Reports
|
|
||
|
||
Reports |
||
|---|---|---|
|
|
Statewide Collection Development Committee As LAUC representative on the statewide Collection Development Committee, I participated at the monthly three hour conference calls as well as the quarterly in-person meetings. The Committee had an extra conference call for the discussion of the BSTF report. Details of negotiations for shared licences for CDL resources continued to be the main agenda items of the meetings. These negotiations have to follow some common principles as well as meet specific – sometimes very difficult – requirements. Reports of the Shared Print Program covered several issues of the prospective and retrospective serials projects as well as the details of the Canadiana monographic project. The Committee repetedly discussed the UC’s strategy and actions related to the GPO’s plan to make governmental information exclusively online. Another important document that CDC prepared for SOPAG was the Report of the RLF Persistence Task Force. Respectfully submitted Kati Radics To: Jennifer Reiswig, President, LAUC For more detailed account of the issues before HOPS, the minutes are posted. HOPS GROUPS The Image Service Rollout and Advisory Committee (ISRAC) submitted its final report. Digital Reference Submitted its final report. HOPS is reviewing the report’s recommendations. Information Literacy Plans are underway for a 1-day workshop, Infusing Information Literacy throughout the UCs: Programmatic Considerations and Practical Approaches, to be held at UCI on August 10, 2006. Respectfully submitted, Kari Lucas SUMMARY OF HEADS OF TECHNICAL SERVICES (HOTS) DISCUSSIONS: A number of recurring issues came before HOTS in their conference calls and in-person meeting since the last report to LAUC: The Bibliographic Services Task Force Report generated a lot of discussion within HOTS. The group had weekly conference calls during February and March to prepare a formal response to the which was submitted March 22, 2006 to SOPAG. Their final recommendations included (among others): II. 1 Create a single catalog interface for all of UC III. 1 Re-architect the cataloging workflow I. 5 Offer better navigation of large sets of search results II. 2 Support searching across the entire bibliographic information space I. 6 Deliver bibliographic services where the users are In anticipation of the need to more closely coordinate cataloging among the campuses in response to issues raised by the BSTF, a Cataloging and Metadata Services Advisory Group reporting to HOTS will be established. It would likely include the Heads of Cataloging and Metadata Services at the campuses. It might be able to incorporate the work being doing by the SCP Advisory Group along with providing policy direction guidance for the UC CONSER Funnel as well.
The Link Resolver Task Force continues to work with CDL for long-term solutions to moving from the PID Server. CDL is writing technical specifications to facilitate this transition. SFX object IDs were added to serial records distributed by SCP in March 2006. This will help with transition of information into the ERMS. A proposal to establish a CONSER funnel for U niversity of California Librar ies was adopted by HOTS in April 2006 to allow broader participation of campuses in contributing CONSER- level cataloging. The proposal has been approved by LC. Valerie Bross (UCLA) will serve as the first CONSER Coordinator for the funnel; she will also coordinate training. Plans are underway for training at various campuses. SCP has begun discussions with CDL about the possibility of capturing URLs for input into bibliographic records of UC’s titles digitized in the Open C ontent Alliance ’s work for contribution to both OCLC and Melvyl. SCP might then be able to distribute records to the campuses.
Full minutes of HOTS phone calls/meetings are available at: http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/hots/ May 22, 2006 Library Technology Advisory Group - Report for LAUC 2006 Spring Assembly (Word Version). Submitted by Gabriella Gray Over the course of 2006 LTAG has continued to work on their ongoing scenario planning exercise. LTAG is involved in a visioning exercise that is looking 10 years out to evaluate what technology and infrastructure will need to be in place to support the Library of the future. The group is identifying key trends and driving forces that are changing the environment and their potential implications for libraries. Some of the trends being discussed include:
Once these key trends and driving forces have been identified and flushed out, LTAG will move on to strategic planning for the technology, infrastructure, resources and policy needs to support future library systems. Future Meetings
RSC Report for the LAUC Spring Assembly (Word Version) Meetings RSC met in person at UCOP on October 20, 2005, and by conference call on January 26 and April 20, 2006. Minutes of the meetings are online at http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/rsc/minutes.html. RSC tackled many complex issues over the past year. Some highlights are listed below. Proposed AGC on Copyright RSC recommended to SOPAG that an all campus group be formed to deal with copyright issues. If such a group is formed, LAUC members could bring some expertise in this area. Request form revisions CDL is revising the Request form, with the goal of improving and streamlining the form to make it more user-friendly. CDL expects to do the revisions in time for the beginning of the fall term. ILL Reserves blocking There has been a great deal of discussion of the issue of blocking ILL requests for items on reserve. There is no consensus on this issue. Some campuses support this practice; others are against it or have no strong feeling. Further discussion revealed that the amount of programming work that CDL would need to do in order to implement this system-wide is not justified by the current need. It was decided that this should be handled at the campus level. ILL among UC campuses of Special Collections materials and media The joint HOSC/RSC report on UC ILL of Special Collections materials was accepted by SOPAG. Resulting action items were for IAG to implement ILL code revision and forms revision. A statement about the program has been added to the HOSC website and should be added to each campus library website. There was also some discussion of ILL of media among UC campuses. This is being further explored. ILL Advisory Group (IAG) See http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/rsc/iag/index.html for information on IAG activities. Circulation Advisory Group (CAG) See http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/rsc/cag/index.html for information on CAG activities. For more information on RSC issues, see the RSC web page http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/rsc/. To: Jennifer Reisweg, LAUC President From: Diane Bisom, LAUC Representative to SLASIAC Re: 2005/2006 SLASIAC Report (Word Version) Date: May 26, 2006 SLASIAC (Systemwide Library and Scholarly Information Advisory Committee) met twice this year. Here are the links to the meeting notes: Meeting Notes of the December 7, 2005 SLASIAC Meeting: http://www.slp.ucop.edu/consultation/slasiac/notes_120705.html Meeting Notes of the May 3, 2006 SLASIAC and SCC (Standing Committee on Copyright) Joint Meeting: http://www.slp.ucop.edu/consultation/slasiac/20060503meetingminutes.pdf In both meetings, the UC digital information environment was the overarching theme. In the fall meeting, SLASIAC was updated on, and discussed activities related to: ongoing access to digital collections; progress on the Systemwide Strategic Directions for Libraries and Scholarly Information; stewardship of digital assets; and current developments in eScholarship services and the work of the Office of Scholarly Communication. The UC Information Technology Guidance Committee (ITGC) was introduced, with its charge of developing a coordinated approach to strategic IT planning across the campuses and UCOP. (http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/itgc/) In the course of the discussions, it was noted that there was considerable overlap between the Standing Committee on Copyright (SCC) and SLASIAC, and it was agreed to consider a proposal for the merger of the two committees at a future meeting. The series of white papers prepared by the Academic Senate’s Special Committee on Scholarly Communication (SCSC) were presented and discussed. SLASIAC also discussed the Academic Senate University Committee on Library’s (UCOL) three areas of focus: scholarly communication, digital stewardship, and new library roles. In the spring, SLASIAC and SCC held a joint meeting. The agenda included updates from the CDL and the UC ITGC. The ITCG had just completed one campus visit, and had most other campus visits scheduled. The themes that emerged from the one campus visit focused on the need for better collaboration tools, interchangeable data, and interoperable and reusable applications. CDL staff presented an update on their efforts to coordinate with the graduate deans from all campuses to plan for a common infrastructure for the deposit of electronic theses and dissertations. CDL staff will meet with the graduate deans and their staffs in the fall to discuss possible collaborations. The chair of the SCSC reported on the wide range of discussion on the committee’s set of White Papers, which addressed the role of publications in the academic personnel process, book and periodical publishers, faculty retention of copyright, and the role of scholarly societies as publishers. (The papers and copyright policy proposal were on the May 10 Academic Assembly agenda.) SLASIAC was also informed that UCOL has had a name change and a new charge approved by Academic Council. UCOL is now University Committee on Library and Scholarly Communication (UCOLASC.) SLASIAC also heard a report from UC Press, and discussed a potential initiative between the UC Press and CDL to investigate how to more efficiently disseminate the scholarly output of UC and to experiment with new models of publishing, As the main actions of the meeting, SLASIAC discussed a document outlining the range of regulatory and policy issues affecting scholarly communication and recommending a broader role for the Provost’s office. SLASIAC “endorsed the concept that the Acting Provost take action to provide more effective coordination of analysis of and responses to policy and legislative issues that affect academic uses of information.” Following on discussion at the fall meeting, SLASIAC also “agreed to consolidate SLASIAC and SCC, with SCC positioned as a standing committee of SLASIAC.” TO: Jennifer Reiswig, President Librarian’s Association of the University of California FR: Patrick Dawson, LAUC Representative to SOPAG RE: Report of the LAUC Representative to SOPAG, Spring LAUC Assembly, 2006 (Word Version) SOPAG continues to be one of the more active groups in planning for the University of California libraries. The University Librarians turn to SOPAG to undertake charges in planning and services. In turn, many of the issues are then delegated to the various SOPAG ACGs or CIGs for clarification and action. SOPAG is very good at keeping its minutes and initiatives updated and accessible to all at: http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag Since the last LAUC Assembly, a highlight of some of the issues SOPAG is continuing to work on are:
In many ways, the issues that SOPAG addresses are fluid, rising and receding in importance and attention. In general, the best way to be informed of what SOPAG is dealing with is to periodically check the SOPAG website.
|
|
| Copyright ©2006 UCLA Libraries Last Updated: May 8, 2006 |