December 2, 2004
GUESTS: Mark Watson (Associate University Librarian for Access & Collections), Carol Hixson (Head, Metadata & Digital Library Services), Andrew Marcus (UO Senate President), Jon Jablonski and Lori Robare (Library Senators), Nancy Slight-Gibney (Director, Library Resource Management).
Deb thanked Judith Musick for volunteering to serve as ULC chair for the 04/05 year. Welcome and introductions followed.
UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH AWARD PROGRAM
Deb distributed a handout on the library’s new “Undergraduate Research Awards” program. The purpose of this award is to recognize students who demonstrate extraordinary skill and creativity in the application of library and information resources to original research and scholarship. The 2004-2005 Undergraduate Library Research Award program is made possible with funding from Freshman Seminar professors Anne Leavitt (Student Affairs), Mark Watson (Libraries), and Ted Smith (Libraries). Deb strongly encouraged the ULC to nominate students they feel fit the criteria. Application deadline is January 14, 2005. For more information, see http://libweb.uoregon.edu/general/libaward.html. Martha Bayless has agreed to serve on the review committee.
Update on Wiley : Deb reported that the library has decided to not opt out of the Wiley purchase. Moving to e-only and instituting a pay-per-view delivery service for the titles of two major publishers (recall that we are moving forward to do this with Elsevier titles) would be too much for one year. Wiley made some concessions with Greater Western Library Alliance by restoring access to the original unsubscribed titles that they had claimed they were pulling. Even though the Library will end up committing to a 3-year contract with Wiley, moving to e-only will save approximately $20,000. After the contract period, the Library will have a great deal of substantial use-data to make an informed decision about whether to move this publisher to the new business model of e-only and pay-per-view.
NIH (National Institutes of Health)
Deb reported that NIH is strongly urging all of its grant recipients to submit their research papers to open access archives. The system is designed to allow the author to deposit his/her article in an open access archive six months after having it published in a journal. This is a significant step forward in support of open access models. Committee members expressed some concern about the additional costs and time associated with depositing into open archives and suggested that these kinds of costs should be included in the grant. Deb will send to the ULC information on the NIH activities and advocacy resources, e.g. SHERPA – which is a collection of information on publishers and their copyright policies.
RETROCON/CARD CATALOG UPDATE
Carol Hixson provided an update on the retrocon project, followed with a discussion on the future of the card catalog. Retrospective conversion is the process of turning a library's existing card catalog records into machine-readable form. The library's project started in July 2000, with an estimated 200,000 titles to be converted into the online catalog. As of December 2004, it is estimated that there could be up to 112,000 titles to be converted, which represents 7% of the collection. An average of 20,000 titles are converted per year. Carol added that most of the more difficult collections have already been converted. It is estimated that the entire project will be completed within the next 4-5 years.
The library has a publicly-available fiche copy (and two backup copies) of the card catalog available in the Document Center that allows users to search by author, title and subject. Given that the fiche copy is more complete than the card catalog (which only allows searching by author or title), the library is proposing to remove the card catalog so that the physical space could be used for additional stacks or seating areas. Patrons would still be able to access the card catalog via the fiche in the Document Center. The committee endorsed this proposal and suggested that library staff have conversations with departments who use the card catalog on a regular basis. It was also suggested that the library ask those departments if they would like to maintain the cards, rather than the library discarding them.
To learn more about the retrocon project, see http://libweb.uoregon.edu/catdept/home/retrofolder.html
SENATE DISCUSSION
Andrew Marcus (Senate President), Jon Jablonski and Lori Robare (Library Senators), attended today’s meeting to discuss possible action the Senate might consider this year in support of the library. In 2001, the ULC presented to the Senate a memo on the scholarly communications crisis (See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~libcom/dir00/ulcmemo.fin.html.) Although everyone was in agreement with the ULC’s recommendations on scholarly publishing, no action was ever taken by the Senate. In addition to the publishing crisis, Andrew feels that the majority of faculty are very concerned with the library’s budget and its ability to maintain and enhance its resources.
Deb responded that the library is aware of concerns with maintaining the collection. Reducing the number of serials is not the only problem facing the library. It is important to be able to keep pace with the purchase of databases. Two of the most important core databases that the library has recently acquired (Web of Science and Early English Books Online) were made possible only with the help of donors. After further discussion, the committee felt that the best approach for the Senate might be to submit a proposal to protect the library’s capital budget from decrements as the library’s materials expenditures are funded from that source. Andrew would like to take this to the Senate Budget Committee for consideration. At that point, the Budget Committee may want to meet with the ULC and/or Nancy (library’s resource director) to discuss it in more detail. Ray stated that libraries statewide face the same budget problems. Possibly another approach might be directed to the legislature on behalf of the library systems statewide. Deb responded that OUS did submit a budget exception request for libraries to DAS for consideration in the Governor’s budget. We do not know if that exception was included as a line item in the Governor’s budget. Frances Dyke, VP for Budget & Finance, will be reviewing the Governor’s budget to clarify.
Another suggestion that was discussed was possibly having the ULC meet with the Faculty Personnel Committee to discuss changing the publication criteria for promotion and tenure. There was some concern about telling faculty where they can or cannot publish. It is important to inform the campus community about other opportunities for publishing their research. It might be possible to consider rewarding faculty for publishing in society journals or open access archives, but at the same time not punishing those who submit to expensive commercial publishers. An incentive for faculty to publish in an open archive might be the University providing funds to do so. There needs to be pressure put on faculty who serve on editorial boards, rather than on the individual author. There may be many people who are not aware of the issues of scholarly and open access publishers versus commercial publishers. It was suggested that the library create a web page discussing the scholarly crisis that is easy to understand. Also, having conversations with individual departments would be beneficial. Putting together guidelines and information on publishing in society journals or open access archives could be an effective communication tool for faculty.
To summarize, there were two suggestions presented for the Senate to consider:
It was agreed that the first step for President Marcus to take is to present to the Senate Finance Committee a proposal to separate the library’s operating and capital budgets.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a.m.
Submitted by
Sheila Gray
http://libweb.uoregon.edu/ulc/dir04/041028.html