skip page navigationOregon State University
OSU Home.|Calendar.|Find Someone.|Maps.|Site Index.

Faculty Senate

Faculty Senate » October 18, 2001

Library Committee

October 18, 2001
Minutes

Attending:
Bob Rost, Larry Landis, Ajoy Velayudhan, Heidi Brayman Hackel, Darlene Judd, Mark Edwards
Library Staff: Bonnie Allen, Kevin Bokay, and Karyle Butcher

Meeting started with a welcome and introductions.

The group reviewed committee's work of last year.

  1. Research study room policy revision. Last year's committee proposed a change to the study room policy. Based on survey results, committee recommended 10 of 70 study rooms be set aside for long-term use, only 3 were granted in the fall term round, but we had additional applications in the winter, spring, and summer rounds. This policy may be revisited with input from Access staff.

  2. Library support for category I proposals. The curriculum committee has taken this task. Probably will require a change in the faculty handbook and an administrative mechanism for transferring funds. Task to our committee is to monitor changes that curriculum committee proposes.

  3. Indirect costs. Discussed subcommittee's visit with Rich Holdren of Research Office. Library's share of indirect should be 3% of research funds. The library does not receive the full 3% for reasons unknown. This committee will re-visit this issue when there is a permanent director of the Research Office.

  4. Discussed other issues including:
      a. Faculty Senate passed a resolution in 1999 to increase the library's budget to 4% of general and education budget. Currently it's about 2.4%. This issue was discussed with Steve Hiller from the accreditation team.

      b. Committee's support of the implementation of pay-as-you-go printing in the information commons.

      c. Accreditation team visit. Library's role in OSU's attainment of top-tier engineering school goal was not addressed by the university administration. University needs a better definition of "top-tier."

  5. Update from the university librarian, Karyle Butcher.
      a. Budget: we don't know how this will play out, but we need to keep our eye on the goal, i.e., where we want to be in the future - regardless of budgetary conditions.

      b. We need to move into a more electronic environment. In the sciences, there's lots of stuff available, but we need to strike a balance with the social sciences and humanities. We are in the process of creating digital libraries - Natural Resources and Tsunami Research. Some libraries are digitizing volumes from the shelves, we'll not be doing that.

      c. ARL membership is something we've wanted for some time now. We've recently applied, our numbers are looking more like what their criteria asks for. They've added a new, less tangible criterion for services provided. At the same time, they're changing their criteria. This is an important step for us, and will help us to secure more funding through grants.

      d. Our strengths are the sciences, and special collections - especially the Pauling collection.

      e. Our volume count is being added to all the time as we are in the process of adding the VetMed collection to our count. Not control, but to our count. Also, the Herbavarium has a collection that we can add.

      f. How are decisions made in the library? This committee is a good example. One purpose of the committee is to advise the library administration on matters that are important to the university committee at large. We get lots of advice from various sources before important decisions are made.

  6. Update from the associate university librarian, Bonnie Allen.
      a. There's been progress in collections, mostly due to gifts.

      b. Last year we licensed Web of Science with another NW school.

      c. We also licensed JSTOR. This is a full-text journal database that accesses some journals from 1819.

      d. Everything we've done this year that's out of the ordinary has been due to gift funds. We have several endowments that provide funds for specific subjects and some that provide funds for books at our discretion. We are able to enhance our collection of both journals and monographs with gift funds.

      e. Only two years ago we had to cut several serials due to the skyrocketing costs of these scholarly publications.

      f. Our strategy is to stabilize the collections and periodicals budget in the next two years.

      g. Technical Resource Funds (TRF). Every year the library, and other campus electronic resource providers, submit proposals to get a portion of these funds. This year the library asked for a multi-year allotment so we could forego the proposal process next year. They did not allow that to take place, but we did get almost $400k.

      h. We also completed the ALA LibQual survey last year with 40 other universities. We found out that our customers want to see more electronic databases and journals, and at the same time, more in print.

      i. Bend OSU Cascades-Campus. We are in the process of building a collection there to support the branch campus. We are hiring a full-time, tenure-track librarian and a .5 FTE Library Technician to manage our operations there. We have a separate budget for Bend.

  7. Tasks for this year's committee.
      a. Heidi Brayman Hackel (committee chair) will continue the funding for category I proposal tracking in the curriculum committee.

      b. Larry Landis, Ajoy Velayudhan, and David Horne will continue with the indirect cost issues through the Research Office.

      c. Work towards a recommendation for large-scale university funding for the Library, considering the 1999 Senate resolution in our discussions.

  8. Discussion of recall policy and privacy issues. The committee returned to the proposal made last June by a Faculty Senator and confirmed its earlier sense that a change in the policy was neither practical nor desirable, especially since the Library has an informal policy of offering to contact the holders of recalled books to speed their return. The committee will encourage Circulation to make this offer more widely known and practiced. Recall period will remain at 14 days for reasons of fairness and practicality.

  9. Next meeting will be on a recurring basis, coordinated through email. Members are encouraged to read the minutes and rules posted on the Faculty Senate Library Committee web page. We'll review the standing rules at the November meeting.

  10. Meeting adjourned.