|LAUC-LA Home | Executive Boards, Committees & Reports | Final Reports 2003|
The LAUC year concluded last August was a time of great change and anticipation (and that is why clichés become clichés). Throughout my term as Chair, I felt “caught between two worlds,” as everyone wondered how the Library would handle the most drastic budget cuts ever (“one world dying”—the Library as we had known it), and otherwise spent the spring and summer months awaiting the arrival of new University Librarian Gary E. Strong (the “new” UCLA library—“struggling to be born”). Ironically, the LAUC-LA “mid-year” reports actually cover as much as two-thirds of our year—and usually the most active two-thirds, at that. Accordingly, my report will essentially be a supplemental highlighting of events, and I urge you to read the individual Committees' final reports for the greatest detail.
The 2002/03 LAUC-LA officers and committee members met all their regular responsibilities for Peer Review, the Fall and Spring Membership Meetings, the awarding of professional development funds, presentation of timely informational and instructional programs, and the selection of the LAUC-LA Distinguished Librarian of the Year. One of my highest priorities as Chair was to keep the membership well-informed of both local matters and the many issues that the past year's LAUC Statewide Executive Board addressed under the indefatigable command of our own colleague, 2002/03 LAUC President Esther Grassian. Many of you will no doubt recall how often Esther asked the divisional chairs to gather information or opinions from their memberships, and I thank all of you who responded to those calls. Locally, although we might not have changed any by-laws this past year, the final reports show that the committee chairs, along with the Executive Board, worked on issues of concern to all librarians and, by accommodating ourselves as needed to the predictably demanding schedules of two Interim University Librarians, we continued to champion LAUC-LA's advisory role.
Our two Interim ULs—Alison Bunting (Fall 2002) and Janice Koyama (Winter/Spring/Summer 2003)—came to most meetings of the Executive Board. We especially appreciated Janice's periodic updates on the budget-cutting process, arguably the preeminent Library concern of 2002/03. Janice was also an especially eloquent and effective advocate for the Library at the now twice-quarterly meetings of the Academic Senate Committee on Library, on which the current Chair of LAUC-LA enjoys Permanent Guest status.
Following the splendid success of the Spring Membership Meeting, the LAUC-LA Program Committee, chaired by Aura Lippincott, continued to produce “Lunches with LAUC,” including the June 17th gathering “to brainstorm issues for discussion with Gary Strong,” which culminated last September 29th in LAUC-LA's official welcome, our “Breakfast with Gary Strong,” and the spirited July 17th consideration of the UC Collection Management Planning Steering Committee Reports. (The liveliness of the June 17th discussion also prompted my decision to call for a LAUC-LA “State of the Library” White Paper Task Force, whose output we look forward to reading in 2004.) I congratulate Aura and her committee on a superb years' worth of work.
I also congratulate the Library Plans and Policies Committee, chaired by David Cappoli, and their production of the outstanding report The UCLA Academic Calendar Revision Proposal: Should LAUC-LA Be Concerned? <http://www.library.ucla.edu/committees/laucla/calendar_revision_report.pdf>. Although the Chancellor ultimately decided against reverting to semesters, LAUC-LA gained a model assessment of all aspects of the issue.
A major accomplishment of 2002/03 bears repeating in this report: under the leadership of Co-Chairs Jennifer Lentz and Jan Goldsmith, this year's Committee on the LAUC-LA Distinguished Librarian Award finally identified a means of securing enduring funding for the award, by putting to good (and appropriate) use heretofore unspent LAUC-LA administrative funds. The Executive Board gladly endorsed this ingenious solution to a seemingly unsolvable problem, and a substantial number of the membership voted to accept it. A monetary award in the form of additional professional development funding seems an ideal solution. I am pleased to have another opportunity to celebrate this year's winner, Valerie Bross, head of serials cataloging. As the Committee noted, Valerie has been
a key player in helping to usher UCLA's library system into the digital age. She has made it a priority to provide the UCLA community with the best cataloging records available, working tirelessly to make UCLA's records more accurate, streamlined and effective.
Also new with this year's award, and still to anticipate in 2003/04, will be a staff development program celebrating or reflecting the particular achievement for which the winner has been recognized. This event will be open to all Library staff.
With regard to the already well-established professional development rewards, the Committee on Research and Professional Development, chaired by Chuck Wilson, succeeded in awarding four local mini-grants, and also vetted two Statewide grant proposals, whose success I am delighted to have another opportunity to salute: Gia Aivazian, of the Cataloging Center, received a grant of $10,231.00 to study the satirical face of the pre-genocide Armenian press in Constantinople, 1908-1915, and David Hirsch, of the YRL Collection Management Department, was awarded $12,065.00 to continue his work on bibliographic access to periodical publications of Middle Eastern groups in Western Europe and Australia.
As I stated in my Mid-Year Report, it's the LAUC-LA committee chairs and members, and the LAUC Statewide committee representatives, who keep the “LAUC-LA engine” going. In 2002/03, they earned every bit of grateful recognition I can give them, starting, of course, with continued thanks to the members of all of the LAUC-LA committees for their desire to serve and for jobs well done. I thank the local representatives to the statewide LAUC committees who completed their duties in 2003: Judy Consales, Co-Chair of the Committee on Cultural Diversity; Ken Wade, on the Committee on Committees, Rules and Jurisdiction; and Janice Matthiesen, on the Committee on Research and Professional Development. Keri Botello is continuing to represent us, through 2004, on the Committee on Professional Governance, and Julie Kwan, Chair of the 2003/04 LAUC-LA Committee on Library Plans and Policies, is also continuing as our Statewide representative to that committee.
No valedictory would be complete without a very deep bow of gratitude to the multi-talented David Cappoli, who does a superb job of maintaining the LAUC-LA Web site. On top of that, he also served as a very active and hard-working Chair of the 2002/03 LAUC-LA Committee on Library Plans and Policies. One of the highlights of the Spring Membership Meeting was the unveiling of the beautifully redesigned LAUC-LA site, on which David was assisted by my colleague (and one of his former students), Aura Lippincott. If you're not checking the site at least every other day or so, you're missing a great deal of timely information.
Once again, I must thank Past Chair Maureen Russell for her good humor and ever-readiness with decisive advice whenever I needed it. To Vice-Chair and Peer Review Coordinator Ellen Broidy, I owe an enormous debt for her warmth, wit, wisdom, and all-around steadying influence. Finally, I thank the 2002/03 Executive Board members both individually and collectively for their unflagging assistance, encouragement, and support in fulfilling LAUC-LA's mission of service to its members and to the UCLA Library.
LAUC-LA Chair 2002/2003
Members of the 2002-2003 Committee on Library Plans and Policies were: Rita Costello, Julie Kwan (Representative to the LAUC Statewide Library Plans & Policies Committee), Catherine Lee, Eudora Loh, David Cappoli (Chair)
During 2002-2003 the committee fulfilled two charges from the Executive Board.
First Charge: The standing charge to the committee in Section 4(c) of the LAUC-LA By-Laws is to "make a continuing review of existing and proposed library policies." Under this general mandate, the committee was initially charged in December 2002, by the LAUC-LA Chair, to discuss the impact on the library of the possible implementation of year-round instruction at UCLA. This discussion had already begun in LAUC's Statewide Library Plans & Policies Committee and we were to review the related issues and provide an overview of the implications. The committee met on January 10, 2003 and listed the various levels of impact year-round instruction would have on campus libraries and personnel. A follow-up meeting on this topic was delayed until June 6, 2003 due to the immediate need of the committee to respond to its second charge (noted in the last paragraph below).
While considering the subject of year-round instruction, the Plans & Policies Committee reviewed “The Feasibility of Year-Round Instruction Within the University of California” published by the UC in April 2000 <http://www.ucop.edu/planning/yearroundreport2000.pdf>. This report strongly recommends that the University of California campuses move towards year-round instruction as a way of handling the expected large influx of students into the UC system. The report does not though specifically mention issues relating directly to campus libraries and their supported resources.
In response to its first charge, the Plans & Policies Committee produced "Year-Round Instruction at UCLA and Its Impact on LAUC-LA Members" which is a compilation of issues, concerns, suggestions, and other matters of interest that relate to LAUC-LA members regarding the possible implementation of year-round instruction at UCLA. This report considers the issue of year-round instruction and its impact library operations, librarians' personal time, and professional development. It also offers the following recommendations:
The report was submitted to the Executive Board on July 11, 2003, and revised thereafter. It is hoped that the report will likely have some importance once the issue of year-round instruction is revisited in the future. A copy of the report is available from the current LAUC-LA Library Plans & Policies Chair.
Second Charge: In February 2003, the LAUC-LA Chair asked the committee to prepare an advisory document addressing the concerns and issues related to LAUC-LA members regarding the possible revision of the UCLA Academic Calendar from quarters to semesters. Committee members Julie Kwan and Eudora Loh attended a Town Hall meeting on the proposal on February 10, 2003 and the committee met on February 14, 2003 to discuss their findings as well as "The Report of the Joint Academic Senate/Administration Committee to Study the UCLA Academic Calendar" (November 1, 2002). On February 18, 2003, the Executive Board, with Julie Kwan as a guest, discussed the issue and a Lunch with LAUC-LA was scheduled to provide a forum for comments from the membership on the proposal. Based on information gathered at the February 26, 2003 lunch, as well as from the committee and Executive Board meetings, the committee compiled a report entitled, "The UCLA Academic Calendar Revision: Issues Concerning LAUC-LA," to address the issues, suggestions, and other matters of interest that relate to LAUC-LA members regarding the possible revision of the UCLA Academic Calendar from quarters to semesters. The report and and fact sheet on the proposal are available at <http://www.library.ucla.edu/committees/laucla/about/programs/02-03/calendar_revision_concerns.htm>. On March 6, 2003, the report was submitted via e-mail to Janice Koyama, Acting University Librarian, to help provide feedback to the Chancellor on the impact of the proposed calendar revision on the Library. A closing note to this committee's work is that in June 2003 UCLA Chancellor Albert Carnesale decided that the university would retain it quarter-based academic calendar in light of the lack of compelling arguments to change to a sememster system.
My appreciation to the committee members for their thoughtful attention to the issues we have discussed.
David Cappoli, Chair
Final Report for 2003
The LAUC-LA Committee on Professional Governance dealt with two issues during 2002-2003.
A revision of the document “Criteria for Appointment, Promotion, and Advancement in the Librarian Series” proposed by the state Professional Governance Committee was placed before the LAUC membership at the statewide meeting on May 30. Position Paper 1 revises the Criteria's language in relation to the Distinguished Step. LAUC-LA needed to prepare our representatives to the statewide meeting on how to vote on this position paper.
To this end, the LAUC-LA Committee on Professional Governance sponsored a “Lunch with LAUC” on April 30, 2003, titled “Capstone or Millstone? Considering the Distinguished Step”. Three librarians, Ellen Broidy, Miki Goral, and Kris Kasianovitz were asked to present their viewpoint on the Distinguished Step to begin discussions among the LAUC-LA membership. Twenty-eight librarians attended this discussion and the committee reported on the discussion at the LAUC-LA Spring membership meeting. At the statewide meeting in the Spring, minor revisions were made to Position Paper 1; it was then remanded to the Position Paper Review Taskforce. They will make a report at the Fall 2003 statewide meeting.
The second issue the Committee on Professional Governance discussed this year was the title of the “LAUC-LA Distinguished Librarian of the Year Award”. The Committee reported confusion between this award and the “Distinguished Step” in the librarian series and suggested to the Board discussing with the membership deleting “Distinguished” from the Librarian of the Year award title. This change would require a change in LAUC-LA's by-laws. The Executive Board discussed this suggestion at the March board meeting and decided to dissuade the Committee from taking on this issue. It has been suggested and discussed in the recent past and is not yet ripe for revisiting.
David Gilbert, Chair
Members of the 2002/2003 Committee on Programs were: Aura Lippincott, Chair (Management), Xia Chen (Law), Bo-Gay Tong Salvador (LIS), and Lise Snyder (College).
The committee began a very busy LAUC-LA Fall quarter with a “Lunch with LAUC” on Monday, October 28th from 12-1 p.m. in Shoenberg Hall's Green Room to discuss the SOPAG Access Integration Model (AIM) Report. LAUC-LA chair Michael Oppenheim was present along with Terry Ryan (AUL for Information Technology and SOPAG member), Stephen Schwarz (LIS and SOPAG Access Integration Task Group) and John Riemer (YRL Cataloging). Stephen Schwartz opened with background remarks and discussed the summary document, while John Riemer, and Terry Ryan talked about types of integration more broadly. Although the issues involved were so large and wide ranging they could not all be covered in depth at the program, there was lively debate amongst the attending LAUC membership. SOPAG representatives received good feedback about the issues surrounding integrated access to resources at the U.C. campuses.
The LAUC-LA Fall Membership Meeting and New Librarians Reception was held on Thursday, November 14th, from 2:00-5:00 p.m. in the Downstairs Lounge of the UCLA Faculty Center. The meeting and reception were very well attended. After a membership meeting packed with reports and discussion on special issues, seven new librarians were creatively introduced by their supervisors. The new librarian introductions were preceded by opening remarks of welcome from Janice Koyama (on behalf of Alison Bunting). Since a number of LAUC members take vanpools in the afternoon the LAUC-LA Programs committee decided to begin future LAUC membership meetings earlier to account for those who need to leave by 4 p.m.
Following in very quick succession on Monday, November 18th LAUC-LA organized a “Lunch with LAUC” to discuss the slate of University Librarian candidates. The program was held in the YRL West Electronic Classroom from 12-1 p.m. and was facilitated by Ellen Broidy. This important program offered a forum for LAUC-LA members to hear and discuss colleagues' observations before sending their own comments to the UL search committee.
Wrapping up the Fall programs, LAUC-LA organized the Monday, November 25th “Lunch with LAUC” to discuss the LAUC Distinguished step. The program was held from 12-1 p.m. in the YRL West Electronic Classroom and was facilitated by Rhonda Lawrence (Law). Rhonda Lawrence began by laying out the report's history and the processes followed by the committee in designing and administering the survey that was the subject of the report. She was very clear on what the problems were and what she felt were weaknesses and failures of the survey and the report. She made several recommendations about possible next steps. Her presentation was followed by a question and answer/discussion period. The attendees were very interested and made good comments. Esther Grassian (LAUC Chair and College), Michael Oppenheim (LAUC-LA Chair and Management) and Ellen Broidy (LAUC-LA Chair Elect and YRL) were in present to note LAUC-LA membership comments to report to the statewide meeting later that week.
On Monday, February 10th, 2-4 p.m. “Show Me the $: An introduction to professional development and research funding sources for UCLA librarians” brought Pat Hawthorne (Library Human Resources), Jan Wildman (Library Business Services), Linda Taketomo (Library Business Services), Heather Hanunian (Library Business Services), and Chuck Wilson (LAUC-LA Research and Professional Development Committee and YRL) together at the Faculty Conference Room, Law School building. They gave overviews of the various finding sources available to LAUC-LA Members as well as sharing some tips for using funds for travel and other purposes.
The LAUC-LA Library Plans & Policies Committee sponsored a “Lunch with LAUC” entitled "The UCLA Academic Calendar Revision Proposal: Should LAUC-LA be concerned?" on Wednesday, February 26th, 1-2 pm, Faculty Conference Room, Law School Building. Participants discussed the proposal to revise the UCLA Academic Calendar from quarter to semester system, and the impact such a revision would have on the Library.
On Wednesday, April 30th from 12-1 p.m. in the YRL West Classroom, the Programs committee assisted the LAUC-LA Committee on Professional Governance with program planning for “Capstone or Millstone? Considering the Distinguished Step. A Lunch with LAUC.” David Gilbert (Music) facilitated discussion after Ellen Broidy (YRL), Micki Goral (YRL) and Kris Kasianovitz (YRL) presented their viewpoints on the Distinguished Step.
The LAUC-LA Spring Membership meeting was held on May 15th at the Faculty Center, California Room. As planned the time was changed to 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. to accommodate those who need to catch vanpools.
The committee wrapped up its work with a September 29th session at the Faculty Center in honor of new University Librarian Gary Strong. The “Breakfast with Gary Strong” was held from 8:30 to 10:00 a.m. in the Sequoia Room. The room was packed with participants who treated themselves to a continental breakfast buffet before listening to Gary Strong's remarks on the current state of the library and plans for the future. Participants had the opportunity to ask questions on a wide variety of issues important to LAUC-LA members. The session was taped for those who could not attend.
Submitted by Aura Lippincott on November 3rd, 2003.
TO: Ellen Broidy, Chair, LAUC-LA
FROM: Julie Graham, Chair, LAUC-LA Election Committee
RE: LAUC-LA Elections Committee, Annual Report 2002-2003
Two (2) elections held on 30 June 2003:
Biographical information for LAUC-LA Officer candidates was posted to the LAUC-LA website. An announcement directing voters where to find the biographical information was posted to LAUCtalk-l. Biographical information for LAUC Statewide Officer candidates was posted to LAUCtalk-l. Election ballot materials were sent to voters in the traditional manner (hardcopy via campus mail).
All ballots were tallied on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 and the results sent to LAUC-LA Chair, Michael Oppenheim and LAUC-LA Secretary, Beth Feinberg for forwarding to LAUCtalk-l and to the LAUC Statewide chair.
We continued the tradition of sending out the ballots by folding and stapling together voting instructions, ballots, and two voting envelopes and attaching the mailing labels on the outside of the bundle. We made sure the voting instructions were on the outside of the bundles so address labels would not be affixed to ballots.
A total of one hundred thirty-three (133) ballots were sent out and a total of eighty-one (81) ballots were received.
I would like to thank my flexible and hard working committee members, Elaine Adams and Alice Kawakami. Thanks also to Michael Oppenheim, LAUC-LA Chair, Debe Costa, Nominations Committee Chair, and Beth Fienberg, LAUC-LA Secretary for their help and support. Also thank you to David Cappoli, LAUC-LA Web Administrator for posting the election information to the LAUC-LA website.
Committee on LAUC-LA Distinguished Librarian Award
October 22, 2003
Members: The 2002-2003 Committee on LAUC-LA Distinguished Librarian Award included Co-Chairs Jan Goldsmith and Jennifer Lentz, Marsha Kmec, Bruce Whiteman, and, as faculty representative, Arthur Rosett, Professor of Law.
Our first order of business for the year was revisiting the issue of awarding a cash prize to the recipient of the Librarian of the Year award. At the fall 2002 LAUC-LA Assembly, a motion was carried for the Committee on LAUC-LA Distinguished Librarian to investigate the feasibility and legality of raising funds to award a cash prize. Several ideas were brought forth at this meeting, including 1) soliciting the LAUC membership for donations and 2) awarding the prize recipient extra professional development funds. On January 24, 2003, the Committee Co-Chairs met with Laila Rashid, Directory of Library Development, to investigate a means of fundraising for this award, as well as the possibility of creating an endowment to fund a cash prize. It was concluded that although creating an endowment was not a feasible option, soliciting funds from the LAUC membership would be possible. Donations could be collected and administered through the UCLA Foundation. The Committee Co-Chairs designed a sample donation solicitation form to bring to the Executive Board.
The Co-Chairs also met with Pat Hawthorne of Library Human Resources to investigate the possibility of awarding extra professional development funds to the Librarian of the Year. It was decided that extra professional development funds could be awarded out of the LAUC administrative account, as this account is rarely depleted. The sum of $250 was selected as an appropriate amount for the prize.
The Committee brought the two options before the LAUC-LA Executive Board on February 18, 2003. The Board concluded that it would be best to poll the membership as to their preference among the options. A survey was sent out to all LAUC members on March 7, 2003. The Committee received 48 responses. The breakdown was as follows: Fundraising option, 3 votes; Professional development funds option, 39 votes; Status quo (no change in award), 6 votes.
On March 21, 2003, a call for nominations was sent to the LAUCTALK list serve. That week flyers were also posted in various libraries around campus, and a call for nominations was included in the Faculty Library News. A total of six individuals were nominated for the award. On April 23, 2003, the committee members met and selected the award winner.
On May 15, 2003, at the LAUC-LA Spring Assembly, Valerie Bross was named the 2003 Librarian of the Year. A presentation was given describing Valerie's numerous accomplishments as Serials Cataloger and Digital Resources Cataloging Coordinator for the Charles Young Research Library. Valerie was presented with an engraved clock, a bouquet of flowers, and a printed certificate. In addition, per the request of the LAUC membership, Valerie also received an extra $250 in professional development funds for the 2003-2004 fiscal year.
News of Valerie's award was subsequently publicized to a variety of local and regional library publications. David Cappoli also added her name to the permanent plaque on the LAUC-LA website. A copy of the statement read at the award ceremony was also posted there.
Jennifer Lentz and Jan Goldsmith, Co-Chairs
To: Ellen Broidy, LAUC-LA Chair
From: Deborah Costa, 2003 LAUC-LA Nominating Committee, Chair
The members of the Committee were Valerie Bross, Anita Colby, Ruby Bell-Gam. On February 12, the Nominating Committee began its work by revising the list of LAUC-LA members and identifying potential candidates. In addition, we planned for another “The Lise Show” which was to be scheduled for March 12. The LAUC-LA Program Committee was very helpful in assisting us with the logistics and publicity. However, due to the low registration, we decided to cancel the program. On Friday, March 7, we posted a call for nominations on LAUC-talk. A follow-up posting was sent to the membership on Monday, March 10. The committee met once more on Wednesday, March 12, before calling candidates on the following day. The list of candidates was completed on April 16 and submitted to the LAUC-LA Secretary on April 17.
The charge of the Committee was completed when the slate of candidates was announced at the Spring Membership Meeting on May 15.
As stated in the LAUC-LA Bylaws, members had the opportunity to make additional nominations at the Spring Membership Meeting. There were no other nominations from the floor.
Again, I would like to thank the Committee for their hard work and diligence.
October 27, 2003
The 2002/2003 Peer Review Committee was formally constituted as of October 2002 with 42 members. Due to resignations from UCLA, the final membership tally is 40. The membership roster is posted on the LAUC-LA website at:
I mentioned in the midyear report, that the 2002-2003 presented some unusual challenges for peer review. The large number of librarians eligible for review (an initial count of 50), a Peer Review Coordinator who was also an RI with unit members up for review, and an interim University Librarian who was new to the final administrative level of the peer review process all combined to make this a protracted and difficult year. As of this writing, there is one file still outstanding and the 2002/2003 Peer Review debriefing has not yet taken place so the committee is still officially constituted.
The Appointments and Peer Review Committee Orientation was held on Wednesday, October 12, 2003. Director of Library Human Resources Pat Hawthorne and I made presentations on the peer review process and the responsibilities of the various levels of review to the newly constituted committee.
The annual Peer Review Documentation Workshop (RDW), developed under the able leadership of the PRDW Committee (Elaine Adams, Kris Kasianovitz, and chair Renée McBride) was held on Wednesday, December 11, 2002. DLHR Pat Hawthorne and I presented the session along with committee members to 33 librarians. A week later, on December 18, 2003, the stalwart and indefatigable PRDW Committee offered a special session for Review Initiators. 17 RIs participated in a lively discussion with Elaine Graham, then Associate Director of the Pacific Southwest Regional Medical Library, Jenifer Abramson, and DLHR Pat Hawthorne on the roles and responsibilities of Review Initiators.
My thanks to the Peer Review Documentation Workshop Committee who did an outstanding job coordinating, facilitating and presenting these two sessions.
Michael Oppenheim, Pat Hawthorne and I met with interim University Librarian Janice Koyama on April 29, 2003. We discussed peer review in general and, as I reported in the spring, responded to Janice's questions and provided our assessments of what might be expected from the UL as final decision maker.
Peer Review Committee work began in earnest on December 16, 2002 with a committee convened to review an appointment. The Peer Review Committee handled its final appointment file on October 27, 2003. During that time the Committee reviewed 7 appointments at the following levels:
The Committee began work on Peer Review actions on February 15, 2003. The large number of librarians up for review and the fact that there were several cases in which the Peer Review Committee did not concur with the RI as well as instances where the interim University Librarian's decision did not concur with the PRC recommendation resulted in committee meetings lasting well into October. Final actions are summarized in the chart below:
Number of Actions by Type of Action Requested by Review Initiator
Number of Actions by Final Decision of the Interim University Librarian
As of this writing, there is one file outstanding – pending further consultatiom.
UCLA Librarians by Rank:
To date, there are 127 librarians at UCLA, including both permanent and temporary appointments, at the following ranks:
I want to express my deepest thanks to the members of the 2002-2003 Peer Review Committee for a job well done. The Committee worked diligently, thoughtfully, and with tremendous respect, care and concern about both the peer review process and their colleagues who were under review. It was not an easy year but the Committee performed professionally and ethically through it all. I owe a special debt of gratitude to Michael Oppenheim and to “senior” members of PRC who helped me out on those occasions when my neophyte status became glaring apparent. I also want to thank Michael for shepherding appointment and review files for librarians in the Collection Management Department. Last but hardly least, I want to thank Karen Murray of the Library Human Resources Office for everything she did to help get us through this exceptionally busy peer review year. From timely notification of files ready for review to dealing with the logistics of too many committees and not enough meeting rooms, Karen was always ready, willing, and able to assist.
On October 27, 2003, I gleefully turned over the Peer Review Coordinator notebooks to Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect and 2003-2004 PRC Janet Carter.
LAUC-LA Peer Review Coordinator 2002-2003
The Committee shall develop, monitor and revise guidelines and procedures for the submission and review of proposals from LAUC-LA members for research and professional development funding.
The Committee shall review proposals for research and professional development funding and make awards in accordance with established guidelines and procedures and the availability of funds.
The committee is responsible for distribution of mini-grant funding. Mini-grants have usually been for not more than $500. This year there was $2000 available for grant distribution.
This was a transitional year for the mini grants. We moved from issuing the request for grant applications in the fall – usually about October or November – to issuing the request in the spring. To facilitate the transition, there were two requests for grant applications this year. The initial request was issued in August and extended through the month of September.
It was hoped that the earlier date would provide additional time for applicants to respond and we would receive more applications. This did not prove to be the case, as the date had to be extended to generate sufficient applications to expend the existing funding.
Four grants were awarded. Bruce Whiteman, Head Librarian at the Clark Library was granted funds to continue his study of the Simonidean forgeries. Alan Michelson, Associate Librarian for Architecture and Design at the Arts Library, was provided funding to assist in the building of a large scale database on California's architecture and architects. Roberta Medford, Social Sciences Bibliographer at Charles E. Young Research Library, received funding for work on compiling a bibliography with abstracts of recent citations on the topic “Housing Discrimination in U.S. Suburbs”. Paul Naiditch, Classics Bibliographer at the Young Library, successfully applied for funding to further work on a book on Richard Porson's library.
The Committee felt the change in the application date would provide successful applicants with more time in which to use the funding and perhaps an increase in the response to the request for applications. Mini grant funding must be expended in a given fiscal year. By changing the application deadline to spring, with the funding to be available at the first of the next fiscal year, nearly 4 months were added to the time in which the funding could be used. In addition it would not conflict with applications for statewide funding, which have been in the fall.
The second request of grant applications was issued in April and response was minimal. It was extended into May. Several applications were received and additional interest was generated after the announcement of funding available at the spring meeting. This was for funding to be expended in the 2003-2004 fiscal year.
Five grant applications were received, although not all requested the full $500. However, with the approval of all five applications, funds slightly less than $500 were allocated to four of the applications. The fifth applicant who had requested less than the maximum was funded for the full amount requested. Successful applicants were Lisa Kernan ,Paul Naiditch, Ruby Bell-Gam, David Hirsch, and the team of Stephen Davison and Gordon Thiel.
The Committee strongly recommended that grant recipients provide a report of the work completed with the funding at the end of the fiscal year. This recommendation for follow up was passed along to the new Committee.
There may be several reasons for the limited or late response to the request for applications. The initial request was issued in August, a time at which librarians may be off campus either on vacation or at meetings. Coming at an unusual time, it may not have been noticed by those who were on campus and expected the request to come some months later. This may also help to explain the low response to the second request, issued in April. It may take a couple of years for librarians to become aware of and respond to the change in the request dates. However, with announcements of the application dates at the fall and spring meetings, the word should be getting out.
A larger concern is with the grants themselves. A question has arisen about the size of the mini grants and the availability of time to devote to research and professional development. This is particularly true in times of tight budgets, which often reduce the number of staff available to keep things running and may find supervisors less likely to grant time for research and professional development.
Funding for larger projects is available through statewide grants and those which originate at UCLA are reviewed by the campus R&PD Committee before being sent to the statewide committee. Once the statewide committee has received applications from each campus, the entire package is sent to each campus for review and ranking.
This year there were a minimal number of applicants statewide. This allowed for the unusual opportunity of seeking a higher level of funding for each of the applicants. In past years, given a prescribed amount of funding available for statewide grants and the large number of applicants, the statewide committee would often ask applicants if they would be able to continue with less funding than was requested. This year applicants were encouraged to ask for all the funding they needed.
Two grant applications were forwarded from UCLA, both from people who had applied for and received partial funding last year. David Hirsch's application for funding to continue his work on a bibliography listing periodicals published by Middle Eastern communities in six European cities was forwarded to statewide by the local committee for consideration as was Gia Aivazian's request for funding to continue work on a book looking into the effects of the Young Turk Constitution of 1908 on citizens of the Ottoman Empire.
Both applications received full funding at the statewide level.
In February the R&PD committee chair participated in a LAUC program on funding for librarians. Information on the new application deadlines as well as format for the presentation of applications was provided.
In the interest of providing successful applicants information on correctly filing expense claims, the committee voted to provide copies of the successful grant applications to the Library Business Office which would review projected expenditures and contact the grant recipients with information on the “dos and don'ts” of filing claims for funds and reimbursement. It was hoped this would reduce the number of claims which could not be honored by LBO because they did not conform to LBO regulations.
Final Report for LAUC-LA Fall Membership Meeting
Members of the Committee: James E. Crooks (CHAIR), Irvine; AnnMarie Mitchell, Berkeley; Elaine Franco, (Davis); Ken Wade, (Los Angeles); Lynne Reasoner, (Riverside); Peter Brueggeman, (San Diego); Peggy Tahir, (San Francisco); Gerardo (Gary) Colmenar, (Santa Barbara); Cynthia Jahns (Santa Cruz).
The full charge of the LAUC Committee on Committees, Rules, and Jurisdiction (COCRJ) for 2002/2003 may be found on the LAUC web site at: http://www.ucop.edu/lauc/crj/charge-2002.html . The LAUC President charged the COCRJ with several specific matters to address in addition to its general charge.
After the LAUC Spring Assembly at UCSD the Committee received a request from the LAUC President to consider several by-laws changes that were not part of the Committee's 02/03 charge. The Committee also received a request to reconsider some of the bylaws changes suggested in its report to the Spring Assembly. The Committee held and in-person meeting July 18, 2003 at the LAX Hilton, in order to complete its work in the most effective manner.
Rather than replicate a large portion of the eight page final report of the LAUC Committee on Committees, Rules and Jurisdiction, LAUC-LA members may access this document on the LAUC web site at:
http://www.ucop.edu/lauc/crj/report-fall-2003.doc . The specific language of suggested changes in LAUC bylaws may be found in this document.
Highlights of the Committee's work are summarized as follows:
It was suggested to the Committee that it postpone further work on reviewing the LAUC committee structure and comparing it to the UL Advisory structure (All-Campus Groups) and the Academic Senate's committee structure pending further direction from the LAUC President concerning this charge.
Bylaws revision suggestions:
In several instances the Committee has suggested more than one option for revising language in the bylaws. Which option if any goes forward will be determined by the LAUC President, in consultation with the Executive Board.
Some language concerning the Committee on Committees, Rules and Jurisdiction (COCRJ) has been simplified to require the Divisions to review their own bylaws when changes are made in the LAUC bylaws, and also to notify COCRJ whenever changes are made in Divisional bylaws.
Several relatively minor changes have been suggested for the sake of consistency or to reflect actual LAUC practice as it has evolved in recent years such as: indicating the Past President consistently as a LAUC officer throughout the bylaws; several changes to the duties of the secretary (recording and distributing minutes but not determining agendas).
Bylaws language has been suggested to allow for approval of Assembly minutes via e-mail or other electronic device. This is an attempt to make it possible for Assembly minutes to be approved by the members who actually attended a specific Assembly, rather than by the following Assembly, whose composition may differ. In several instances in Article IX, Elections, language requiring information “in writing” has been eliminated in order to allow for this business being conducted via e-mail.
Apportionment of Division delegates to the Assembly: COCRJ has proposed several options to the LAUC President on this issue. These options are 1) to retain the current language unchanged; 2) retain the existing model for apportioning delegates and change the number of members required for a given number of delegates (including eliminating any division being apportioned four delegates – a reflection of our dwindling membership); 3) use a model for apportioning delegates modeled on the UC Academic Senate, under which the LAUC Assembly would consist of 30 members in total, 10 of which would be the Divisional Chairs. The remainder of the Assembly delegates would be apportioned to the Divisions by the LAUC Executive Board, which would annually prorate the distribution of delegates among the Divisions in proportion to their membership.
Elections – Under current LAUC bylaws candidates for office cannot be from the same Division, or the same Division as the current President-Elect, or from a Division one of whose members has served in the same office in the previous two years. These restrictions are perceived to make it more difficult to find LAUC members willing to serve as officers. COCRJ has proposed two options for modifying the bylaws to help ameliorate this problem, 1) eliminate the restrictions entirely, or 2) reducing the restriction to one year.
One suggested change in the bylaws that appears in the Committee's final report removes responsibility for maintaining LAUC's records from the duties of the Secretary. This appears to create a circumstance in which there is no designation of responsibility for maintaining LAUC's records in the bylaws, other than to deposit (who would do so?) such records in the Bancroft Library at UC Berkeley. The Committee thinks responsibility for LAUC records should be specified in the bylaws. Therefore, COCRJ requested the LAUC Executive Board consider issues concerning LAUC's records, not only with regard to designation of responsibility, but also in light of the electronic environment in which so much of LAUC's business is conducted.
FROM: Janice Matthiesen, UCLA Representative, LAUC Statewide Research & Professional Development Committee
Final Committee Report for 2002-2003
Members of the 2002-2003 LAUC Statewide Research and Professional Development Committee:
Linda Kennedy, UCD, Chair
The Statewide R&PD Committee has a four-part charge in the LAUC Bylaws:
Serve as the review body for research proposals submitted to the University-wide Research Grants for Librarians Program by LAUC members and recommend funding of proposals to the Office of the President.
Develop, monitor, and revise, as needed, procedures for carrying out the review of research proposals.
Develop guidelines for application to the University-wide Research Grants for Librarians Program and recommend revisions as needed.
Advise the President and the Executive Board on issues related to research and professional development for librarians and address other subjects at the request of the President.
The Research and Professional Development Committee received the following additional charges based on the Final report of the R&PD Committee for 2001/2002:
The Research and Professional Development Committee has conducted its business this year by conference call and email, since the LAUC Statewide budget could not cover travel expenses. We met by conference call on March 3, 2003, to review Statewide Research Grant Proposals from all the UC campuses and chose the final proposals to send to the Office of the President (UCOP). The committee received 3 proposals this year, 2 of which were from UCLA. Final versions of the chosen proposals were sent to UCOP for approval and the winning applicants were announced at the Statewide Spring Assembly.
Winners were: Gia Aivazian, UCLA, The Satirical Face of the Pre-Genocide Armenian Press in Constantinople, 1908-1915; David Hirsch, UCLA, Bibliographic Access to Periodical Publications of Middle Eastern Groups in Western Europe and Australia; William Benemann, UCB, Roscoe Pound and the Women of Berkeley: Class and Gender in American Legal Education.
Updated documents were sent out on the LAUC Webpage by the Statewide R&PD Chair, and the committee continued to work by email and conference call, to complete the six specific charges assigned by the Statewide Chair. For more information, see the Final Report of the Statewide Chair, to be presented at the Fall Statewide Assembly and on the LAUC Website.
Janice Matthiesen, UCLA Representative,
Updated: November 18, 2009
Contact LAUC-LA Webmaster