1. AUL Update.
The first think tank meeting for a web content management system was held. Librarians responsible for research guides and instruction pages would benefit especially from the updating and versioning capabilities of such a system.
There is a new entry level programmer staff line available for public services. The person in this position would work closely with the library systems staff.
IPAC has determined that it is possible to broadcast search to three other Z39.50 catalogs. CRL and the two Rutgers law libraries were suggested, however the law libraries are not Z39.50 capable yet. Use statistics will be examined to determine which other library catalogs are heavily used. JerseyCat may be a good candidate.
The heads of public/information services and access services from the three campuses, Ann Montanaro, Judy Gardner, and Jeanne met to plan the pilot implementation. Judy is working closely with library systems staff and others. Law library patrons will be able to use PALCI but must use Robeson or Dana as their pick up libraries. Requests from PALCI libraries will appear in separate local pull lists. Costs such as UPS and staff time (Systems, local library and Shipping) will be tracked. There are many ways to link to PALCI. We will want to include it on our ILL request form. The recall policy may need revision to encourage users to use PALCI rather than the recall service.
3. Guest Borrowing Program Revision Proposal
The "Friends of the Rutgers University Libraries" program is going through a transition that will merge them with our much larger overall donor group. Currently, Friends pay $60 to enjoy borrowing privileges, while donors receive no benefits. The proposal is that anyone who pays $100 would receive a library card, but not necessarily become a Friend. Jeanne surveyed other libraries to identify various borrowing programs. We might call ours the "Community Borrower Program". It was noted that many people currently identify with the Friends as a social group, as well as a way of obtaining borrowing privileges. The Friends group as we know it would cease to exist as an organization, however, some sort of leadership group, advisory council, fund raising committee, etc., would remain. Trips and events would still take place.
On a related note, Judy suggested making the wording of the "guest researcher" cards more descriptive as to the restrictive nature of the card, or doing away with it entirely. Very few such cards are issued since people can usually get what they need through the ILL programs of their local libraries.
4. ILL/DD Reports
The four reports are posted on the RUL website under Access Services-Reports.
Less was spent this year on ILL. Titles averaged about $42. Five percent of requests came from Camden, 16 percent from Dana, and 79 percent from New Brunswick libraries.
Ingenta document delivery cost about $5,000, which is close to last year's figures. The indication is that this service is not growing. There were only 64 users, and many of those were librarians, presumably helping researchers navigate the non-intuitive interface.
The topic of denied requests for several articles from the same issue of a journal was raised. In many cases, such requests are from a special issue of a journal. One way to solve this problem may be to purchase the special issue, and treat it as a monograph. Mary Page will be contacted to discuss this possibility.
5. RLG/OCLC Reference and Interlibrary Loan Working Group Report
The report is available on the RUL staff pages at: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/rlg-oclc_ill/reports/final_report.shtml
Several members of the working group joined the Council for discussion of the document. The conclusion was that aspects of both RLG and OCLC are needed in order for us to work efficiently. From both a public services and a technical services point of view, we need to be a hybrid library. It was suggested that Public Services Council and Collection Development Council form a committee to look at the platforms for the databases that we provide. We may be subscribing to databases via Ovid, etc., when we could get them from OCLC, RLG, or directly from the producer. Bob agreed to add the topic to the Collection Development Council agenda for next month. It was noted that the usability (interfaces, etc.) of databases should be taken into consideration when deciding from whom to purchase them. Open URL software may eventually affect such decisions.
The report was accepted by Public Services Council and Jeanne will bring it to Cabinet for discussion. Jeanne thanked the group for its excellent work.
6. E-ssential Library LAMA Institute Report
Judy reported on some of the workshops that she attended.
7. Documents Recon Proposal
Mary Fetzer presented the proposal to Public Services Council and asked for its support. The project targets New Jersey history materials and government publications. Between Alexander and LSM, there are 6-7,000 uncataloged government documents. There is $50,000 available to devote to the project this fiscal year. Public Services Council endorsed the proposal. It was agreed that we need to continue to identify and prioritize specific parts of our collections for recon. Fundraising for recon may be easier if potential donors identify with a specific, focused area of the collection of particular interest to them, and that they wish to support. Jeanne and Bob will talk with Julia Zapcic and Marianne Gaunt about developing strategic plans.
8. Ready Reference Databases
Jeanne asked the group whether we should be considering electronic ready reference database packages such as xreferplus and Oxford Reference Online. Among the questions that arose were where to place such titles on the RUL website-under electronic reference resources and where else? Would individual titles be cataloged in IRIS? Will individual titles as we know them eventually disappear, and the product become one bundled package? How much of the print counterpart could/should be cancelled? Jeanne will submit a networked resources request form for both of these products.
8. Round Robin
Ann: Ann and Linda Langshied attended a workshop on Institutional Repositories. All of the ELF equipment has been installed in Camden; Dana will be finished soon.
Grace Agnew has asked the PC working group and DAWG to discuss implications for support of wireless technology. RUCS has asked the library to determine guidelines and costs for implementation. Wireless will supplement hardware devices but not replace them.
Leslie: The Instructional Services Committee has shifted the date of its annual election for chair of the committee from December to June to bring it in line with other RUL committee timelines. The current chair (Leslie) will stay in place until June 2003.
Bob: Bob is working on a proposal for state funding for some science and medical databases. These databases would be available to all public academic institutions and four public libraries. The state librarian will be presenting the proposal to contacts in the state legislature. The following databases are included: ACM Digital, Wiley InterScience, ScienceDirect, IEEE, and 100 medical and nursing journals. RUL currently purchases all of them. If the state paid for them, it could free up money for us.
At the request of several PSC members, Jeanne will arrange a joint meeting with the Web Advisory Committee in the near future.