Minutes of September 19, 2001 meeting

Roger Smith, Ramon Negron, Kristen Ko, Eva Kalamotousis, Zohreh Bonianian, Phyllis Palfy, Kumu Sivarajan, Myriam Alami, Irina Loutchkina, May Chin, Jan Reinhardt, Pete Anderson
Dean Meister, Joanna Karwowska


  1. Upgrade: any problems
  2. Change to Expiration Dates? Make the last day of those months 1/31/2001, 5/31/2001, 8/31/2001
  3. Local Scanning/FTP updates - FTP: We need to remove old copy on Web Server before sending over new copy, if file name stays the same.
  4. Removal of summer reserve, brief records and control records.
  5. Re-using brief records.
  6. Poor quality originals: instructing the professors: stamp: “best original copy”
  7. Update on using electronic files directly from subscribed resource.
  8. Printing Problems: Alexander Library
  9. Item display:
      * This item's item type is STACKS. When you put it on Reserve, the current location became RESV-CHANG. However, when a patron checks out this item, it gets the current location associated with that patron (i.e., CHECKEDOUT). * What you see displayed is "item type (current location)" which in this case is "STACKS (CHECKEDOUT)". * NOTE: The only time you see "RESERVE (CHECKEDOUT)" is for those items not owned by the library (e.g., photocopies, professor's copies, etc.) that get an item type of RESERVE when you create the brief record for Reserves. Everything in the Rutgers collection gets the normal item type it always has.
  10. Reserve Fines: Tracey Meyer checking on it
  11. Next meeting, Wednesday, October 17th

We began the meeting with a review of the recent upgrade. No major problems or concerns were reported. It was noted that the problem of removing individual instructors from a reserve record with more than one individual reserve persists. I will look into it.

We then took another look at reserve control record expiration dates. I suggested we change 6/30/ to 5/31. This would make each expiration date the 31st of a month (1/31, 5/31, and 8/31. The end of May is approximately 2 weeks after the end of the semester, as is the end of August. For the January expiration date, more time is allowed for holiday slowdown and processing of new records for spring during the same time period. I would like to bring this matter to a close. With the uniformity in expiration dates for these records, we can assure a clean “report” to withdraw the records at the end of each term.

We touched base on removal of summer reserves, brief and control records. “Preview lists” have been circulated, and action should have been taken to retain and roll over files requested for fall/spring lists. Removal of remaining records will proceed shortly.

A reminder was issued not to re-use brief records. Reports to remove these records key in on “created on” dates and they should not exceed more than a year for any reason. This is a concern in meeting copyright conditions.

We discussed the implementation of local scanning. Mostly things were reported as going well. Kilmer, and to a lesser extent Douglass, reported that saving files to the U drive was extremely slow. For the interim, Kilmer has been saving to a T drive location. I have reported to Donna the necessity of fixing this situation. We also discussed the need to extend FTP privileges to other units, especially Alexander, to help speed the process.

We discussed printing problems as reported from several students to Alexander Lib. Staff. When we tested the articles, they print fine on our PCs, but did exhibit problems when printed from other machines in the building on the network copiers. I asked for specific examples when this occurs so we can demonstrate to copy center.

Reserve fine should be returning to our desired format, 15 minute grace period, then $1 fine accruing, second dollar at the 3 hour mark. Tracey Meyer is making change per/Judy Gardner.

Judy Gardner was in favor of the “best quality original” stamp for e reserve articles that are poor quality submission from professors. I will look into its implementation.

We would like to issue a reminder to RRS staff to please be sure to charge reserve material directly to RESV-LIB, and not to create holds for reserve.

We would like to also remind ALL unit to include (LIB) at the end of a course record. For example 01:730:101:01(LSM) is the proper format for a course record in Workflows.

The group took a look at an email that Dean had sent to me questioning the manner in which reserve records now display in Webcat. If a patron were to look up an item through the catalog, and it was on reserve and “available” it would read: (item type) stacks (current location) RESV-LIB. However, if the item was checked out, then it would appear (item type) stacks (current location) CHECKEDOUT. Our concern was that if looking through catalog, the patron would not see any indication that the item was on reserve. This is not so. There is a line indicating, for example, “1 STACKS CHECKEDOUT desk: RESV-LSM/ circ rule:2HOUR due:9/24/2001,12:03”. This clearly indicates that the item is on reserve, charged out, and when it is due.

We touched base on the removal of fines for records that need to be removed.

Next meeting, Wednesday, October 17th.

URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/reserves_group/minutes/reserves_01_09_19.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy
© Copyright 1997-, Rutgers University Libraries