Library IT Task Force

Library IT Task Force

Open Forum Discussion - Recommendations

Task Force Members – 2008-2009

Peter K. Dorhout, ChairOren Anderson (FCCoL)Patrick BurnsDavid Dandy (FC Strat Plan)Ann GillBlanche HughesPaul LaybournApril MasonMichael PalmquistCari Stepsay (ASCSU)

Task Force Charge:• Evaluate the Library and Information Technology organizations in order to

determine the best model to meet both our current needs and those of the faculty and students to follow.

• Identify areas for synergies between the Library and central IT units.• Discuss and recommend strategic directions related to options for Library

collections and storage .• Create new models for an information access portal, including on-line and

self-service capabilities for assistance with reference materials, enhanced global search, and discovery tools, etc.

• Explore the best models for the Library College Faculty to interact with colleges and academic units, support research and discovery, instruction and outreach.

• Evaluate and comment upon the Library’s strategy for renovating the Library into a Learning/Information Commons.

“Somewhere the saving and putting away had to begin again and someone had to do the saving and keeping, one way or another, in books, in records, in people's heads, any way at all so long as it was safe, free from moths, silver-fish, rust and dry-rot, and men with matches.” (or magnets?)

- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

Today’s forum:

• Ask three questions• Review Vision 2020 recommendations

and progress• Review pertinent background data• Discuss current Task Force

recommendations

Key discussion questions• What forces are acting on your professional life at CSU? As one

example, consider your personal portfolio of Teaching-Research-Service as a faculty member and those of your colleagues, as a guide.

• Where do the forces in question 1 bring you or your colleagues professionally by 2020? Assume that there are no new forces applied.

• What information resources will you and your colleagues need to reach your 2020 point given the forces you currently experience?

Library Vision 2020 Task Force

Summary of October 2007 Report to the Provost

Task Force Members – 2006-2007

Peter K. Dorhout, ChairTom BaxendaleTamla BluntIngrid BurkePatrick BurnsAnn GillJuliet GionfriddoTom Gorell

Allan KirkpatrickAlan LambornKatharine LeighKen ManningCatherine Murray-Rust (ex-officio)Tom Moothart (ex-officio) Patricia Smith (ex-officio)Donald Zimmerman

Task Force Charge:• We should ask, “what does the library look like in 10-15 years?”• We should not do an extrapolation based on peer institutions.• We should not work toward appeasement of an external ranking

group.• We should focus on having a vision and a draft financial plan by

May 2007.• We should use the current library Strategic Plan as a place to

begin our task (see, http://lib.colostate.edu/about/goals/mission-values-vision.html)

Task Force Working Groups

• Student perspectives• Faculty perspectives• Infrastructure perspectives

Task Force ResponsesThe challenges for the Libraries: to continually monitor the changing needs of faculty and students as they pursue their academic programs, to create and manage collections designed to meet those needs, and to improve services such as information and discovery tools.

The opportunities emerging in this new century: to lead the CSU community in technology and access to information, to enable CSU to serve as a leading destination for scholars in Colorado for research, and to train students, faculty, and staff in effective information management.

Mission: University Libraries connects the CSU campus and greater Colorado community to information and knowledge critical for research and learning

The Critical Perspectives envision that the Libraries will contribute to the Mission of the University by becoming:

1) the information access portal for the university and its community; 2) the archive for scholarly work, particularly electronic theses and

dissertations, electronic publishing, and scholarly work of faculty and students; and

3) the flexible space on campus for information management and student and faculty learning.

Perspective 1. The Libraries will emerge as the information access and management portal for the university community

• Provide electronic access of materials• Provide physical access to printed material• Train students, faculty, and staff in information

retrieval processes

Perspective 2. The Libraries will archive the scholarly work of the university community.• Implement and manage electronic thesis/dissertation

deposition• Expand the digital special collections and institutional

repository services to include photographs, technical reports, e-portfolios, and other publications.

• Implement mechanisms that help faculty to manage electronic scholarly work

• Educate the university community on e-journals and other web-journal publishing opportunities

Perspective 3. The Libraries will take a leadership role in ensuring that the physical and virtual space will provide a flexible learning environment.

• Lead the Morgan Library space evolution through the Physical Development/Master Plan, seeking faculty and student groups’ input

• Identify space in existing and new buildings that will serve as limited-hour access virtual library and learning space

• Identify and develop space for 24/7 access• Utilize and expand wifi capabilities to support access needs in

across campus, especially living-learning facilities that will serve as satellite electronic libraries and learning spaces

Today’s forum:

• Ask three questions• Review Vision 2020 recommendations

and progress• Review pertinent background data• Discuss current Task Force

recommendations

Brian L. Hawkins, “The Unsustainability of the Traditional library and the Threat to Higher education,” from Brian L. Hawkins and Patricia Battin (eds.), The Mirage of Continuity, Reconfiguring Academic Libraries for the 21st Century, Council on Library and Information Resources, Washington, D.C., pp. 129-153 (1998)

Buying power/avail information

Weighted Library Buying Power: 1980-2010

CurrentEvaluation at CSU

CSU – Average Annual Increase in Access 34%

01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/080

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

Periodical Subscriptions

Aggregator

E version only

Print/Print w/e

Print Only

CSU Inter-Library Loan

99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-070

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000Interlibrary Loaned Interlibrary Borrowed

99/0

0

00/0

1

01/0

2

02/0

3

03/0

4

04/0

5

05/0

6

06/0

7

07/0

8$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

$8,000,000

E&G Collections Expenditures by Category

OtherConsortiaeJournalsPrint/ePrintDatabasesE-BooksBooks

2000

-200

1

2001

-200

2

2002

-200

3

2003

-200

4

2004

-200

5

2005

-200

6

2006

-200

7

2007

-200

8

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

Annual Book Checkouts

This represents 85% of all book check outs.Remainder = ILL.

Holdings = 2.148 M (9.3%)

Holdings = 1.898 M (16%)

ARL Institutional Profiles

CSU RankInstitutional Data Absolute NormalizedTotal FTE TT Faculty 12 -PHD Fields 11 3PHDs Awarded 10 8FTE Grad Students 11 8FTE Total Students 11 12Total Budget 11 7

CALIFORNIA, D

AVIS

COLORADO

COLORADO STATE

ILLIN

OIS, URBANA

IOW

A STATE

MICHIGAN STATE

NORTH CAROLINA STATE

OHIO STATE

OKLAHOMA STATE

PURDUE

TEXAS A&M

WASHIN

GTON STATE0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

FY 2007 Tot. Lib. Budget/Tot. Inst. Budget

Series1

Rank = 6th

Today’s forum:

• Ask three questions• Review Vision 2020 recommendations

and progress• Review pertinent background data• Discuss current Task Force

recommendations

Library IT Task Force Recommendations:• Libraries should become more user oriented:

– Use data to inform operations and strategies.– Report usage metrics to FCCoL, engage in setting priorities & directions– Develop self-service, web-enabled applications for users– Assist users with search/discovery – search “best practices”

• Libraries should pursue strategies regarding budget:– Link budget for collections to research volume for a sustainable model –

RA/RSP– Engage FCCoL on annual budget reviews, changes in investment,

reactions to changing practices (e-Books, Print on Demand, etc.)– Enhance sustainability through alliances/consortium purchases.

• CSU Libraries should adopt the following positions regarding collections:– Work with other Prospector Libraries to establish a shared purchase

plan to reduce expenses on monographs and expand access to monographs.

– Focus acquisitions to be more pertinent to CSU’s academic and research missions.

– Periodically review databases purchased by CSU Libraries for duplication.

– Identify collections where access is otherwise available, and withdraw them from CSU Libraries – “weeding policy”.

– Pursue strategies and funding to increase CSU Libraries’ storage capacity.

– Work with faculty and others at CSU to establish an appropriate open access policy for CSU delivered content.

• CSU Libraries should pursue strategies regarding preservation and special collections– Ensure that CSU preserve and sustain collections

in areas of its uniqueness.– Work with the University’s records retention

committee to ensure that CSU observes appropriate best practices in terms of records management and records retention.

– Work with Comm. & Creative Services to ensure current historical information is provided with metadata and preserved appropriately.

• CSU Libraries should pursue strategies regarding digital content:– Establish, with broad University feedback, policies

for the preservation of digital materials.– Progress with an electronic thesis and dissertation

(ETD).– Follow technologies and trends for electronic books.– Continue to explore digital rights and digital asset

management policies and procedures.– Continue to develop the Discovery Tool for

searching content.

Did we address these key questions• What forces are acting on your professional life at CSU? As one

example, consider your personal portfolio of Teaching-Research-Service as a faculty member and those of your colleagues, as a guide.

• Where do the forces in question 1 bring you or your colleagues professionally by 2020? Assume that there are no new forces applied.

• What information resources will you and your colleagues need to reach your 2020 point given the forces you currently experience?