[Minutes submitted November 12, 2003 (draft), Approved December 2003]
The meeting was convened at 10:03 am.
1. The agenda was approved.
2. The minutes of the September 24, 2003 Coordinating Committee meeting were approved.
3. The Faculty Coordinator had no report.
4. Old Business.
a. R. Womack (Chair, Rules of Procedures Committee) reported that after deliberations, the committee had concluded that separate elections for campus representatives were too cumbersome, and suggested that representatives either be appointed from the Coordinating Committee or by the University Librarian. Discussion ensued. Points brought up were the need for clear instructions, the meaning of representing a campus, and the difficulty of being a member “without portfolio.” It was decided that the Rules of Procedures Committee would rewrite the appropriate sections of the by-laws to indicate that campus representatives would be appointed from among members of the Coordinating Committee, and if that is not possible the University Librarian would appoint one or more of the campus representatives from faculty not already on the Coordinating Committee. The rewritten bylaws proposal will also make clear that the New Brunswick representative represents all units located in New Brunswick/Piscataway. The rewritten sections should be ready by the next Faculty meeting.
4b. Libraries Strategic Plan Update
Marianne Gaunt reported on an Association of Research Libraries (ARL) conference session, “Scholarly Tribes and Tribulations,” on the impact of technology on scholarship in various disciplines. The presenters questioned how much we know about what scholars are doing and how technology is changing the way they work. The conference proceedings will be on the ARL web site shortly. In anticipation of a structure for updating the DLI, the Cabinet has been considering a series of focus group discussions to elicit faculty and student input on a variety of topics related to changes in how they find and use information, and appropriate services to respond to these changes. Suggested topics for focus groups included mentoring doctoral students, educating users about the digital content of databases, and the role of departmental liaisons in providing input. While many liaisons know what their disciplines need, that information is not routinely shared across the libraries. It was suggested that meetings among departmental liaisons be planned to discuss such issues that will inform the update of our strategic plan. It was also noted that teaching/research faculty are very diverse in their needs, and many do not know of collections or services the Libraries provide. Gaunt mentioned that Jeanne Boyle is preparing an RFP for a communications audit on how the Libraries communicate with the university community. The audit will use surveys and focus groups to gather feedback, and will generate useful data for improving communications.
Jeris Casel reported from the New Brunswick Faculty Council that the University Administration is planning a retreat on services in response to student concerns about services in general. The Rutgers Focus will now be reporting on New Brunswick Faculty Council meetings.
5. New Business
a. Agenda for November 14 RUL Faculty Meeting.
The Rules of Procedure By-Laws change discussed above will be on the agenda. The Collection Development Council’s proposed Digital Project Criteria (not final title) document was suggested as a topic for faculty discussion. It was agreed that this document should be discussed to get input from the faculty and specifically those involved in digital projects before it goes to Cabinet for approval.
There was discussion of a special topic for the latter, open part of the
Faculty Meeting. It was agreed that the draft copyright policy,
currently on the Libraries web site will be discussed. Since this
policy affects staff differently from faculty, it is important for staff
to be present. Discussion ensued over questions of ownership in student
projects and collaborative projects. The policy will be going to the
Senate for review this semester. It was agreed that M. Gaunt and Jeanne
Boyle will present on the copyright policy at the Faculty Meeting using
examples from the Libraries.
[This topic was subsequently re-scheduled to a time when J. Boyle would be available for the discussion]
b. What constitutes scholarship?
Discussion ensued on this topic, particularly in regard to online publications. The question came up of whether online subject guides and pedagogical guides are considered scholarship or librarianship. B. Hancock, Chair, Personal Policy and Affirmative Action Committee (PPAAC) reported that the committee has been discussing this topic. Peer-reviewed publications are the highest form of scholarship, while web guides are normally considered librarianship. While unpublished research may be scholarly, it will not be sufficient for tenure and promotion. The existence of different levels of scholarship was discussed. The Reappointments and Promotions guidelines provide for published works (peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed) and works in progress, both online and in other formats. Whether the work is to be sustained over time (will be available in perpetuity), peer reviewed, and scholarly (as judged by external and internal reviewers) are the most significant criteria. Because the online environment presents opportunities for new forms of scholarship (not books and journals) each non-traditional work must be considered individually. Peer review of a work is the easiest criterion, but other factors for judging web sites include awards received, research depth, and impact. It was suggested that these issues should be addressed in upcoming workshops or RUL faculty meetings.
6. Report of University Librarian
M. Gaunt mentioned that open hearings by the Commission on Higher Education which would include discussion of the restructuring of public education would be held at Caldwell College on October 21, 2003 and Rowan University on October 22, 2003.
M. Gaunt reported on the meeting of the Information Technology-Libraries Working Group on restructuring with President McCormick. The President, provosts and committee chairs expressed strong support for a system-wide rather than a federated model for the Libraries in a restructured state university. President McCormick will report in 2 or 3 weeks on his committee’s discussions.
The Cabinet will be brainstorming on the possible use of Academic Excellence funds. She encouraged the committee members to think about proposals.
Other topics which came up at the ARL meeting are the following:
1) 2004 has been declared the year of the university press. RUL will probably sponsor joint activities with the Rutgers University Press next year.
2) Harvard and Cornell are probably not participating in the NorthEast Regional Libraries Consortium (NERL) agreement for access to Science Direct. Some libraries have been using professional negotiators to deal with vendors and conducting all negotiations in writing.
3) There was discussion of how to promote Open Access publications. Presidents and provosts often do not really understand what Open Access means. Another question is how to come up with a viable economic model for Open Access.
7. Other business.
In future, the Coordinating Committee will forgo routine reports from Committee Chairs in the interest of time, instead focusing on action items. Committee reports will be distributed to RUL-EVERYONE. Action items should be submitted two weeks in advance of the Coordinating Committee meeting to the Deputy Faculty Coordinator.
Planning Committee Report: The Planning Committee met on September 24, 2003, and elected Ron Becker as chair and Farideh Tehrani as vice chair. Faculty Coordinator Rhonda Marker met with the committee to discuss its future role and composition. The committee is meeting this week to draft a document with recommendations for its future and will meet with M. Gaunt to discuss it shortly thereafter.
8. The meeting was adjourned at 12:05 p.m.
Fernanda H. Perrone