Future of UCSan Diego Libraries

From LAUCWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

UC San Diego Trends:

-Reference requests are dropping. We are having less contact with our users (chat reference excluded), but their reference needs are still there.

-Data curation will be huge. We need expertise.

-Scholarly publishing will increase.

-There is a push for tenured faculty to do instruction (lecturers have been laid off)

-Joint programs with other universities are increasing

-Increase in new undergraduate and graduate programs and degrees (2)

-Record numbers of students are coming into the library (7)

-The role of the university is changing. The undergraduate degree is becoming a commodity, i.e. a ticket to a good job. Libraries can help prepare students for the skills they will need at work, vs. academic skills and training received in their coursework. (15)

-Culture – changing the culture(s) will be the biggest hurdle. UCLA & UC Berkeley see themselves as the flagship campuses and are not willing to give up immediacy of local copy and are reluctant to carry lesser budgets of smaller campuses.

-Infrastructure – we do not currently have the infrastructure to support a one-copy universe. Processes are duplicative across campuses. We must change how we are organized.

-Technology – related to infrastructure, there must be a universal technology used at all campuses for collections & technical services

-Budget Disparities – in order to have a one-copy universe, there must be a “UC Libraries” budget that funds the universal system-wide (“Tier 1” level) one-copy. Funding must come from the top down in order for it to work.

-Interface – current interface is lacking

-Digital – as more resources become digital, one-copy will be easier to facilitate. Time is a factor in receiving materials from another campus (ex. Berkeley ILL is slow).

- Use UCLA & Berkeley’s desire to be perceived as the flagship campuses – make them central repository for shared physical collection, which would alleviate some campuses space issues.

-Coordinated weeding with validated quality (decision process) will be needed. Especially need a shared decision-making process on how retrospective weeding will occur. Cost & time to do weeding must be shared. SLRF closing makes coordinated weeding an imminent concern.

-Coordinated selection process across campuses is necessary – including across languages and formats.

-UC-wide shared approval plan for core collections that all campuses share (like history, literature). If no e-version of monograph, core print would be at all campuses with additional distributed copies available.

-Binding must also be coordinated system-wide with an eye to which copy is the unique copy that “deserves” top-quality binding

-Identify areas of expertise. Create more discipline-specific Tier 2 working groups (Latin American Studies has a working model).

-Decision rubric or process for determining when duplicate copies are necessary

-Shared print will require validating the quality of a copy and when & how it gets replaced, where cost comes from, how time is shared/used—must be a systemic process with the same criteria across campuses.

-Fund UC-wide resources from the top down. The one-copy available to all campuses must be funded first system-wide and not be part of individual campus’s budgets.

-Need a true system-wide federated search: across formats including the catalog, digital resources, special collections—include everything!

-Authentication & digital rights management across campuses must be managed.

-Knowing our community better is essential; promote awareness of system-wide collection strengths. Identify areas of expertise.

-Technical Services has expertise that should be utilized in facilitating this change.

-Special Collections has cultural barriers to digital repository (rights management, search interface lacking), but can selectively target what can be exposed. Even if it doesn’t circulate, serve up the metadata in federated search because there is value in knowing where it exists.

-“hitting the ceiling” – need to consider decoupling Step 6 and “distinguished librarian” (11 dots)

-Things that should be given more weight in reviews o Embedded librarians (7 dots) o Liaison librarians (2 dots) o Instruction (1 dot) o Informal teaching experiences (e.g. consultations) (8 dots) o Collaborating with faculty (5 dots)

-Appreciate that UC librarians can move up in salary without taking on more administrative responsibilities (12 dots)

-There is a perception that unspoken cultural and university librarian expectations impact reviews – (e.g. it is not clear what the UL really wants to see highlighted in files; there is an expectation to be involved in national organizations as one progresses through the steps, however it is not explicitly stated anywhere)

-Generally, we would like to see more formal goal setting. We discussed the possibility of tying goals to reviews, but realized there would be a lot of issues related to how that would be implemented before we would feel comfortable with it. (7 dots)

-Reward creativity and innovation (11 dots)

-Reward “soft skills,” such as collaboration, communication and project management (we think that a successful project manager has to excel at “soft skills” (13 dots; one comment that “soft skills” does not mean “easy”)

-Reward initiative, process and effort, not only accomplishments (10 dots)

-Develop tools and interfaces for user autonomy (13)

-Library get out of the way (e.g., stop putting up barriers that delay access) (5)

-More awareness of faculty and student expectations (5)

-Learn more about use of textbooks: faculty, students, bookstores (5)

-Make the process for making a decision transparent (i.e., is NextGen Melvyl Pilot here to stay? Who decides and how do we know?) (1)

-Call things “beta” not “pilot” (11)

-Develop texting reference (6)

-Provide things to people regardless of their technology level (4)

-Set realistic goals (4)

-More empirical data about our uses (e.g., what technology they own) (15)

-The UCSD Libraries Strategic Planning Working Group is nearing completion of a draft strategic plan.

-ILL consolidation from multiple units into one unit will complete by September;

-document scanning continues in decentralized mode

-The Committee Chair noted that the faculty will have to be made to feel the pain before they understand the magnitude of what the Libraries is up against.

-Campus decisions about reductions to the various divisions' support budgets have been made. Reductions are to be taken over the next three years and are not assessed evenly across divisions, ranging of 7% to 17%.

-Decisions about the budgets of the colleges will be made next, followed by decisions about "central service" budgets, including that of the UCSD Libraries.

-Since library staff know the budget reduction scenarios, waiting the campus decision about the Libraries’ three year budget is suspenseful.

-Beginning in November 09, a broad based Strategic Planning Working Group (SPWG) was charged to develop a process for strategic planning, coordinate that process, and prepare a draft strategic plan for library administration and library management group review. The SPWG held meetings gathering input from staff of individual library departments as well as with other library groups, such as LAUC-SD. The Group is also meeting with external groups, such as the deans, faculty, and student government associations. The Group will analyze and synthesize this input so as to present a draft strategic plan at the end of March with a final draft due the end of May.

-In response to staffing and budget shortfalls the following have or are planned to occur. The Science & Engineering Library service desk (circulation/reserves) was consolidated with the main Geisel Library service desk.

-Also consolidated were several ILL units, there will only be one. Discussions on consolidating archives processing are ongoing.

-The Libraries reduced late night hours at Geisel, the main library, from 2 am to midnight. All libraries are now closed on holidays and hours at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography and at the Medical Center Libraries reduced to one shift (effectively reducing evening and weekend hours). Overall library hour reductions amount to 11%. Further library hour reductions may be considered once budget cuts for 2010/2011 are known.

-Our IT department has also instituted some cost reduction strategies: moving some servers to the San Diego Supercomputer Center, lengthening computer replacement cycles by one year, and reorganized its services and staff so as to take advantage of services provided by campus computing staff.

-On the collections side, the Libraries cancelled 750 print serial subscriptions and reduced the binding budget.

-There is an Academic Affairs Division freeze on all recruitments. All vacancies are now strictly reviewed by library administration and only those with a strongly demonstrated critical need are considered for recruitment.

-If approved by Library Administration, a request for an internal-to-the-campus recruitment needs approval from the Vice Chancellor’s office. Outside-the-campus recruitments would also need VC approval, but we have yet to ask for permission (leaving positions unfilled to meet our budget cuts).

-Over the past two years and forecasting through this June, the Libraries have/will hold vacant or eliminate 42 positions of which 11 are librarian positions.

-Over the last two years, the UCSD Libraries have taken about $6 million in cuts (~4.8 in services/operations, ~1.2 in collections), of which about $3 million, or 10%, are a permanent reduction. Per campus request, the Libraries are submitting budget scenarios for a 10, 15, or 20% cut for the coming year.

-With the final approval of the LAUC Bylaws, locally we have set up a committee to review and update our local bylaws to be in compliance with the state bylaws and to make other changes as we find appropriate.

-To continue the work begun last year, we reconstituted and recharged our “Finding Community Website” committee, created in response to a need to provide potential candidates information about San Diego. The website provides information about the various communities of San Diego, some of it from official websites, but a good portion from library staff.

-In the fall we inaugurated two ongoing librarian recognition events, one initiated by LAUC-SD, the other by Library Administration.

-In an effort to recognize professional achievement, Library Administration is now hosting a reception to honor Librarian achieving Distinguish Librarian status during the past review cycle.

-To recognize service to the Libraries, LAUC-SD established the Librarian Service Recognition Program. Librarians celebrating a five-year increment service anniversary are now honored with a reception, a certificate of service, and posting of their name in the library newsletter (noting years of service) and on our local website. This is modeled after the similar campus annual staff recognition ceremony sponsored by UCSD administration.