University Libraries Logo University Archives of Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes Archive

January 10, 1990

  These minutes were  approved as submitted  at the February 7,  1990,

  ULC meeting.

 

                  UNIVERSITY LIBRARY COMMITTEE MINUTES

                            January 10, 1990

 

 

  PRESENT:

  Sharon Brusic, GSA                    Arthur Keown, Business

  John Bowen, Veterinary Medicine       J. Scott Poole, Architecture

  William Cox, (for M. Vorster)         Jane Wentworth, Human Resources

  Norman Dodl, Education                David West, Arts & Sciences

  J. C. Duke, Faculty Senate            Roderick  Young,  Agr. &  Life

  Paul Gherman, Library                    Science

 

  GUESTS:

  Carol Dallman, CSAC                   Frances Painter, Library

  Bela Foltin, Library                  Linda Richardson, Library

 

 

  ABSENT:

  Michael Kainer, SGA                   Michael C. Vorster, Engineering

  Provost's Representative

 

  MEETING SUMMARY:

 

  The meeting was called to order at 4:02 p.m. Minutes of the

  December 6, 1989, meeting were approved as submitted.  The committee

  will continue to meet on the first Wednesday of each month at the

  same time.  There was continued discussion on the issue of access

  vs. ownership, and discussion of library space needs was begun.

 

  OLD BUSINESS

 

     I.   CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF ACCESS VS. OWNERSHIP

 

          N. Dodl: The committee should develop a procedure to bring

          this issue clearly before the committee members' faculty

          constituencies.  What strategy would the committee recommend?

          P. Gherman:  Dr. Heterick and Dr. Carlisle also believe this

          to be an important issue which needs to be understood by the

          university community.  Perhaps this committee, or jointly

          with the Faculty Senate, could sponsor a symposium on the topic.

          A. Keown: I wonder why we discuss this, as it seems to be

          an issue that the library doesn't have control over.

          Outstanding new products are developed and it seems a

          foregone conclusion that they should be purchased.

          D. West: Some faculty with whom I've spoken aren't aware of

          what is happening, and they do need to be alerted to the

          trends that are emerging, even though we probably don't have

          much control.

          P. Gherman:  Library staff are making decisions in this

          area.  Every time the library spends money on "access"

          rather than ownership the decision is being made. When a

          CD-ROM product is bought which tells where information is,

          rather than providing the information, or the Center for

          Research Libraries is joined, access to information has been

          bought rather than ownship. Increasingly, a portion of the

          library budget is moving towards access and away from ownership.

          B. Foltin: The budget issue is forcing the staff to closely

          define the core of materials really needed "on board" as

          opposed to those only occasionally needed in order that

          collection development can proceed in a coordinated way.

          Traditionally, the library had to anticipate what might be

          needed in the future and buy materials accordingly.  It is

          now necessary to reduce that "guessing" portion of library

          acquisition, and through access products perhaps share in

          coordinated collection development with other institutions.

          N. Dodl: Do committee members have any thoughts on what the

          committee should be doing or saying to colleagues.  Has

          Faculty Senate talked about this.

          P. Gherman: I have spoken to Faculty Senate, and had some

          response. An additional issue is that not every faculty

          member or student has a PC on his/her desk, and if access

          increasingly means the necessity to have electronic devices

          available, then not every faculty member or student will

          have equal access  to information.  Not  all of the

          information will be free, and faculty may have differing

          amounts to spend on information. Another issue pertains to

          CD-ROMS owned by departments?  Should they be centrally

          cataloged so that everyone has access to them?  There will

          be many equity governance issues about access to

          information.  Libraries may be thrown into the role of

          gatekeeper to information rather than provider of

          information. Libraries will need sound policies to guide

          them in that role. At the last meeting the committee talked

          about scholarly journal publishing reverting to the

          universities, rather than the for-profit publishing industry

          taking what scholars produce and then selling it back to

          them. What if universities were to assert that everything

          written by faculty is not for individuals to copyright, but

          belongs to the university? The university would then assume

          all negotiations with publishers, and would make the

          decisions about publishing electronically or traditionally.

          J. Duke:  If editorial boards examine manuscripts

          electronically, much as they review hard copy, and then

          create a file of the reviewed manuscript, it could be

          shipped electronically. The editorial board could ship the

          reviewed document only to subscribers. In some technical

          fields the advertisements in journals are also important

          information.  Advertisements could be segmented in

          electronic files to be sent with every article accessed.

          The operation could probably be subsidized based on the

          charges to advertisers.  Illustrations are a more

          complicated issue, but in the near future that will probably

          be solved.

          P. Gherman: Senator Gore is sponsoring a bill to build a

          national telecommunications highway for higher education,

          called NREN (National Research in Education Network).  It

          would allow communication with all higher education for free

          or at very low cost. This has strong support on both sides

          of the House and it is expected to pass. It would eliminate

          the problem of telecommunications costs.

          D. West: This is just the sort of thing that faculty should

          be apprised of.  Most faculty like to browse journals, not

          just to look at tables of contents for specific articles,

          but to see what is going on in related fields as well. The

          contents of huge databases are too much sensory input to be

          coped with. Faculty may suddenly wake up one day to realize

          they can't browse a journal any longer.

          B. Foltin:  There are other paradigms being developed, such

          as HyperText and HyperMedia, which do create an environment

          in which you can browse.

          J. Duke: We're talking about trying to develop policy to deal

          with information and access to it, but a good part of this

          discussion has been about influencing the development of access

          technology. The function of this committee is to concentrate

          on the issues of access; how to develop policies to facilitate

          access, or how to develop funding for access. Whether, or when,

          the technology happens we have to develop policies in advance

          to react to them.  For example, we can develop a policy that

          generally addresses the issue of access to a department

          owned database or CD-ROM.  One part of this issue is the

          technology and how fast it's developing. Should we try to

          influence that because of it's impact on budgetary aspects

          of the library operation? The other part is that if the

          issue is simply stripped down to economics we may lose some

          of the other things people are talking about here.  We

          should focus on keeping abreast of the technology

          development and developing policy to that end.  We should

          bring this before the faculty and try to learn if other

          units in the university are bringing invited lecturers to

          campus to address this issue, etc.

          N. Dodl:  The position of this committee is not one of

          trying to control this process, but to be concerned about

          direction, to communicate adequately in advance to our

          colleagues, getting their prospective, and bringing that

          information back to the library. We need to decide how the

          committee facilitates an ongoing discussion of a change that

          is obvious, but that nevertheless needs input from the

          university community.  At the next meeting we will talk

          about strategies for bringing this more squarely before our

          colleagues.

 

  NEW BUSINESS

 

      I.  MEETING TIMES FOR 2ND SEMESTER

 

          It was agreed that the committee would continue to meet on

          the first Wednesday of each month at 4:00 p.m. in the

          library Board Room.

 

     II.  SPACE NEEDS OF THE LIBRARY

 

          N. Dodl: Space needs is a general category for discussion

          around which there were questions raised having to do with

          storage needs, growth in the library, and utilization of

          present space.

          J. Duke: The library is not in need of space at this moment

          in order to do its job.  Discussions about space have

          centered on the future--if advance planning is not done, the

          library will not be able to overcome the problem, since the

          time frame for finding a solution is not short.  There are

          those on campus who are in a crisis situation right now in

          regard to their space needs.  When they read that something

          new has been added in the library they don't understand why

          the library talks about a space problem.  We need to make

          clear to the community that the issue of space is being

          addressed here from a planning point of view.

          P. Gherman:  You're right. We do not have a space crisis

          today.  We do have a space problem in the near future,

          probably sooner than we can build space to deal with it. At

          the same time there are strategic opportunities to bring new

          services to the library that can't be passed up today just

          because there will be a space problem 3 or 4 years from now.

          Recently we've brought in the film collection and the

          consulting service for the computing center.  Some of the

          more acute space needs that now exist in other units on

          campus would be solved for some time to come with additional

          square footage. The library's problem grows day-by-day with

          the addition of every new book and every new service. There

          will never be a time when it's possible to say that since

          the library is full no more books will be bought. An added

          problem is that as the library fills the labor costs of

          constantly shifting the collection escalate.

          N. Dodl: We have enjoined the issue of space as it relates

          to future need for more space.  There is also the issue of

          utilization of existing space.  We know that the state has

          said they will only consider requests for compact storage space.

          P. Gherman:  In the university's formal capital plan the

          library is not mentioned for a decade.  Dr. Carlisle has

          said he hopes to move the library forward in that priority.

 

          J. Bowen:  When new books move in, aren't there an equal

          number of old books moving out to Cheds?

          B. Foltin: The problem exists at both ends. Cheds will be

          filled at the end of this summer.

          P. Gherman: Also, Cheds is rented and the rental option is

          up in a year. The rent will probably increase. A related

          problem is that the more that is sent to storage, the less

          faculty and students can browse.

          N. Dodl:  Nothing suggests there is any potential in the

          next couple of decades for building more browsing space.

          The only building will be for storage.  The planning

          enterprise seems to have certain fixed limitations.

          J. Duke: Then it is in that context that the committee needs

          to develop policy. Do we know when Newman Library will be

          filled?

          P. Gherman:  In 1992 or 93.

          J. Duke: Then, if it will be ten years before there is more

          space for the library we need to change the slope so that it

          is not filled until ten years from now.

          N. Dodl:  It would be useful to the committee if the

          Director could be talk about things the committee might do

          that would be helpful in the policy arena.

          P. Gherman:  The library is going to appoint a group to

          study how the collection is used. This will tell us what

          part is heavily used and cannot be moved to storage, and

          what part can, so that decisions are made in an orderly fashion.

 

  REPORTS

 

     I.   LIBRARY ANNOUNCEMENTS (P. Gherman):

 

          It has been almost five years since the library developed

          its Strategic Plan.  It is time to begin another intensive

          planning effort. This planning effort will be done so that

          there is significant faculty input from the beginning of the

          process. It will begin within a month or two, and hopefully

          finish in the fall. The library would like to have active

          participation from the University Library Committee.

 

          So far the budget situation has not impacted the library,

          but it is going to be a difficult biennium and it is

          unlikely the library will remain unscathed. Budget cuts for

          next year would almost certainly mean serials cancellations;

          the monograph budget cannot be cut again.

 

  The meeting was adjourned at 5:02  p.m. The next meeting will be  on

  February 7, 1990.

 

Current Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive

Return to Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive


VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives


Send questions or comments to:

Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001

URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/ulc/1990/January+10++1990.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:52 EDT