Minutes of the New Brunswick Libraries Faculty Meeting  
August 10, 2007

Present:  Bartz, Caviness, Denda, Dent, Fetzer, J. Gardner, R. Gardner (recorder), Glazer (guest), Izbicki, Kesselman, Kuchi, Mardikian, Mullen, Niessen, Shepard, Stec, Ward, Wilson, Womack (chair)

Ryan opened the first meeting of the year by stating that rather than asking for motions and seconds, he may ask if the group agrees on a particular issue and then, saying “hearing no objections”, simply move on with the meeting.  The chair also indicated that he may want to limit the number of times each person speaks during lengthy discussions.  These two changes may allow us to get through agendas more expeditiously.

Adoption of the agenda
The agenda was adopted.

Approval of the minutes
The minutes of the June 2007 meeting were approved.

Introductions
The group welcomed and introduced ourselves to our new colleagues:

• Caroline Caviness (SCILS intern)
• Valeda Dent (AUL for Research and Instructional Services)
• Tom Izbicki (Humanities librarian)
• Judit Ward (Alcohol Studies librarian).

Marketing Plan

• Harry Glazer distributed copies of the Rutgers University Libraries Marketing Plan for 2007-08.  Harry reviewed the process that led to the plan, which was recommended by the Communications Audit group.  The main goal of the plan is to increase awareness of our resources to our constituents.  The plan addresses how to involve liaisons in marketing and how to help them be successful in this endeavor.
• Harry pointed out three objectives which involve the liaisons:
• The outreach desks that will be placed in student centers
• Promoting costly but underused resources such as EEBO and CRL
• Contacts with new teaching faculty that may be generated by the libraries distributing literature at the university president’s reception for new faculty
• A fourth objective, not yet formally approved, involves forming a “community of practice” which would meet a few times a year to discuss best practices in liaison work
• Much discussion followed
• Many people have no idea how a librarian can help them.  Laura has a sign from the earlier outreach project that explains to students what librarians can do for them.  She will lend it to the current organizers.
• Data from a similar pilot project a few years ago indicated that service desks in the student centers did not encounter much traffic.  Concerns were expressed about cost effectiveness.  Perhaps the libraries can talk with the campus student center directors about ways we can collaborate with them.
• CRL is not all that useful to most undergraduates. It might be useful to promote CRL by putting CRL brochures in the graduate student lounge.
• Might put general library brochures in the campus student centers.
• EEBO and CRL are niche resources; better to promote them through niche channels.  Would be better to focus attention on NJKI databases as that funding is so critical.
• Would like to see underused science and social science databases promoted as well as humanities.
• Concern about time frame; students are not thinking about research till later in the semester.   Judy clarified that the service desks in the campus centers would start in late September and then be there once a week over the next few weeks.
• Make RUL website more dynamic.  The website can follow the academic calendar better.  (ie. welcome new and returning faculty and students, offer congratulations at graduation, etc.)   Harry commented that the mandate of the Marketing/PR team is to promote the services & resources on the website; WAC and PSC are the proper forums to discuss changes to the site itself.
• It would be good to have students (especially students who do not work in the libraries) on WAC.
• In response to the question as to whether there are any students on the marketing group, Harry stated that students participated in the group that drafted the marketing plan and a student rep served on the Marketing/PR team over the past year. Harry’s gotten some good feedback when consulting with students.  However, students’ schedules seem to preclude them from being permanent, regular members of the Marketing/PR team.
• Might be a good idea for the libraries to have a tab in Sakai.
• Questions arose as to how the feedback given this morning will be incorporated into the plan if it is to be ready for September.  
  

New ILL/RDS Interface
Judy gave a very informative presentation on the new ILL and Article Delivery System.  She began by explaining that when RLG merged with OCLC the ILL manager system was no longer supported.  ILLiad software was chosen to replace the old system.  ILLiad allows for articles from any RU library on any campus to be delivered to the desktop.  Judy demonstrated the new system, including new request and ILL functions in IRIS.  A suggestion was made to add the Ask A Librarian button on the ILLiad screens. Judy mentioned that one of Access Services’ goals is to activate direct requesting from WorldCat and ArticleFirst via OCLC in the next year, however licenses and partnerships need to be established before this can happen.

Sharon Fordham Center
Eileen presented an update on the status of the Sharon Fordham Center at the Douglass library.   Fully funded by a member of the Douglass class of 1975, it will be a state of the art multimedia studio.  Eileen shared two videos that document the construction progress.

New Science Library
Laura described the vision for a proposed new science library for Busch campus.  A concept document was submitted to the current Capital Campaign.  The rationale for a new building is based in the fact that moving to digital collections that are accessible remotely allows for the disbanding of the branch libraries on that campus (physics, math, chemistry, alcohol studies, etc.) and the academic departments can reclaim the space.  Some departments are interested in collaborating with the libraries in constructing a new building.  For example, the physics department would like to include a “hall of learning”.  The new library would be an environmentally “green” building.  Eileen and Marty may set up promotional space in Second Life.  

Other Capital Campaign Projects
Triveni stated that the Kilmer library submitted a proposal for expansion or renovation.  There are many plans floating to spruce up the Kilmer campus, including “College Town” which envisions an area of housing, shops and open space.  The Kilmer library would like to tap into that energy.  The proposal includes electronic classrooms, collaborative study spaces, and a media hall.  Another suggestion is to make a covered path between the library and the nearby campus center and encourage more collaboration between the two.

Discussion of NBL Priorities and Issues
Ryan asked for a round-robin to consider what issues the group feels are priorities for the coming year.  Topics aired were as follows:

• Working with new system-wide administrators, deans, etc. resulting from the recent reorganization of the colleges.
• Real time chat reference services.
• NJKI promotion and awareness.
• NBLF vis-à-vis the reorganization of the libraries.  How to communicate within the larger structure.
• Moving forward in a time of extraordinary change.  A major concern is workload issues.
• How can NBLF be more relevant within the new School of Arts and Sciences (SAS) and their proposed “learning communities” and first year seminars?
• How to do reference and instruction better.  Hopefully NBISG will pull us together to work more collaboratively.
• How does a small research library, funded independently from RUL, fit into the larger system?
• What is the future of the NBL website?
• Make decisions about reference services.
• Need to move forward with issues such as authors’ rights, scholarly communication.
• Need to go out and talk with our faculty more.
• Enhance the value of our OPAC by getting more records for “hidden” resources into it.  Many of our materials go unused because they are not included in IRIS.
• Work more closely with Technical and Automated Services; communicate a need for more staffing there.
• How do we deal with issues concerning instruction and assessment?
• What is our role in RUcore?  What is our role in federated searching?