)
    In addition to the written report, Reeb distributed a handout reporting annual use of Blackwell as the primary book vendor.  At this time, all campuses are directing at least half of their monograph expenditures to Blackwell.  Reeb reported the Collection Development Committee is still quite active.
  • User Services (Frye)
    A written report was submitted.  Frye asked the directors for our vision for moving forward and what we would like to see implemented system-wide regarding user services.  The Directors indicated they would like to see:
    • Collaboration on system-wide subject guides or a ‘framework’ for a guide with some of the system-wide resources that could be customized for local campus use.
    • Ideas on best practices; what’s being tried and what were the results
    • Experimental services, recognizing that some will work and some won’t but we need to try new services and report on the result
    • A common assessment tool
    • White papers on topics. For example, products to be adapted and implemented such as the reference database that tracks statistics.

Frye expressed concern about the lack of use of the listservs.  Directors noted there may be misconceptions about the use of the listservs as being for committee use only; reluctance on the part of staff members to share information that might be monitored by directors and others; and a need for discussion groups for functional areas.  There was a recommendation to do a survey of staff to determine the best way to get involvement and use of listservs.

  • Library Technology (Brunsting)
    As noted in the written report, the LAMs have had no face-to-face meetings.  Brunsting stated that there is a need for at least one face-to-face meeting per year. As noted earlier, there is a need LAM listserve for technical questions.  Improved communication was a great result of restructuring. Following a general discussion of face-to-face meetings for functional groups, it was recommended that more meeting time be incorporated into the next CUWL conference. This is indicated in the conference survey results as well.
  • Digital Initiatives (report sent by Ranger)
  • Plan for assessment of new committee structure & strategic plan update (Barczyk/Gilbertson)
    Gilbertson recommended a small working group to plan and do the assessment. Gilbertson also requested a summation of activities for the past year from the chairs of Coordinating Committees. She will use this to prepare an annual report on the strategic plan implementation. The report will be posted to the CUWL website. Brunsting requested feedback or an evaluation of the chairs and the coordinating committees’ work prior to the formal assessment. This would provide the Chair an opportunity to make improvements before term is over. Barczyk stated the Executive Committee will look into this. 

Document Delivery Update  (Hardy, Wilkinson, Jewell)
Hardy reported a slow startup and low use; however, it’s really only been operational for three months. The evaluation of the project recommended several changes. The most significant request is for broader resources, use of purchase cards as part of process, use by grads/undergrads not just faculty; funding explanation/clarification on matching. Concern was expressed that there may be cultural barriers to implementation. Many ILL staff do their best to save money by requesting resources that are free. It was noted that it is necessary to spend funds, especially for copyright exceeded. Others stated the limited number of vendors was a bigger concern. Many campuses are looking to cancel some expensive journals and replace them with access via document delivery. It takes time to make these decisions. Several directors stated they would notify specific undergraduate research areas on their campus to increase use of the program while making sure it is not abused by undergraduates. Others noted there would be changes in the reference and instruction practices to indicate the availability of the program. Faculty will need to be informed so they will encourage students to use the service. The Directors’ leadership is necessary to make the program work. The following proposed improvements are:

  • Purchasing cards for campuses
    Set up purchasing cards for each library through their university account with WiLS as the billing address. Libraries would use these cards to purchase documents commercially from any provider or publisher that meets their needs. WiLS would administer the matching fund requirements for libraries and system. This provides each institution with the greatest amount of flexibility.
  • Vendors
    Continue the arrangements with Wiley-Blackwell, Science Direct, CISTI, and British Library, and possibly add more vendors based on cost savings and work flow considerations. 
  • Expand users
    Expand the eligibility of users to include graduate students and/or upper level undergraduate students working on collaborative research with faculty, at the discretion of the library.
  • Local funding
    Encourage library directors to allocate funds for the purpose of supporting commercial document delivery. Encourage ILL departments to consider when speed of document delivery is more important than cost avoidance.
  • Equitable Access
    Track the use of these funds by campus, but set no restrictions on use unless significant imbalance is observed.

There was clarification on the matching funding--if the campus spends $500, UW System will pay half.  Barczyk called for approved of the recommendations by voice vote.  Approved.

CUWL operating procedures – revisions (Malzacher and Evans)
Malzacher and Evans presented the revisions. Hansen/Johnston moved/seconded approval of the operating procedures. Motion carried.

WILS update (Schneider)
Schneider distributed three handouts:  1. Year end 08 report on lending.  She noted the total numbers of ILL requests are down. The pattern of net lenders and net borrowers has not changed. 2. British Library use is over budget.  There has been more use by Colleges. 3.  Survey response handout.  Looking at responses for the UW Libraries she notes that UW Libraries are veteran users of OCLC and do not feel a need for as much support from WILS.  UW Libraries are fine with online training while public libraries are not.  

WILS will be meeting on 9/9/08 with OCLC to review the changes coming for OCLC and regional services in July, 2009. OCLC wants to move forward with their plan for their long term viability.  There will be a more international focus and greatly diminished local network activity. OCLC is no longer a membership cooperative--it not the same environment today as when OCLC began nor does its management have the same philosophy. With the new governance rules passed by OCLC, WILS will no longer have role in electing members to the Members Council.  There will be a new global council.  Schneider has had a discussion with the Midwest Federation about collaboration as this could provide some real benefits beyond OCLC activity. Schneider stated the upcoming OCLC changes will be an opportunity for WILS to go in new direction.  There are services they have planned but not had time to implement.  Schneider expects that WILS will continue to provide ILL services and support and the cooperative purchasing service.  Yet, there are some concerns that need to be addressed by UW Libraries regarding WILS and OCLC. The CUWL Executive Committee was charged to work with Schneider to develop an effective response for UW Libraries.

LibQual  Discussion  (Nola Walker, Lee Konrad)
Walker asked what’s our objective for the executive summary. She requested a time frame for report.  It was agreed we want the report to compare the most recent data to the 2004 survey data. The report would be written for non-librarians and would address needs related to funding and any requested need for additional databases. We expect graphics that capture the findings. User comments will be included in a grouped manner using software to code and analyze them. We expect the report will identify concerns or needs across campuses. These issues will help System prepare funding requests. Some directors also requested assistance with the use of software to help with the analysis of their campus comments/data.    

UWSAC report (David Null for Gottlieb)
Null, UW Archives, Madison, reported there will be a one day meeting in fall in Madison; and a May meeting in Green Bay, this may be a two day meeting. The primary focus of the Board has been the standardization of circulation policies across campuses; especially the transfer on media (photographs primarily, other video, etc.), digitization of this information, concerns about users bringing in their own cameras, charges for various services. They are also looking at unrepresented parts of state where there is a need for digitization projects. There are issues related to use of metadata as well.

WLA Foundation funding initiative (Lisa Strand)
Strand reported the WLA Foundation Board’s focus for the coming year is on promoting academic libraries. The past state-wide publicity campaigns for Wisconsin Libraries were designed to encourage charitable giving, conduct a statewide survey of public library use, provide merchandise, radio, editorials (life-long learners via all-types of learners), hire a PR coordinator, study the economic impact of public libraries. It was suggested that similar activities be conducted for academic libraries, particularly a study of the economic impact and the promotional materials/ ad campaign with some revision. The timeframe is for 2010 funding.  Planning needs to begin soon for initial discussion at the November 2008 Board meeting. A plan will be presented to the Board at that time with final recommendations made in April. Some suggestions for the survey included determining the community member use of academic libraries, particularly for the Research and Development flow in our communities; another event could be a day in spring where the public would be invited to the academic libraries; we could focus on the Wisconsin Idea in action. Private colleges could be invited to participate as well. Evans & Hansen volunteered to co-chair a working group to prepare a proposal for review at the fall CUWL meeting. 

UWS DIN planning update (Pletcher/Frazier)
The updated DVD Advantage Wisconsin; Growing the Research Infrastructure was viewed. Spokesperson David Ward highlighted the economic impact of University that led to the Governor’s growth agenda. He is a spokesperson on the DVD. One important message for legislators is that the UW System lags behind Minnesota (and Iowa). It was noted the DVD informed viewers what we will do with the funding by clearly showing what databases are.  It was suggested that the Legislators will look at economic impact and wouldn’t see the value of anthropology. Frazier reminded directors to contact their Regents. Nordgren reported on her meeting with Colleene Thomas. Thomas is supportive and expects there will be no problem with the request at the Regent’s level. Her primary question was: what are we getting for the money. A list of potential databases was distributed and suggestions for changes were made.  Wilkinson noted that when his Chancellor asked “How much goes to Oshkosh”, he responded “all of it”. Reeb reminded the directors that the usual process, with input from librarians, will be used to determine the resources to be purchased. The list distributed could be used to provide examples for legislators. Schneider reminded us that our request is not to be confused with Badgerlink which is also being re-negotiated.

Frazier stated UW-Madison is piloting a research fellow program. It will use the System’s authentication system; provide sponsorship based on existing UW-Madison criteria and policies to be developed.  It was noted that some databases will not be available to the researcher depending upon licensing agreements and is dependent on the researchers’ field. UW-Madison will partner with other UW libraries. Frazier has met and discussed partnering with Oshkosh in the fall and River Falls in the spring. 

COLAND Visioning summit  (Pletcher/Frazier)
Pletcher reported on the two-day summit.  Discussions included issues such as the  quality of life; sufficient bandwidth (a concern of public libraries for use with online job applications, tax submission, etc.); a literate Wisconsin--literacy for 21st century; career resources; sharing expertise; developing partnerships; flexible staff; training librarians for current and future skills; community branding; four-to-one return on investment for libraries; community engagement. A working draft is to be posted for participants by the end of week. Pletcher read the vision statement that resulted from the summit. Malzacher, Wilkinson, and Schneider participated in the summit. Malzacher noted that there were passionate speakers on school libraries. The idea of one library card in the state was discussed. Schneider noted that most assume this would not include academic libraries. If academic libraries were included it would sent an important message. Wilkinson noted that public libraries have a real need for internet access. Schneider noted that bandwidth is a concern. Additionally, Badgerlink needs to move forward; it’s expected there will be an inclusion of health and geological resources.  85% of attendees reported they want to be involved in moving forward with recommendations of summit. Information on the summit can be seen at http://dpi.state.wi.us/coland/vision.html. 

UB report  (Rieder/Reeb)
Rieder reviewed the report. A question on the #1 recommendation concerned the amount of requests made but not picked up. Rieder replied that her general sense was that it was not overwhelming and suggested that there could be a reallocation of resources should there be a great increase resulting from implementation. The #1 Recommendation: Whether UB pickups should be allowed from the holding library and whether this service should be implemented System-wide was approved by voice vote. Recommendation #2: Whether UB aggregate block limits should be extended to patrons' local circulation transactions. The working group is in favor of applying this new option so that local patrons who have reached the UB aggregate block limit are also blocked from new local circulation transactions Approved by voice vote. The third recommendation required no action: Whether the UB's promotion capability should be implemented system wide. It is our recommendation that this service not be implemented until such time as future software releases better support this functionality.

Under other recommendations #1--The Working Group recommends that all UW libraries forgive all processing fees for returned UB items which have gone to lost status when the item is returned, and for all UB patrons, faculty and students alike. It was noted that since the original survey all libraries have implemented this.  #2--the Working Group recommends that replacement bills be sent out between 28 and 31 days after the due date of the items. Both recommendations passed by voice vote. 

Under Discussion points #1--The Working Group would like CUWL to consider asking all UW libraries to do further testing and possibly limit searching in the simulsearch interface to only the “simple search,” and only use the search indexes which have proven to provide consistent results through testing: Words Anywhere (the GKEY index), Title Words (TKEY), Journal Title Words (JKEY), Author Words (NKEY), and Subject Heading Words (SKEY) was referred to LTCC & User Services Coordinating Committees, to include LAM involvement. The second discussion point noted that there are a lot of factors to consider regarding the sharing of non-print media; time to transport materials, etc. No action was taken on this item. We will continue to defer to local policy.

Resource Discovery Taskforce update (Gilbertson)
Gilbertson reported that the charge for this UW-Madison Taskforce was to develop a vision for resource discovery based on user needs and expectations. As part of its work, the Taskforce reviewed a lot of products. A report was presented at the CUWL conference. The report has lots of recommendations and there are plans to distribute it more widely. Library administration at UW-Madison is reviewing which things are currently happening, prioritizing other recommendations, and discussing what action or possible implementation for others. Nothing has been finalized and discussion will continue on the Madison campus. Brunsting asked how long we will have Voyager. 

Wrapup

  • CUWL meeting schedule for 08/09
    The Winter meeting will again be held prior to Library Legislation day, Feb. 3, 2009, in Madison. 
    It was agreed that the Fall meeting include a discussion of copyright and RIAA as well as a discussion of D2L integration.  These topics would be good for a joint meeting with ITMC. They meet this fall on  Nov. 11. Barczyk will follow-up. 
    The Spring meeting will be in Platteville. 
  • Other
    The Executive Committee discussed distributing the minutes earlier and including the Coordinating Committee reports on the website but not in the minutes. A list of action items will be sent as soon as possible following the meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 4:30 pm.

Respectfully submitted,
Deb Nordgren
CUWL Secretary