University Libraries Logo University Archives of Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes Archive

January 9, 1991

  These minutes were approved at the ULC meeting on February 6 with some

  editorial changes which have been incorporated in this version of the

  minutes.

 

                  UNIVERSITY LIBRARY COMMITTEE MINUTES

                             January 9, 1991

 

  PRESENT:

  Bill Cox, for Engineering           Arthur Keown, Business

  Norman Dodl, Education              Ken McCleary, Human Resources

  Holly Ferguson, CSAC                J. Scott Poole, Architecture

  Edward Fox, Arts & Sciences         J. D. Stahl, Faculty Senate

  Paul Gherman, Library               Karen Watson, GSA

  Kara Goldberg, SGA                  Rod Young, Ag. & Life Sciences

 

 

  GUESTS:

  Shirley Glazener, Library           Paul Metz, Library

  Frances Painter, Library            John Straw, Library

 

  ABSENT:

  John Bowen, Vet Med                 Michael Vorster, Engineering

  Carol Burch-Brown, Provost's Office

 

 

  MEETING SUMMARY:

 

  The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m., and the minutes of

  the December meeting were approved with one correction. Under New

  Business, Information Systems Issues... in the third paragraph the

  fifth word should be "develop" not "development." There was a

  discussion about Susan Jurow's visit to campus, and continuing

  discussion of issues and goals for Information Systems 1991-96.

 

  The committee agreed that the ULC meeting time continue to be the

  first Wednesday of each month at 4:00 pm in the Library Boardroom.

  The next meeting will be February 6.

 

  REPORTS

 

  LIBRARY ANNOUNCEMENTS (P. Gherman):

 

       There were no library announcements.

 

  OLD BUSINESS

 

        I.  SUSAN JUROW'S CAMPUS VISIT (P. Gherman):

 

            Susan Jurow, Director of the Office of Management Studies

            of the Association

            of Research Libraries, will be on campus January 24 and

            25.  The schedule is not yet confirmed, but she will

            arrive the morning of the 24th and stay through the 25th.

            There may be a session scheduled for Thursday evening.

            The purpose of the return meeting is to hold focus group

            sessions on specific topics. It is desired that at least

            one of the sessions include faculty and students from

            around the university. The committee was asked to suggest

            topics that might be addressed at that meeting.  The

            library has considered as possible topics 1) collection

            development: how to make decisions about what electronic

            information the library should buy, what portion of the

            library's expenditures should be for electronic

            information versus paper-based information, how should the

            library develop a policy statement in that area, 2) what

            expectations are the library's clientele going to have of

            the library five years from now: what price of services

            should the library plan for, how will anticipated changes

            in the university over the next five years affect the

            library, 3) staff development and retraining: what new

            expertise and ability will the staff need in five years.

            These ideas provide material for three major focus

            sessions, but during the two days of the Jurow visit there

            will be room for four or five sessions.

            E. Fox: Suggested that as a matter of procedure the

            sessions should be open, in particular that at least one

            member of the University Library Committee attend each

            session.  Another focus group session might be devoted to

            the issue of library space.

            P. Gherman:  The university administration is aware of the

            library's space problem and seems committed to finding a

            solution.  Since the state has said that no further full-

            service library space will be constructed, it can be

            assumed that any solution will be with some kind of

            storage facility. However, a focus group could discuss

            how best to use any space that might become available in

            Newman Library after a storage solution is found and, more

            importantly, what materials should be stored and the

            implications of increased storage for the library's

            services. In response to E. Fox's first comment, the

            committee members are encouraged to attend as many

            meetings as possible, and to become as involved in the

            sessions as their schedules will permit. There will be a

            task force appointed to write the first draft of the

            strategic plan, and hopefully some committee members will

            be on the task force. The library plans to have the first

            draft ready for distribution sometime in April and the

            final version ready in August or September.

            N. Dodl:  Perhaps the library could send sign-up

            checklists to the committee members as soon as the

            schedule for the focus sessions is confirmed and the

            members should plan to attend as many meetings as possible.

 

       II.  INFORMATION SYSTEMS ISSUES AND GOALS FOR 1991-96 (N. Dodl):

 

            Committee members had been asked to bring to the meeting

            their own reactions, or the reactions of their colleagues,

            to the paper Information Systems in 1996: A Vision, which

            was first discussed at the last ULC meeting. E. Fox

            presented comments from the Ad Hoc Arts & Sciences Library

            Committee. A summary paper of his meeting with the

            committee was distributed.

            E. Fox: In looking to the future the A&S Library

            Committee wanted to preserve the browsing capability now

            present. They also felt it was very important that the

            community be educated to understand the economics and cost

            benefit tradeoff of new library approaches. They wanted

            to be sure that the ULC have a role to play in the

            library's planning process, and expressed the desire to be

            kept aware of the distribution of funds for library

            materials. The A&S Library Committee also expressed

            additional concerns: some frustration with VTLS and a

            desire for study of alternate systems; wanted S. Jurow to

            visit with other university groups while on campus; wanted

            ULC to be involved if there are cuts in the library's

            collections or services; wanted standing orders to be

            preserved, and wanted the library collection held sacred

            from the budget cutting process.

            K. McCleary: In speaking of the budget cutting process

            and possible reduction of serial titles--will there be any

            interaction with other state libraries to try and not

            duplicate cuts?

            P. Gherman: I met with the Directors from William & Mary,

            VCU, and UVa to review each school's proposed cuts so that

            inadvertently all schools don't cut the same titles. The

            collection development officers from each school will also

            be meeting. The coordinated effort also means that the

            state's libraries will go first to a sister institution

            for interlibrary loan, thus making better use of all the

            state's libraries.

            N. Dodl: I would like to see this kind of information

            shared with all the faculty in a timely manner. Faculty

            should be alerted to the positive things the library is

            doing.

            P. Metz: I am planning a letter to all faculty at the

            time the lists of potential cuts are circulated to all

            departments at the end of February.

            R. Young: The vision statement was discussed in a meeting

            of the College of Agriculture Library Committee. The

            potential exists for everyone at the university to have

            access to all of the computer operations on campus. One

            question raised is how this could be paid for without

            taking it off the top and reducing operating funds. It's

            nice to have but not if there is no money left to work

            with. Another point was the idea of having professors

            work in the electronic publishing format--can the

            university be convinced to accept this? At present the

            expectation is for publication in a "peer journal."

            N. Dodl: One idea is to put universities in at least a

            competitive position with commercial publishers by

            publishing scholarly research in electronic journals.

            There are copyright issues to be settled, and even the

            question of whether universities should be doing this.

            P. Gherman: The idea that universities take back

            ownership of what the faculty produce and find a way to

            distribute it is gaining momentum. The scholarly

            societies are beginning to look at this. I have talked to

            faculty groups here on campus and found overwhelming

            support for the idea of no longer giving away to

            commercial publishers the product of their work.

            It is in the faculty's best interest to see this new order

            evolve, and it is in their hands to do it. They sit on

            the review panels, and editorial boards, they are the

            members of scholarly societies and they are the ones who

            submit their articles to commercial journals and assign

            copyright to them. The faculty are the ones who control

            the process.

            N. Dodl: The University Computer Committee has had the

            Computer Center set up a listserve arrangement. There is

            an administrator for any given listserve group, and the

            group members are able to conduct an electronic dialogue.

            This is for internal group discussion, not for electronic

            publication. There is a group set up to deal primarily

            with the issues on this vision statement. We could do

            that for this committee.

            R. Young: Another question was whether student use of the

            network would overload the system.

            P. Gherman: M. Williams is working to create an anonymous

            access capability on the 3090, where students without an

            ID can dial in and look at various files and services.

            E. Fox: We don't seem to be near the point as yet where

            the system will be overloaded. "Junk" mail may become a

            problem.

            N. Dodl: In addition to whether we provide access

            universally, there are related issues. What resources

            should be available to students: e-mail, directory

            service, file service, library access, etc.? My feeling

            is that directory service and library access would be

            appropriate first steps, and ought to be available to

            students as soon as possible. I would be more reluctant

            to recommend e-mail as an open-ended device initially,

            since that might have the capacity to glut the system.

            E. Fox: The only way e-mail would work is if the single-

            system image project, which is already being tested,

            proceeds further. That involves students with PCs using

            them as a connection device which would not involve having

            a regular campus account or disc space on the system.

            It's a different concept than everyone having an ID.

            N. Dodl: If you took the current system and assumed that

            the entire student population had an ID on the system

            would that be feasible given the existing system?

            E. Fox: I doubt it. The other solution is more

            appropriate in our environment.

            P. Gherman: Many things available to faculty on Profs

            University Info could be made available to students with

            the development of the anonymous access system; accessing

            library hours, asking for interlibrary loan, asking for a

            book from Cheds, etc. Shortly the new books list will be

            available online to faculty. The library would like to

            experiment with scanning reserve lists and materials so

            that they may be read online. At present, copyright law

            prevents full-text articles being used, so the library

            wants to experiment using a professor's own material.

            Another application would be to place course syllabuses

            online. These are exciting prospects for students using

            the anonymous access.

            N. Dodl: The real benefit is for students to access all

            kinds of information in their rooms. This is a major issue.

 

  The meeting was  adjourned at 5:00 pm.  The  next meeting will be on

  February 6, 1991.

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/1991/January+9++1991.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:52 EDT