Minutes of the February 17, 2011, meeting
OSRHE Regents Conference Room
Attending: Jon Sparks, Maria Martinez, Bettye Black, Susan Jeffries, Victoria Swinney, Kelly Brown, Michael Foote, Mike Rusk, Adrianna Lancaster, Tamie Willis, Don Gilstrap, Arlita Harris, Sharon Saulmon, Nancy Draper, Sharon Morrison, Sherry Young, Evlyn Schmidt, Alan Lawless, Beth Freeman, Anita Semtner, Paula Settoon, Marty Thompson.
Guests: Vicky Sullivan.
Introductions – Don Gilstrap, OCALD Chair
All the members at both distance sites and in OKC introduced themselves. The group welcomed Paula Settoon from NSU-Broken Arrow.
Approval of the Minutes
Minutes were approved with the addition of the meeting date. Mike Rusk moved to approve, Jon Sparks seconded. Minutes approved.
Regents Discussion – Dr. Debra Stuart, Vice Chancellor for Educational Partnerships
Dr. Stuart is out of town and Dr. Davis was chairing another meeting in Dr. Stuart’s absence. Don Gilstrap reported that the budget is at the forefront of conversations.
ODL Report – Vicky Sullivan
Vicky Sullivan reported that Amendment 35 to the continuing resolution in the federal House would zero out the budget for IMLS for the current year, negating the funding for the state databases provided by OLA. ALA and other supporters are asking for library representatives to contact their congressional delegations to ask that this not be passed. Let them know we need our federal money for libraries. ODL gets approximately $2.2 million. Almost half goes to fund the databases. The rest funds ILL, some staff salaries and other projects. This would be a significant blow to services that ODL provides statewide. Don Gilstrap stated that OCALD would draft a letter from OCALD and send to the five Oklahoma legislators. Don will also send the language to the OCALD list so that individual library directors can also contact their legislators. Don asked that the letters be sent today, because the vote is scheduled for tomorrow. President Obama’s proposed budget for LTSA is only slightly lower than the current funding level.
Vicky reported that Governor Fallin has recommended a 3% cut for ODL. ODL sees this as positive that the governor sees ODL as part of education. However, when ODL had their hearing before the senate, the senators talked about a 10% cut. They were asked to prepare budgets with a 5%, 7%, and a 10% decrease. Marty Thompson stated that the OLA legislative committee talked to state legislators explaining that reducing ODL’s budget would cause ODL and Oklahoma to possibly lose federal funds.
HB 2140 seeks to consolidate six state agencies under the Office of State finance, including ODL. Susan and Vicky would serve at the pleasure of the director of state finance. This is based on a model from Montana. The hearing is this afternoon at 2:30. Susan is willing to send the OCALD list an email each Friday tracking bills pertinent to libraries. Don asked her to do so.
The database selection committee for the children’s product has developed the RFP and it is in the hand of Central Purchasing. The process may be delayed because of the recent bad weather. Vicky is hoping to have vendor demonstrations in the next six weeks or so.
Jon asked about SB 0142 which states that universities will not being able to raise tuition more than 3% of the rate of inflation. Victoria said that it is the lessor of 3% or the rate of inflation. Marty stated that there are several bills about limiting institutions’ ability to raise tuition.
Sherry Young asked for some standard language in response to comments saying “everything is available on the Internet”. Vicky said they usually respond about the quality of what is available. Arlita commented that many people consider the electronic databases as ‘on the Internet’ and don’t realize that we pay for them. Don asked if ODL has any readily available data about numbers of searches. Vicky said that there were at least 20,000,000 searches. Kelly talked about the cost of those searches and downloads, especially in light of the possibility of not being able to raise tuition. Don asked Vickie to send us the searches number to the OCALD list. Don reminded that many of our arrangements with the databases are dependent on ODL’s statewide subscription. Tamie asked that Don send us information about the legislators too. Sharon said that the number of letters do make a difference. Marty said that Coburn was very supportive of IMLS and was instrumental in selecting the new director. Marty suggested we thank him if we have any connections there.
Vicky talked about the legislature having a new crop of legislators who have very definite ideas about having smaller government and possibly doing away with income tax.
OLTN Report – Christine Dettlaff
Vickie included this report in the ODL comments.
Executive Committee – Don Gilstrap
HB 1363 is dead
Adrian Alexander and Francine Fisk at the University of Tulsa offered to host the OCALD/OLA luncheon, pending confirmation with the date. Don and Tamie will talk with Adrian to work out the details. Evlyn suggested that we have a luncheon close to the hotel on Friday.
The group discussed spring elections. Tamie has a full slate of candidates (two for each position). She will be sending out more information later.
The group discussed state funding for databases. Two issues: one related to what happens with IMLS funding. The group also talked about whether we would face a cut from the Regents. What are the scenarios for a 10% cut, a 30% cut, or a majority cut?The next meeting is scheduled for May 19th. We talked about moving it to the beginning of May/late April.
Expanded Instructional Support – update on charge
Jon did not receive any feedback on the proposed charge. Don asked that Jon send the suggested charge to the listserv. Don asked the members to provide feedback.
Tamie thanked everyone who agreed to participate. Ballots will be sent out via SurveyMonkey.
Statewide databases discussion
The last time we talked about: 1) 10% cut - we pick up the cost of what the Regents do not cover; 2) 30% cut – Regents might cut a database but Ebsco might still give us consortial pricing; 3) majority cut – we might have to pay for all of our databases. Susan says it is difficult to determine because we don’t know what our piece of the pie is. The total amount is approximately $400,000. The private schools are already paying some portion. It is also hard to determine without knowing our local budget situation. Marty suggested we asked EBSCO for information concerning the cost for us to buy the databases outside the existing agreement so that we can share that information with the Regents and the legislators in order to show the benefits of consortial pricing. We also need to talk about how many of us will have to drop the newspaper database and PsychInfo, a serious loss of intellectual access. Marty wants to provide the Regents with information about their return on investment. Don will ask Kirk Gordon for that information. Marty suggested we poll OCALD about what we would prefer to lose if we had to choose. Don reminded the group that last time we talked about trying to keep the most general database (Academic Search), rather than PsychInfo. Victoria suggested that it’s important to consider the institutions with lower budgets who would have to do without if the Regent’s cut the funding. Beth suggested we survey the membership in May to prioritize what we need to see cut (when the institutions will have a better sense of their local budgets). Marty suggested OCALD meet in May with only one agenda item to talk about this one issue. Marty asked if we had numbers that we could present the regents. Sharon M. asked who will present this information to the Regents. Don said our first priority right now is the IMLS funding. Don asked that we all think about this and then agreed with Beth that we survey the group in May. Sharon suggested that Don make the case for us rather than a third party. Sharon also suggested that we thank the Regents for what they do – sending letters to the Regents and the chancellor might be a good idea. She suggested we do some PR work. In the letters, state specifically the benefit of the package. Sherry also said to make sure that the Provosts/VPAAs understand and know what is going on. Kelly asked also if we should engage our students in this conversation – the student voice might be effective. Jon talked about making a basic letter with information to make available to librarians and students so that students can make that an easier process. Don said he thinks we’ve done a good job letting people below the chancellor know how much we appreciate their work. But wouldn’t the chancellor appreciate hand notes from us. And Susan pointed out that it was something positive to do. Don asked that we all think about this and talk about more later, probably at the May meeting.
ACRL: The Value of Academic Libraries – A Comprehensive Research Review and Report – Mike Rusk
This is an excellent report that talks about how we interpret our value to our institutions. Mike would like us to do something with this – perhaps host a workshop to discuss how this can help us determine our value. The author challenges us to establish how we determine student learning. Mike suggested we all take this report to heart. He wants to have a small group to talk about putting together a one day workshop to grapple with some of these issues about determining value. The group could meet and present some ideas at the March meeting. Arlita suggested that we partner with other groups like OK-ACRL. Tamie said everyone would need to commit to reading the report so that they understand what the committee is talking about. Mike will work with the assessment committee. Tamie asked others who were interested in working on this to let Tamie know. Beth asked that another Tulsa person be represented.
Round-table discussion on Best Practices for Library Liaisons and Professional Development opportunities
Evlyn Schmidt and Adrianna Lancaster will lead the discussion. Please refer to this article as a launching point: http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/newslettersnewsletterbucketacademicnewswire/
The majority of members have library liaisons. Evlyn suggested some possible topics for members to share.
- At meetings, share liaison ideas and report back.
- A written report and librarians meet at the end of school year to share activities (great way to document for new librarians).
- Part of every librarian’s job description. Instruction librarian does freshman orientation and English. All advanced instruction is conducted by liaison librarian.
- Most librarians are subject-specific. One librarian is invited to ALL departmental faculty meetings.
- Liaison with learning communities (groups of students) who have areas of study (interdisciplinary). Librarian is in almost daily communication with the group.
- Very informal – all librarians are liaisons to all departments because of the size of the institution. Little structure. Faculty develop relationships with particular librarians, not necessarily a subject specialist.
- Liaison librarians meet with every fulltime faculty member once every semester to talk about services. Supervisor addresses it in the librarian’s yearly evaluation. The librarians have become creative about ways to meet with the faculty (hosting coffees, etc.).
- Tries to attend departmental meetings, but the new faculty orientation is the best avenue to make contact with them. Some institutions host the faculty orientation or host the luncheon. Meet with the faculty to show them the library (specific to their discipline).
- Director meets with all department chairs each year. Director takes on liaison areas when a librarian leaves.
The meeting adjourned at 3:00.