Minutes of April 16, 2009 Meeting

Melissa De Fino, Shaun Ellis (guest), Mary Fetzer (chair), Judy Gardner (guest), Rebecca Gardner, Bonita Grant, Rhonda Marker (guest), Kevin Mulcahy (recorder), James P. Niessen, Laura Mullen, Cathy Pecoraro, Vincent Pelote (teleconference), Glenn Sandberg, Robert G. Sewell, Gracemary Smulewitz, Julie Still (teleconference), Ann Watkins (teleconference)

The agenda was approved (it was noted that the original agenda mistakenly listed Jane Sloan instead of Rhonda Marker for the discussion of ETD).

One minor correction was noted for the minutes of the March 19, 2009 meeting: DRUPAL should be Drupal. The minutes were approved as corrected.

Chair's Report-Mary Fetzer

Mary welcomed several substitute attendees: Melissa for Mary Beth Weber, Bonita for Ron Becker, and Rebecca for Karen Hartman. The May LRC meeting will be held in the Dana Library in Newark, at the later starting time of 10:00 AM. Mary and Bob Sewell have finished the LRC goals statement and forwarded it to Jeanne Boyle for inclusion in the Action Plan Grid. Mary has forwarded suggested changes in the RUL Faculty Bylaws to Kayo Denda and Sara Harrington; these changes involve the merger of the Acquisitions and Cataloging Departments.

The Electronic Resources team leaders met on April 6 to prioritize databases for year-end purchase (a list was distributed at the LRC meeting), and the team leaders will meet again on May 6 to compare Academic Search Premier and Wilson OmniFile Full Text (with the likelihood that RUL will not be able to maintain both).

Associate University Librarian for Collection Development Report-Bob Sewell

The RFP for an approval and book acquisitions vendor has been completed, sent to the Purchasing Office, and sent out to vendors. The RFP for subscription services is nearly complete, awaiting some advice from the Purchasing Office. The approval vendor needs to be selected by the beginning of the new fiscal year, but there is a slightly more elastic deadline for choosing the subscription services vendor. DTS has created a representative list of subscriptions for testing vendors.

The priority lists for databases have been completed by the Electronic Resources teams, and negotiations have commenced with vendors. Initial signs point to some success in negotiating better deals. We should be able to acquire all the titles selected by the teams, and perhaps add one or two more.

The teams have also recommended switching from LexisNexis Academic to Westlaw Campus. Westlaw Campus will enable access as soon as Rutgers signs, allowing a transition and training period. Substantial savings (including reductions on remaining Westlaw print subscriptions) will result. Some concern was expressed about the loss of LN newspaper coverage, but the consensus was that newspaper coverage will remain strong through our various databases. There are also concerns about the WL interface (as there have been about LN), but we will work with Westlaw to seek improvements.

Bob expressed concern about the proportion of non-state firm order money as yet unencumbered, particularly in the "D" or Development funds. This is especially troubling since other non-state funds are encountering the 90% wall and are thus forced to cease ordering because of the need to avoid overspending in non-state accounts. Bob proposes creating a non- state "transfer" fund, analogous to the state money transfer fund. In essence, this would allow funds to encumber 100%, with the assurance that money would be available for orders that cost more than projected.

Budget Reduction Scenario-Bob Sewell

RUL will need to give back $700,000 in collection funds for FY 2009-2010 under the current projections. The libraries, however, have already achieved at least $300,000 in savings through periodical cuts implemented in FY 2008-2009. The University Librarian has pledged to contribute $250,000 from unrestricted non-state funds to collections to compensate for the loss of state funds, leaving around $150,000 in cuts. Additional economies achieved through the cancellation project, renegotiations, and other efficiencies, bring that total closer to about $90,000. The Libraries will continue to negotiate for better terms on databases and journal packages, consider cancelling duplicative packages, and identify additional print duplication or lower-priority print subscriptions. This effort will be informed by Counter data.

Selectors often want to cancel current subscriptions in order to fund new subscriptions. Timing is key here, so selectors should wait until the needed sum is canceled system-wide, and then make cancellations specifically tied to new subscriptions (e.g. I am canceling X to fund Y).

There have been suggestions to cancel Center for Research Libraries (CRL) membership in order to save the $50,000 membership fee. Bob and LRC see this suggestion as short-sighted since membership gives RU borrowers access to 5,000,000 items, including access through RAPID (article delivery), and an increasing number of digital materials. In addition, CRL membership can be seen as part of institutional "good citizenship." There might be a need to market CRL resources more effectively, perhaps incorporating CRL records into IRIS or adding the CRL Catalog to the Libraries' federated searching.

Library Annex Operational Overview and Procedures Manual-Judy Gardner

Judy was invited to LRC to discuss some concerns about the Annex (expressed in last month's minutes). In response to those concerns, Judy expressed her understanding that Camden and Newark can send, and indeed have sent, materials to the Annex. While no language in the Manual specifically excludes Robeson and Dana, it was agreed to add language explicitly including those libraries. Some inconclusive discussion ensued as to how to handle system-wide duplication. Judy will rewrite all sections of the Manual dealing with duplication and resubmit. We'll also want to see how our Annex duplication policy meshes with VALE last copy policies currently under development. Bob commended the Manual as a valuable document, and once it has been revised, it will be shared with Cabinet.

Electronic Theses and Dissertations Update-Rhonda Marker and Shaun Ellis

Most graduate programs are now submitting theses and dissertations. Here is a brief chart of when submissions began.

Graduate School in New Brunswick: Optional as of May 2007; mandatory as of October 2007
Graduate School in Camden: Optional as of January 2008; mandatory as of May 2008
Graduate School in Newark: Optional as of October 2008; mandatory as of January 2009
Graduate School of Applied & Professional Psychology: Optional as of October 2008; mandatory as of May 2009 for the PsyD degree (PhDs already handled by Graduate School in New Brunswick)
Theses and dissertations not yet included are from Mason Gross and the EdD degrees from Graduate School of Education.
Rhonda noted that PhD degrees in NB, regardless of program, are handled by the Graduate School in New Brunswick.

Currently there are 575 ETDs in the RUcore, with an additional 262 in a backlog. While staff can handle as many as 40-50 per week, most will remain in the backlog until an ongoing upgrade of the RUcore is completed. IRIS currently includes 72 ETDs. Shaun demonstrated searching the ETD collection in RUcore, noting that in the basic search it is best to search author full name or title in quotation marks. Advisor names are included in the ETD records and can be searched by general keyword or by name. Searching by department is not possible at this time because dissertations do not include the names of departments, only the graduate programs. Rhonda stressed that questions about the status of a particular thesis or dissertation can be directed to her.

The path of ETDs is of particular interest to public services librarians. ETDs first go to RUcore and the ETD collection and then to IRIS and ProQuest, so RUcore will be the first place to look. Note that we cannot make ETDs public until the date of the degree, regardless of how early the documents themselves were submitted. Rhonda estimates that May theses and dissertations would likely be entered into RUcore by September; the smaller number of ETDS submitted in October and January would probably take about one month.

Our ETDs are not yet being captured by Google searching, and we are trying to find out why. We have requested that Google Scholar index our collections. We are not recommending that our students pay an extra fee to ProQuest for making their dissertations or theses "open access;" we assume that eventual Google access will make that unnecessary.

Counter Compliant Statistics-Gracemary Smulewitz and Cathy Pecoraro

Because this topic merits a more complete discussion than was possible at this meeting, it was decided to table this item, and give it priority at the May LRC meeting (to be held in the Special Collections Room in the Dana Library, Newark Campus, starting at 10:00 AM.)

Future Agenda Items

Mary said that for our May meeting we will likely have an E-Books Task Force Report and a Gifts Policy report as well. She is negotiating with Grace Agnew and Jane Sloan on a date to review progress on NJVid.

The meeting adjourned at 12:10 PM

Respectfully submitted,
Kevin Mulcahy

URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/lrc/minutes/lrc_09_04_16.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy
© Copyright 1997-, Rutgers University Libraries