Weeding

Umm... maybe I should call it deselection. Whatever the term, my library is in the midst of a large weeding project. We had several thousand titles stored in a remote facility in a different part of the state. That facility ran out of room and the books are being returned. All 43,000 of them. The returned items do contain journals as well as monographs.

To start, we pulled a list of the journal titles and made decisions on what to keep or discard before they arrived. My criteria for this was if my holdings were incomplete and complete holdings were available locally, then I withdrew my holdings. However, there are five librarians involved in this project, each with collection development responsibilities for different areas. And, we're all making the withdraw or keep decision differently. It's really rather fascinating to watch.

Then, we get to the monographs. They are in our local remote storage and have come in by size (they were stored by size). So, they are in random order. This means you have to peruse every shelf to see what titles fall in your area. They went to remote storage because they had one or zero circulations. However, upon reviewing many titles, those circulations were since we brought up the ILS. Prior to that, many titles had very high circulation, but due to age or change in instructors or programs or the way classes are taught, that usage has dropped off. Some have been recalled from remote and have a flag on them, so those automatically get kept. That was a fairly easy decision, though I've wanted to discard a few that were recalled, because I know I have more current titles in those areas.

I have collection development responsibilities for areas that have materials that age out, although I think most areas have materials that age out, but it has to be thought out. Each subject area here basically has it's own collection development policy (called an Information Management and Access Plan); there is a general weeding/deselection policy, but it hasn't been updated in awhile. So, again, all five librarians are using different standards/judgement to do their deselecting. For me it goes if: the age of the book (especially if it's a text book) is over five years old; bibliographies (pretty much replaced and outdated by databases); symposium proceedings, pamphlets specific to a particular event or city (unless it's in my state), especially if the condition of the item is bad; biographies, especially if they've never circulated or it's a person not widely known (we received many by donation); dissertations; and statistics and other data that can now be found online. I also look closely at materials related to other countries for fit with programs that are offered by the university. If the fit isn't good, the material goes. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, as well as some materials that just have to be reveiwed.

We have one more shipment to go. It's time consuming and tedious, but it has given me great insight into not only the process of deselection, but also collection development. Since it's time to be updating my the collection development plans for my areas, what I've learned from doing this project will be incorporated there as well.

On a side note, I did attend the Charleston Conference last month and attended some very good sessions and lively lunches. Once I can get my thoughts together on that, I will be posting on the things that really stood out to me.

NISO Forum

Last week I attended the NISO Forum Understanding the Data Around Us: Gathering and Analyzing Usage Data. This forum came at an appropriate time for me, as many of our databases (as I'm sure is the case at most libraries) renew in January. So, I've spent the past couple of weeks digging for usage statistics and then trying to interpret what I got.

The Forum was basically two well spent days. I won't give a synopsis of every session, but will point out ones I particularly enjoyed and then some of the key pieces of information and thoughts that I walked away with.

For the most part, all sessions were good, but there were a few that I particulalry enjoyed: Usage Data: Seeing the Full Picture by Kevin Cohn, Product Director, Atypon; From What to Why: Electronic Resource usage Data in Collection Development and User Behavior by Karen Coombs, Head of Web Services, Univeristy of Houston Libraries; SUSHI & COUNTER by Oliver Pesch, Chief Strategist, E-Resources, EbSCO Information Services; Why Collect Data? by Colleen Cook, Dean of the Texas A&M University Libraries; Real World Data: Using Usage to Shape Libraries by Virginia Steel, University Librarian, University of California, Santa Cruz; and Electronic Resource Usage Statistics: Defining a Complex Problem by Caryn Anderson, Doctoral Studies Program Manager, GSLIS, Simmons College.

One idea stated by many presenters is that all data is good. The key is knowing what to do with it. There was some overlap between presentations, but the general consensus is that usage data are a good thing. This may sound basic, but apparently there are folks out there who do not think usage data serve a purpose. I like usage stats, so I have to agree with this. I have an undergraduate business degree and business experience; I tend to say if it isn't being used, then don't subscribe to it. However, we live in the real world and while I'd like to live by this adage, sometimes you can't, given the nature of programs offered by the university. I'm not sure if the same would ring true in public libraries. However, usage statistics are being used for a variety of reasons outside of subscription/renewal decisions - weeding/deselection, marketing, editorial decisions by journal editors, just to name a few. An off shoot of this is that everyone approaches usage statistics from a different perspective; the variety of ways to use usage statistics are limitless. In the end though, usage statistics of any kind should help you be better informed about your users.

There is no standard, so to speak, on how to use usage data, however, there is a standard for getting/providing those usage stats. I felt like I'd had my head in the sand when several presenters mentioned the problems with COUNTER. After listening to them, they made some good points. (Several presenters mentioned problems with COUNTER, but Kevin Cohn with Atypon defined them well. Link to the presentations is provided at the end of this post). I agree with what they were saying, but, I have a slightly different perspective. All of those presenters were assuming that usage stats were coming in a COUNTER compliant format. Ah... if that were true. There may be faults with COUNTER, but I deal with a lot of business databases and they are not COUNTER compliant, which makes it quite difficult to compare usage for similar databases, though admitedly many business databases provide unique resources. One database provides usage for their Quick Search, Company Snapshot, General Sources, etc. The only totals they provide for all this are the "What if Total Price," the amount we would have been charged if we didn't subscribe. I don't find that particular piece of information useful. I then had to try and reconcile what I did have to something along the lines of searches and sessions. There was also the assumption that usage statistics were being provided. I have a subscription to one commercial database that does not provide statistics and has no intention of doing so. Their viewpoint - it's the same cost regardless of the number of users. My thought of course, is if no one uses it, why should I subscribe.

Powerpoints for the NISO Forum are available at http://www.niso.org/news/events_workshops/usage07/agenda.html.

Also available is a new Usage Data wiki at http://usagedata.pbwiki.com/. Join the community conversation about developing a usage data decision framework (and other usage data issues). For more information about the usage data conversation, see Caryn Anderson's closing remarks (available on the presentations page).

LITA National Forum 2007 -- Day 1 Sessions

Future of Libraries Discussion

This session posed a few key questions to the group and asked us to think about hte year 2023. We were asked to ponder --
WHAT IF...
-- There were 100,000,000 free full-text books
-- Copyright legistation were completely rewritten to more reasonably reflect real world practices
-- Star Trek-level reference were really available

What I found most interesting was how difficult it was for a room full of librarians to think beyond today's technology. Any mention of information implants or anything close to AI was immediately poo-poo'ed. The conversation focused on how we stay relevant despite a couple of non-librarians in the audience trying to explain that we may not be already.

Topic Mapping

I didn't get to stay long for this one as I had to hit the session below, but I found the intro highly interesting. It is essentially a way to aggregate index information instead of focusing on full-text and create new access points. This is an area I'm going to have to look more indepth at when I get home.


Tagging the Catalog & Keyword in Headings

This session showed two concepts. First it demonstrated how heading data could harvested and allow keyword searching to actually pull a relevant list of subjects back. IE. User does a search for Civil War and instead of getting "no hits", they get back a list of all of the subject headings that include the words Civil and War. Second, it showed the value of allowing users to tag their own items. "Users are no longer passive." This allows an additional access point. Tags allow for "changes as language changes". One unique implementation of this was providing students of a method of finding all items from a specific professor.

LITA National Forum 2007 -- Preparing

I'm at the conference this weekend and preparing for our presentation on Plinkit Sat afternoon. In the meantime, I've also stumbled upon the opportunity to publicize our upcoming book on Federated Searching. We hope to provide a practical guide to reviewing, selecting, and implementing a federated search tool to librarians of all kinds.

There's a Five Minute Madness session which affords people like me to ramble on about projects they are currently working on. I hope to get the word out that we need participants in our survey to make sure that we are addressing all of the concerns of the field.

If you have time, please fill out our survey AND pass it along to your colleagues. Our publishing deadline is January and every response helps!

Cubicle chaos....

We've all been there. Offices move, new furniture comes, etc. And, usually we just see the end result by moving into our new work homes.

Last Friday, I finally got my very own cubicle. Now, I'm like all the other librarians in my department. Woo hoo! We've had the planners in several times to map it out, decide on configuration, etc. Then we got the date. So, last Thursday afternoon, I and several others (we rearranged some open work stations as well) packed up our desk stuff in anticipation of the activity the next day. We got to work and waited. And waited. And waited. They didn't start installation until almost 2:00 pm. And, of course, it wasn't as smooth as we had anticipated.

We're in a big, open room, so to get power to the workstations, we have power poles coming down from the ceiling. The planners said they wouldn't need to be moved. We didn't question this. We should have. The power poles had to be moved. Rush order to the physical plant for electricians. We were hoping for Monday, but one actually showed up that afternoon. He couldn't do anything then, but he stopped by to see what was going on so he would know what to do. And, he realized that they were going to put my partition wall in front of the electrical outlet and run power strips under the wall for my power. His question (one I hadn't yet voiced) was "what if you need to unplug it?" What indeed. And, they had wanted to plug one power strip into another. I said no and was backed up by the electrician. Can't do that, unless you want to get in trouble with the Fire Marshall.

So, no power in the cubicle and no power in the workstations. And, no phone either, because no lines where the workstations were moved and of course, my phone and data outlet couldn't be blocked by my partition walls either.

I will say, the electricians, the data guy, and the phone guy had us up and running by Monday afternoon. We weren't expecting to be down two days, but those guys really put us at the top and for that I'm grateful.

In addition, the wood for my desk is a different color - it's lighter than everyone elses. And, the overhead cabinet doesn't match the trim in the cubicle. My manager has decided to let me keep the lighter wood (we all like it better), but the overhead cabinet will have to be swapped out. We were first told a new one would be ordered. Yesterday, we were told this one would be painted. The off color one is still set up because I need the light. So, I'm not sure when they'll come take what I have or what will happen with the overhead.

Somehow, when the installers finally showed up, I wound up being the point person for the set-up, the electrical moves, the phone moves, the data stuff, etc. Since I couldn't do much of anything else, that was fine and I kind of enjoyed telling people what to do. But, I also have a whole new respect for facilities and office managers who coordinate entire build-outs of new office space.

Before Web/ Library 2.0

This past June at ALA, I was amazed at the number of sessions geared toward Library 2.0. I attended one aimed at it's use in Technical services, basically as collaboration tools (blogged in a previous post). In my previous job, I could/can see uses for such things as a blog and a wiki, however, management was a little wary as nothing like that had been done or considered before. Since there was no share drive or intranet, the more I learn the more I believe these tools could have been used for not only meeting the needs of users, but also for internal collaboration (as was done by the presenters of said ALA session).

In my current place of work, we have share drives, which weren't at previous place of work, making the use of such collaboration tools not as necessary. After all, if a process is in place and working, it shouldn't be changed simply to use a new technology. Unless, that technology could improve the process and/or collaboration. I admit the drive could be better organized, but it's still there and accessible by everyone. However, a share drive doesn't quite encourage collaboration the way a wiki could/would.

The more I think about it though, the more I realize I was using collaborative tools in my previous life and pre web point anything. In my previous life, I held several positions with a software company. One was in their Customer Care department, which when created involved more than working with a phone script. We had to know several different products, their supported platforms, 3rd party products that worked with the software, billing/invoicing processes and procedures, what was coming in future releases, and a host of other things. If we didn't know the answer, we had to know where to go for that answer.

The company used Lotus Notes, which also provided a way to create databases. My main page contained links to the databases I used most frequently. Each product line and almost every department had a database we could go to to find the information we needed or to at least find a contact person. As our group grew, we realized the need for a database for our issues/resolutions and created it - one that could be searched by the entire company and edited by everyone in our group. I should also add that our "team" was spread from coast to coast. We had people in MD, IL, MI, Canada, MA, PA, TX, and CA. The database allowed for collaboration and everyone contributed. Today it would probably be created using a wiki. We dealt with the majority of our customers via phone or e-mail.

Because we were so scattered, we used chat for quick communications. That was actually my first introduction to web chat - I used it for work first and then expanded it to personal friends. So, coming to the library profession and seeing the "innovations" of e-mail and chat reference are really not so new to me - I was doing that six years ago.

I look at all the "innovations" and uses of technology in libraries today and realize that there have always been tools for collaboration. What appears to be innovative probably has been done before -- what's old is new.

Usage statistics

When databases come up for renewal, one of the first things we do is look at usage statistics. Well, I have a tax database due for renewal -- the vendor does not provide usage statistics and has no intention of doing so. When I asked, the reply was that the cost was the same regardless of usage and if we wanted to know, they recommend that their corporate customers send out an e-mail to gauge usage. Well, we're a library, so that's not really an option for us. So, do you just blow off usage statistics?

The first professional conference I ever attended was the Charleston Conference. I had been in my first full time job less than six months when I went, but I'm still learning from one of the sessions I attended. It was a session on Counter compliant statistics. They didn't teach that in library school, so it was all new to me. One of the presenters stated that they finally implemented a policy to not subscribe to a database/resource if the usage statistics were not Counter compliant. I didn't quite understand it until I spent a week gathering usage statistics for my library's annual report. Then, I got it.

Now, I'm wondering if I shouldn't have such a policy for databases that provide no usage statistics. The above mentioned database will cost us thousands of dollars and I have no way of gauging if it's being used. My business librarians tell me one facutly member in the business department uses it for one of her classes. We do have a MS in Taxation which adds a little wrinkle to it. However, ProQuest now has an Accounting and Tax database that offers most of what this database does in addition to accounting journals. Their interface is familiar to most and usage stats (Counter compliant ones no less) would be available.

I have no desire to take away a resource that is being used. I also have no desire to pay thousands of dollars for a resource for one class, especially if the information could be provided by another resource that would have broader applicability.

Which begs another question. Is any type of usage statistic better than none?

Plinkit? What is that??

Flippantly, it's the project I walked in the door as the Project Coordinator (with no clue) that was expected to do a state-wide roll-out of 100+ libraries by the end of the year. So, within 2 weeks of being at my new job, I was off for a week attending Plone administrator bootcamp.

(Really, Plinkit (Public Library Interface Kit) is a Content Management System offered to empower small rural libraries in creating intuitive, dynamic websites with little effort and no technical expertise.)

Some much simplified background --

Oregon created a product that allowed libraries to choose from a variety of templates placed on top of PLONE - an open source CMS. Oregon, Colorado, Texas, and Illinois have come together in a collaborative to distribute the product to public libraries throughout those states.

In our state, we have the State Library which grant funds the Library Regional Systems. So, the first order of business was to train all of the technical contacts at the Systems offices, which was conducted in late April. Those technical contacts have been in charge of getting the libraries in their region up on Plinkit. To date, we have 7 or 8 live sites.

Journal review

It's nearing our fiscal year end. Add to this the fact that several publishers have drastically increased subscription prices and, you guessed it, we're reviewing journal subscriptions. About the lists: one list is for a move to print only; one list is standing orders for titles that are not available electronically, so we are reviewing to see if we should keep the subscription.

Naturally, usage and cost come into play for both. For those available full-text, the consideration is merely is the usage there. At MPOW, we're definitely moving toward electronic, so print only isn't really an option, even if it is less expensive. In most cases yes, the usage is there. In a couple of cases, no it isn't. For those titles with low usage, I considered where else it was held and given the current usage, is ILL an option. Well, one title had four uses. In addition, I looked at the title's value to the field. So, even though a journal may have low usage, it might not get marked for cancellation if it is considered a top journal in the field.

The second set of journal reviews is the one that was more interesting. Up until now, I'd never really considered stats for journal titles from an indexing and abstracting database, just overall database usage. However, when reviewing journal usage for print subscriptions, it helps to know if it's being used. My OPAC shows "historical browses" for titles, but there is some debate as to how accurate it is. So, I pulled usage stats by title. I was surprised by the results. Titles that seemed obscure in name and had very few browses in the OPAC had heavy usage in the database. Since the stats were returning abstract requests, it doesn't tell if the user actually went to the print journal, but it does tell me that the title is appearing in searches run in these databases. And, most were fairly high, even the "obscure" title.

I've also got one or two titles that don't appear to be indexed in any database we subscribe to, but that have fairly high browses in the OPAC. I'd prefer that my print titles be indexed somewhere, but the OPAC stats tell me that there are people looking for this title. I'm not ready to stop the subscription, but I can't really say I should look at purchasing a database for one title.

Overall, the exercise has been a good one. I think a couple of titles can be cancelled and I have a better feel for the usage on other titles.

ALA... a few good sessions

Well, I'm a little behind on my posts for ALA, but I've been trying to catch up after conference and then the 4th of July. While I'm all into the Web 2.0 applications, I don't really have the opportunity to do much of anything with it. So, while a lot of folks had a lot to choose from, honestly, I struggled to find a couple of sessions that apply to what I do... electronic resources and collection development, heavy on the collection development.

I did find two really good sessions, though. The first session I attended was "We have the data, now what? Putting your collection assessment to work." It was a panel disscussion sponsored by RUSA. Since I had just finished evaluating the effectiveness of our collection development efforts for the previous fiscal year, I was interested to see what this session would offer up. The first speaker was Shirley Baker, Director of Washington University (St. Louis) Library. The really interesting thing I took from her session was the use of what is being digitized by the Google Nine (it was Five when she did it) to help weed your collection, either for permanent removal or removal to off-site storage. Like everyone else, I keep hearing about who's joined the Google digitization effort, but here's a library actually putting that product to their use. These are public domain titles prior to 1923. With the increase in copyright to 75 years, it will be harder and harder to do this, but pre-1923 can be a pretty big chunk for a lot of libraries. Naturally, they used WorldCat Collection Analysis for their comparisons. Now, I don't really care for WCCA (see previous postings), but his was a pretty cool use of a pre-defined group in WCCA.

The second presenter was Karen Neurohr, Assessment Librarian at Oklahoma State University. She did a measurement space study, then actively used what was available electronically in JSTOR to determine what journals could be moved off-site. The third presenter was Betty Gailbraith of Washington State University. They are using journal statistics to make collection development decisions. It sounds basic, but they are incorporating using statistics not generally used - titles cited by faculty and titles that faculty publish in, how did faculty use the title (online or in the library), and is it a core title. Having something in numerical format also helps faculty understand decisions.

Now, in retrospect, the second and third presenters didn't really come up with anything new, but in my previous position, it wasn't something I thought of when determining a game plan for our weeding project. Admittedly, I was working with monographs, but now I wonder what criteria was being used for journals. We moved a set of journals off-site thinking they would never be used only to find out that the Theatre Arts department used the ads in back issues to help with costumes. We wound up bring them back to the library.

The second session I attended was Technical Services 2.0 (guess I did get a 2.0 session in). It was presented by the ALCTS Technology Committee and was also a panel presentation. Matt Barnes pretty much gave an general overview of Web 2.0. Beth P. Camden spoke about Penn Taggs, which is a social bookmarking system for University of Pennsylvania library resources. In addition to uses for the students, library staff have used it to train new staff members. I'm completely fascinated by the use of social bookmarking in the academic setting, so I particularly enjoyed seeing a model in action. Elizabeth Winters spoke about Georgia Tech's use of Web 2.0 technology within the department. They use Wikis's for sharing processes and managing serials, Google applications (spreadsheets) for sharing documents, and instant messaging (IM) for internal communication. In my previous job, we had no share drive. After hearing about their use of Google apps, I had a "duh" moment and wondered why I didn't think about it. I'm a total believer that IM is not only good for reference but for internal communication as well - cut down on some of those e-mails. I first learned to use IM not for personal reason, but in a job setting. I worked for a software company doing in-depth customer support as part of a larger team. None of us where in the same office; in fact we ranged from East to West Coast, literally. We used IM to communicate with other members of the team; we all had "specializations" and it was generally more efficient to pop off a quick IM than to talk on the phone. Later the company purchased an IM system and went company wide with it.

All in all, I enjoyed both sessions and came away with something new.

I was a little disappointed in the vendor fair. It didn't seem to be as alive as it was in New Orleans. Some of the vendors evened seemed like they would rather have been somewhere else. Having said that, I did speak with those I wanted to and got to do a little exploring.

Collection Development effectiveness...

A couple of weeks ago, we (the librarians in my department) were tasked with running reports that would show how many books we ordered in the previous fiscal year, the lag time till checkout, the number of times the title circulated, and the number of times the title was placed on reserve. Then, we were told to go figure usage statistices. We weren't given any specifics, just to go figure what we thought was reasonable and bring it to the librarian's meeting in two weeks.
I love Excel and am fascinated with statistics. So, another librarian and I sat down and did some quick stats. What we chose to look at were the the total items circulated, total circulations, average lag time for an item to circulate, percent of items ordered that circulated, and the number/percent of items that circulated in 30, 90, 120 and more than 120 days. We also looked at the number of video recordings that were ordered and that circulated (number and percentage). For music, we also looked at the number of sound recordings that were ordered and circulated. The numbers were looked at by department and for the last fiscal year.

The results were interesting. In all cases, the circulation numbers were higher than the the total of the items circulated. What this told us was that while a certain percentage circulates (average was about 30% of items ordered circulated), those items generally circulated more than once. In some departments, 50% of the items that circulated circulated more than once. And where videos were ordered, in most cases a high percentage of the videos circulated; 100% circulation in some cases and in one case 0% of the videos ordered circulated. Our highest three departments circulated 67% and 61% of the ordered items. Our lowest circulation for a department was 11%. Overall, 35.41% of what was ordered circulated; 25 out of 42 departments circulated more than 30% of items ordered, three departments circulated more than 50% of ordered items. The average lag time for an item to circulate is about five months. 58.07% of circulated items circulated in 120 days or less. 51.78% of videos ordered circulated - videos accounted for 1.39% of materials ordered, but 2.03% of materials circulated.

I am fascinated by these results and a little heartened. I had stepped up the number of vidoes and multi-media for some of the collections I develop. The numbers show me that the videos that have been ordered in the past are circulating, so ordering more is probably a good thing. What I'm not sure of is if these numbers are good. I did pull the ACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education (2004). At a glance they don't give any numbers for circulation, but rather suggest looking at "Ratio of circulation (excluding reserve) to combined student and faculty FTE," and "Ratio of volumes added per year to combined student and faculty FTE." Again, nothing is given as to what would consitute a good number here, but at least it's a guideline. Unfortunately, I don't have the faculty and student numbers for last year, but I'm thinking that it wouldn't be bad to see how those ratios look against what we've already done.

Another world of Librarianship

Within the past three months, I have entered the world of State Librarianship. Prior to my current position, I was vastly unfamiliar with what the State Library actually might do within a state.

Our State Library encompasses:

• Federal grant funding for Systems (regional service centers) and Libraries directly
• Talking Book Program
• State-wide access to subscription databases and resource sharing initiatives
  
• State Archives, Genealogy Room, Reference Services, Library Science Collection
• Consulting and Continuing Education on all topics related to Librarianship

Tools for moving...

As a fairly recent MLS graduate and having also moved for both of my professional positions, I'm not only familiar with the job search, but also with gathering information on potential cities. I don't like to apply for positions unless I'm fairly certain it's a place I'm willing to relocate to. Thanks to a blog I frequently read, I've discovered a new resource to help with moving, neighboroo. It's a very cool site, providing information on housing, demographics, cost of living, schools, safety, health, climate and a couple of other statistics in a map format. And, you can get the information down to the zip code level. I checked out my current zip (having just moved here) and found the information interesting. So, check it out if you get a chance.

A couple of other sites that I like are: epodunk.com for city information, Find Your Spot, provides really nice city profiles and recommended cities based on a profile you complete, and the Move Salary Calculator, for finding out just how far your salary will go in potential future city.

Do you know your Mission?

As mentioned previously, I started a new position in January. This week I had my new job "orientation." Naturally, I did the univeristy's orientation shortly after I started. My current library also has a new employee orientation. Sounds hokey and in a way, it is. On the other hand, it was good. Basically, it's spread over 2 days for about 2 1/2 hours each day. The first day, the Dean and Assc Director meet with us and give basic information. We also hear from the Staff Assocation (this library has about 120 employees) and visit the other libraries (Science & Engineering and Architecture & Fine Arts). Day two involves visits to and overviews from each of the different library departments. I had a lot to do, so was I bit stressed about losing a couple hours for a tour of my workplace (especially since on day two when I lost my whole morning just trying to get onto our network due to issues related to the latest storm). However, it was a good thing. I know what departments there are, but it completes the picture to hear from them what they do.

One of the most interesting aspects for me though was on the first day, when the Dean of the Library went over the Library's Mission Statement. I'm pretty sure I saw the Mission Statement for the library I worked at previously, but I can't tell you anything about it. The one here is one sentence. Short and to the point followed by statements for supporting the mission. One of the ways they support the mission is to "hire and develop knowledgable staff." This spoke to me. I'm sure other mission statements do this, but it was cool to see staff development as a way to support the mission. It seems basic, but I think a lot of places tend to overlook this. You can offer everything under the sun, but if the staff can't support it or isn't knowledgable about it, what good is it?

The Mission Statement naturally led to the Values Statement. Again, one item stood out. "Respect - an understanding and appreciation of the individual skills, abilities, opinions, and diversity of our users and staff." Too often, respect is no where to be found. I once had someone say to me "she'll just have to do it the new way" in regards to someone I supervised and our transition to a new system. My theory about this was whatever works for her. I can't ignore a new system and must use what the university uses (so must she), however, if adapting includes something someone else might not do or might seem odd to someone else, who am I to say she shouldn't as long as the job gets done (and she did it very well). It might not be the way I would do it, but then I'm not the one doing the job. My dad once told me I was washing the dishes wrong. I can't see how one can do that wrong as long as they come out clean, but the big lesson I learned from that was everyone does things differently and no method or way is wrong as long as it accomplishes the job. So, to see "Respect" in a Value Statement really jumped out at me. I've not been here long enough to say "yes, they practice this," but I haven't seen anything that says they don't either.

How much overlap?

I'm currently in the process of reviewing a database and it's usage for renewal while looking at a new product from the same company, and upgrading another database from a different company. Same discipline, but different areas.

The information in the renewing database is specific to a certain group, but I think it is also available in other database's, but the user would have to do a more specific (advanced) search. So, I've looked at several of the other database's we have in this field to see where the overlap might be, while taking into consideration what is offered in other database's we are considering. The questions that are coming to mind: a) how many different ways do you offer the same information (i.e. DataMonitor reports), b) is there a way to define what type of different information or feature would justify the overlap, and c) what criteria should we use to determine what we can drop, taking into account we might lose features and or information, or d) should we not lose anything and go with the overlap?

At previous job, we used Serials Solutions, thus I had access to their wonderful Overlap Analysis tool. Alas, not so here. So, now I'm stuck with the question of the best way to compare overlap of one of the databases under consideration with two other databases, which we subscribe to, offering the same type of information. This time, the database is rather specialized, so it may not be as much of an issue, but what about the next time? After using SS, I really hate think that I might have to go in and (gasp) manually compare the full-text holdings for each database. Gads. It just seems so archaic to me. But, we do what we gotta do and I just may have to.

When simple might be too simple...

My library is in the process of redesigning the search interface for the OPAC. This is a process done by committee and was started long before I got here. They've rolled it out via a Preview button right now and have put methods there for feedback. Naturally, I'm giving it a test.

Currently, I use the OPAC rather than the ILS client to search for titles currently held (title searching), authors (author browsing), and to see what we have in various subject areas (subject browsing). What is currently being re-done, with Google-like visions, is the Simple Search. Sadly, this is where the current browse feature resides. The new simple search will be one search option only (Catalog Search) and that is over the entire record. Advanced search is still there, but it does not have the option to browse. So, when the OPAC is rolled out (unless they change it based on feedback and I did give feedback), users will no longer have the ability to browse subjects or authors.

I was aghast. It's second nature to me to subject browse and always has been, even before I became a librarian. Maybe it's because I learned to do research with a card catalog and print indexes. These force you to think in terms of subject. When I worked the reference desk and a student wanted information on a particular subject, I showed them how to do a subject search and most were quite pleased when they learned they could could search this way.

Bananas is a search I recently did, but I was looking for titles related to the banana trade, marketing, economic factors, etc. A search in the "Simple Search" box for bananas, netted 40 hits. Not overwhelming. Near the top of the list is Language, bananas and bonobos : linguistic problems, puzzles and polemics by Neil Smith; the only assigned subject is Linguistics. Bananas is simply in the title. Another match midway down the list is Walking after midnight : one woman’s journey through murder, justice & forgiveness by Katy Hutchison; it has a chapter titled "Yes, we have no bananas." I think few students are going to want to cull through 40 matches, but that is better than the several hundred which a Simple Search for Latino Culture brings up.

Advanced Search allows for searching within the subject field which gives much better results, but by title. To actually browse by subject, the user must select a matching title, then expand to the full record, then click on the Subject heading that matches what they are searching for. It takes about three clicks to get to where you can actually browse and then there is no Search box to refine or further browse; you have to either go with "previous" or "next" buttons to browse the subjects. I find myself adapting and the user probably will too, but I still think the ability to browse subjects and authors should be there.

I understand the desire to simplify. However, I think sometimes we underestimate the users and eliminate functionality that some use or would use if taught. I hear librarians say "but, they don't use it." Then, teach them.

How many users?

At current work place, we're running quite a few database trials right now. So, this morning I was checking some of them out and giving feedback. One of them is a spiffy little database - Literary Reference Center by Ebsco. I also ran a trial at previous work place. That previous trial is what made me begin to seriously look at the number of users when licensing a database. This database does not solely license unlimited users. You start with one user and work your way up from there. My first thought, was gosh, good price, but only one user?

Then I really thought about it. I would be replacing print editions of criticisms with the database. With a print edition, only one person can use it a time and if it has been used and is laying on a table somewhere waiting to be shelved, then the next user does not have ready access. So, I'm not losing anything, except the amount of money I'm paying. I did the math, the print costs for the titles the database would replace were more than the cost of the database itself. And, the database doesn't require shelf room. Plus, you have the added functionality of being able to search across all reference volumes, articles, criticisms; you get author biographies, books are assigned categories; and it's accessible 24x7 from anywhere. So, only one person can access it a time, but now we have increased accessiblity.

After thinking about this and realizing that realistically, I'd probably want 2-4 user seats, I also realized that based on the type of resource and who would be using it, unlimited usage was really not required. And, given my limited budget, that was a liberating realization. Some standard databases do need unlimited access, Ebsco Academic Search Elite/Premier or ProQuest Research Library, for instance. However, look at the subject areas they cover and the fact that all students, undergraduate and graduate, as well as faculty will use it. Literary Reference Center is a very nice database, but it's usuage is most likely limited to undergraduate students in lower level writing and English courses. It is is not a resource for the graduate or faculty researcher.

Here we're actually taking a hard look at the number of users for a database we already have, which has about four users. We looked at the past year. Some months we had turnaways in the hundreds, but other months we had just two turnaways, other months, there were no turnways, and for a couple of months there was no usage. What we're looking into are the instructional sessions. Are these tying into the high number of turnaways? If so, perhaps, the sessions could be adapted away from "hands on" with the knowledge that a) not everyone will be able to get on (or put them in groups to match the number of logins), and b) when the time comes for the students to do research, odds are they'll be able to get it. If the turnaways are occuring due to the training sessions, then the turnaway numbers aren't really an accurate picture of the number of users we need for the database.

End result: now I approach database licensing and number of users differently. If the "default" is unlimited users, good. If not, then I look more closely at the resource, but I also take a hard look at who my user population will be. Odds are having less than five users will be sufficient. And, if it's not, then we can always evaluate the usage and increase the license if needed.

A brand new world...

It's been a little while since my last post. Mostly this is because this April finds me in a new job. Having had a number of personal changes in my life, I sought a new start. Many things helped me to find my current position - and thus the topic of this entry.

Networking, networking, networking!
I put the word out to every possible librarian that I knew that I was looking for a new opportunity. I attended trainings, conferences, workshops, and got involved. The key thing to this I see is not stopping those activities now that I'm settled. In order to retain one's network it is mandatory that it be a way of life, not just something you use when you need something.

Mentors
I had developed some mentors along my path. People that although they may be sad to see me move on were still encouraging me every step of the way. My two cents on finding one is to see who's in your environment, your sphere of influence that you respect and admire. Do not be held back by thinking they may be too busy or too important to spend time with you. What I found was that these were exactly the people MOST willing to be a mentor.

Job Buddy
I had a couple of friends/colleagues that I was able to continually talk with about the job hunt. They were the people that encouraged me when potential employers were taking forever to respond. They were the ones that helped remind me WHY it was I was going through this job change. Finally, they were the ones that helped me evaluate not only my own resume, but also the job postings that sounded most interesting.

I wish you luck on your next job hunt! Feel free to contact me if you need that extra boost to get started or keep going!

My first Curriculum Committee meeting

Yesterday afternoon I attended my first Undergraduate Curricula Committee Meeting. Normally, my manager sits in on this committee, but she's on vacation, so I got to go. I was a little lost at first, but it was interesting. Apparently, there have been a lot of changes this year, so this was an additional meeting for the semeseter. Many of the changes were changes in prerequistes, but there were new classes (adds) and courses that were dropped (deleted). Interestingly (to me anyway) some of the changes were to the programs themselves and many were to drop the required degree hours down to around 120, with the exception of one degree which actually took the required hours to 133. Naturally, many of the changes were to meet accreditation standards and must go through the state board of education.

Information about adds and changes in degrees is passed on to the librarian responsible for collection development for that area. This is good as it helps to determine what areas to order in, especially in light of new classes. Naturally, when degrees are added we are a part of the process.

So, you might wonder why this is intriguing to me. At my former library, a representative from the library was not on either of the curriculum committees, undergraduate or graduate (even in a non-voting capacity as we are here). Since the faculty did most of the ordering, in theory this shouldn't have been a problem. However, as I pointed out in a previous post, faculty tend to order for their research needs at times and not necessarily in support of the programs being taught. The result is that the library may not have materials needed to support a class.

We had always believed the library should be included on these committees and after attending this meeting, I'm sure of it. No, we don't need to vote, but if the school is going to support the classes, then the library needs to have materials available. No, not all classes will require library support, but many will. By participating on the committee the library is aware of what the departments are teaching and no extra step is needed to bring the library into the loop.

Approval plans and subject areas...

I'm now about three months into the new job and merrily selecting for my subject area - business. We use approval plans and slip plans for selecting. These are broken up into the following areas: Management, Marketing, Economics, Finance, and Accounting. Needless to say, some areas publish more than others. Also, some are more dependent on the library than others.

Each week I get an electronic slip list, which I go through. What has amazed me it what the jobber puts in certain categories. For example, all career guidance manuals, materials, etc. are in Accounting. So, Careers in Psychology shows up on the approval plan under Accounting. I admit, that one puzzles. But, because accounting doesn't publish that much, I'm rolling with the flow on that. For now. At some point, I may ask why the career manuals are under accounting. Then, there's just the plain odd stuff. And, I wonder if I'm the only one here (we have five Collection Development librarians working with different areas) receiving certain titles. Currently, I'm reviewing a title that I received a slip for that is given the subject area of "Home Economics" by the jobber, is on my Management slip list, and "chronicles a highly personal journey, with plenty of loafing stops along the way, through the hills and hollows of Southern Appalachia, in search of the tastes that define and sustain the region's people." Now, admittedly, I could be missing something, but to me it doesn't fit in any of the subject areas I cover.

Then, almost everything legal, falls under the Marketing profile. Again, some of it I can see, business law for example, but a lot of it is just plain legal with no relation to Marketing. Fortunately, the majority of it comes in slips so I can pick and choose. It just adds a bit of work to review a title that really has nothing to do with the subject.

The jobber doesn't always have a description and/or table of contents for the work. So, I find myself usually checking Global Books In Print for descriptions, which they generally have as well as fairly descriptive subject descriptions. But, if you check several sources - a couple of jobbers, GBIP, and Worldcat among others - nine times out of ten you will get different subject areas from all of them. The above title mentioned gets a subject of Cookery & Cooking/General from GBIP, Cooking from jobber number 2, and Cookery/American, Cookery/Applachian Region, Southern from WorldCat. Generally, it's the jobber that my approval plan is set up with that gets a somewhat goofy subject area. The more I do this, the more I'm intruigued with the different subject areas assigned by the different sources. I'm not alone. I've heard some of the other librarians puzzle over subjects that show up on their approval list as well.

In the end, I'm not sure it really matters. If the book doesn't fit my subject area, I don't order it. Hopefully, I'm not missing any titles this way either.

I've been cited...

Occassionally, I Google myself. I have a unique name (I'd even venture to say I'm the only person with my name), so it's easy to do. That in and of itself is good and bad, but that's another post. At any rate, if there are web hits, it's most likely me. What I discovered this go around, was that an article I wrote in 2005 was cited in a library school student's paper. That's kind of cool. And, odd. My article was listed in the List of References, but I couldn't find where I was cited anywhere in the paper. Now, when I wrote papers, I did not list sources in my bibliography unless I used information from them and if I did I cited them in text as well.

The other down side. The column editor was given co-author status in the citation. I find this a little unnerving. She asked me to write the article and turned it in. She contributed nothing to the actual article, yet anyone looking at the citation will assume she contributed at least half of the article. Sigh.

All in all though, it's pretty cool to have an article cited by someone else. It just goes to show that regardless of what you think when you submit an article (I thought no one outside the state of Arkansas would read it), once it's indexed in a database, others will read it.

And, in an interesting side note, I found what appeared to be a reference to another article I wrote on Monster.com of all things. However, when I went to see how it was cited, the link is no longer good. That just gets my curiosity going. And, again shows that you never know how a published article will be referenced or by whom.

HTML vs an editor

American Libraries Direct (February 28 issue) linked to a posting on TechEssence.info blog titled "CMSes, WYSIWYG -- why learn HTML?" The question is with editors like FrontPage and DreamWeaver why do you need to know HTML? I didn't learn to do HTML until I took a graduate class on web design as part of the program for my MLS. My instructor was of the opinion that you learn to code it, then you can use an editor. His reasoning was more than sound - if you can code it, then you can look at someone else's (or something else's) code to identify where problems are coming from. He also contended that if you code it yourself, it keeps the coding cleaner, making it easier for others to know what you have done. So, I learned HTML, some Java script, and some ASP.

Shortly after starting my first professional librarian position, I wound up re-designing my library's website. I tried using the university's template, but without their style sheet it wasn't feasible. So, I took our new design and I coded it out. In HTML. Using a simple text editor (a step up from Notepad). It won't win awards, but it was a definite improvement over the six year-old design of the existing website. I used cascading style sheets and a tad of ASP.

After I'd been doing it awhile, I was given MS Frontpage. Then I knew what my instructor was talking about. I simply used this as an enhanced editor. And, it did forms nicely. But, if you tried to use the visual interface, the coding was worse than messy. And, it can take what you've done and basically throw it out the window. I also looked at the process for cascading style sheets in FrontPage. I decided I was better off doing it myself. I learned quickly why I was taught to code it and why coding it is still probably the best way to go.

Here's a link to the blog posting: http://techessence.info/node/84

Do meetings stifle creativity?

I just read two articles, linked below, that suggest that creativity plummets when in a group setting. I have to agree with this, mostly. I think there are times when group meetings are good and generate synergy. I also think there are times when maybe the wrong people are in the group, which may lead to good ideas being ignored or never voiced. Something to think about.

Meetings make you stupid on Yahoo! Tech

and

Meetings make us dumber, study shows on MSNBC.com

Being a team member....

Two positions have recently been posted at my former place of employment, including the one I vacated.

First, I'd like to say that I truly enjoyed working there. I liked the job and the people. I moved for a promotion and to return "home."

Having said that, the job description includes the following statement:
The successful candidate will be someone who is open minded, has a flexible personality, strong social skills, the ability to function as a team member, and a dedication to the profession of academic librarianship.

I dare you to address that in your cover letter and/or resume. I've seen some vague statements on job ads, but this really jumped out at me. I'm not going to talk about open minded, flexible personality, or social skills, as everyone's definition of that will vary. I am going to talk about the ability to function as a team member, i.e. being a team player. The reason - I'm not to sure my definition matches theirs.

It is an awesome place to work, but as with any organization, it does have it's short comings. I've always believed in pitching in and helping, especially after working in a brand new library in a recently opened career college - I did more than my share of non-librarian duties. However, at former workplace, this isn't necessarily the case. As an example, reference librarians release print jobs among other things. "Where's the bathroom" may be the bane of a public library reference librarian, but at former workplace it was "I don't have my id and I need to print." So, if the students didn't have their id, we had to release the prints for them. This required walking to the printer and swiping a card. No kidding. Well, there is only one reference librarian on at a time and some students do actually have real reference questions. During peak times, the line could get long, with a good number of those waiting simply wanting their print jobs released. Circulation and reference face each other. Hard not to know when the reference librarian is handling a boatload of students. However, should a student ask at the circ desk for a print job to be released, they would send them to the reference desk, regardless of the length of the line (not a problem if I'm not helping others or it's a slow day). I personally helped each person in order of appearance at the desk, so if you had to wait for a print job while I helped a student locate a resource, so be it. The circ personnel had a print card, but they rarely popped over to help us out. You see, it wasn't their job. On average, there are three people at the circulation desk to one reference librarian, but it wasn't their job, so they sat there and continued to send people over to the reference desk. If you absolutely were drowning, you called another reference librarian. The librarian over that department once said it wasn't beneath her to release print jobs. I'd have to agree; it isn't beneath me either. However, apparently it was beneath the circulation personnel. I could go on, but hopefully you get the point.

A couple of other things: it's a small library. And, I am defining team in this case as the whole library. In larger libraries, it may not be feasible, but this library only has about 14 librarians, including the director and two coordinators. And, obviously two of those positions are vacant.

Being a team player is pitching in and helping out when it isn't your job. Going in and just doing your job doesn't make you a team player. Or at least not a top notch team player.

New job learning curves....

As mentioned in an earlier post, in January I moved to accept a new job. The new job is in the state I lived in prior to accepting my first full-time librarian position, so the area is familiar and comfy. As in a previous career, job changes are kind of wonky. You know how to do the job, but you have to learn the "way" your new organization does it. And, in my case, it's hard not to compare the two. I'm learning to take on functions in different ways and to let go of things I did in my previous job (and enjoyed) while acknowledging that it is somebody else's job here. A key difference for me is the new position is in a much larger library. So, more departments and more distinction between groups and the role they play in the overall scheme of the everyday running of the library.

One of the biggest differences is in the collection development aspect itself. Here the librarians do the selection. Faculty requests are almost always purchased, but the main selecting of materials is done by the librarians - both by "manual" selections and with approval plans. Some will nod their heads and say "yeah, isn't that how it's done?" In my previous position, the majority of the materials budget was given to the departments, thus the majority of the collection development was done by the faculty. We weren't alone in this approach. Some say they are in a better position to choose. Recieve a couple of list from Amazon's Listmania and you'll start to wonder about that. Another downside is some faculty will select based on their research interests and not necessarily to support the courses being taught. I had come to the conclusion that, at a minimum, a combination of the two approaches should be used. So, I'm looking forward to doing the process from the other side.

At your service....

The below articles reference the growing trend for government agencies to place forms online only and then send the users of their services to the library to access and recieve help with these forms. I haven't worked in a public library, just academic, but this came as no surprise to me. The forms may be different, but in many ways, academic libraries fill these roles for their students.

In my time at the reference desk, especially at the beginning of the semester and in the summer, we frequently had students coming in to complete financial loan paperwork and other student aid paperwork. Many with slips of paper with the wrong information - bad URL, erroneous password, a step left out, etc. We also helped students enroll in classes - it's all online now and many don't have computers. And, I've helped a few get in and do their taxes online.

The good was that our computers were newer (upgraded about a year ago and about 20 were added), the bad is the same as for the public libraries. Lack of training or just no information about what's going on and who's going to be coming over. I'm happy to help, but that help would be better if I know they're coming.

Drafted: I Want You to Deliver E-Government in Library Journal (August 15, 2006)
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6359866.html

Librarians expected to become our e-government service in The Florida Times-Union (January 31, 2007):
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/013107/nen_7610167.shtml

Electronic Resource - Gartner

In fall of 2004, we at the library were approached to participate in bring the electronic resources of the Gartner Group to campus. An agreement of understanding was drawn up between the Business School, Information Science, CyberCollege, Computing Services, and the Library. Each of the units would contribute significantly to the price tag while the library would take on the administration and maintenance of the contract and resource.

In spring of 2005, the proposal to purchase the resource went the the legislature. -- Yes, in Arkansas, any purchase over $20,000 has to be approved directly by the legislature. -- Members of the agreement of understanding went to the floor of the state congress and obtained the approval to sign the two-year contract.

At our price point, we received the following with our contract - 2 seats at a Gartner conference, Research Analyst assistance, unlimited access for the campus to their online resources, and a monthly audio newsletter for the collection. The library commenced to setup the requisite PGP authentication required by Gartner as well as logging. Access was provided to the campus through validation with their network login and password - thus allowing access to all university affiliated patrons no matter their location. Once established, a couple of the core participants started to use the resources as an integral part of their instruction.

During the course of the first year, the Computing Services department experienced some issues with the Research Analyst assistance. While working on a portal implementation project amongst many others, they ran into roadblocks in how to most effectively use this service. What they had been hoping for was that anyone from the Computing Service department would be allowed to call and use this service to aid in the research behind starting a new project. What they experienced was a need for the actual seat holder - in this case the CIO - to be present on each phone call that was being made. In addition, the assistance that was received was limited to 30 minute sessions and ended in the university staff member simply being pointed to appropriate online resources, not being given a consolidation or analysis of what the literature said.

When the renewal for year two approached, Computing Services began to mention that they would not be renewing the contract. At this point, the library started working with the other players to see where they stood on the resource. The two academic units that had integrated the resource into their curriculum were very strong for renewing the contract. The third unit found itself in a budgetary quandary and would not be able to continue its support. Between it and Computing Services, this left a shortfall of roughly $14,000.

We worked with Gartner to see what other service levels might be available to continue its presence. What we learned was that the unlimited access to the electronic resource was a benefit of the Advisor/Analyst seats and therefore could not be purchased separately. After a careful analysis of the usage logs and the library's budget, we were able to increase our portion to cover half of the difference. Unfortunately, this was not enough to save the product on our campus.

The electronic resources were wonderful for our academic units and we have been quite dismayed to have to release them. In a time where most libraries are clamoring for vendors to package more of their services to keep from the constant stream of "add-ons", we hope that in the future Gartner will find a method to provide this access separate from the overhead of the rest of their services.

Chat .... as a work tool

I was the editor of my state library association journal and recently moved to another state. Not all that bad except as the editor I did the layout and sent to the printer, etc. Problem - the software belonged to the association not to me and I was moving! I couldn't take it with me. Tine to the rescue - she volunteered to lay it out for me. I couldn't have been more grateful. With the exception of one meeting before I actually left town (at a Pizza Inn, no less) we've collaborated on this issue using Yahoo! IM and e-mail. Yes, we've done it virtually and have what I think is a pretty good product to boot. I've coordinated many items with the Associate Editor via e-mail, but I believe chat improved this a great deal, including walking me through changing the page numbers, as it is "real time." There is no delay. And, in many ways it's better than the phone, because conversations usually remain on "target." Not to mention the multi-tasking that can be done while chatting.

We wound up using different software, Microsoft Publisher, rather than Adobe InDesign, but in the end it worked out. I actually have Publisher at my new job, which made it possible for me to do some of the edits. Publisher has presented a couple of challenges with the printer, but we're on the downswing now. The important thing was getting it laid out and ready for the printer. Tine and I have always done professional collaboration using chat, but I'm a little impressed that we managed to put together an issue of a state library journal virtually.

Academic Library Makeover - Part 2

Volunteers were solicited for participation on the Mission and Vision team. This group spent some time this fall semester synthesizing and refining the work that was started in the one day retreat in August. At each revision the drafts were reviewed by not only the Dean and the Provost but also our retreat leader. (Our end product can be found at: http://library.ualr.edu/whatsnew/missionvision.htm.)

Once a consistent message was crafted, the Dean took us on our next level of organization building - Goals and Objectives. The nine vision points were consolidated into six major themes - Assessment, Collections & Access, Collaboration & Outreach, Excellence through Staff Development, Physical Environment, and Fundraising. Six work groups were established with volunteer participation to develop one goal and three to five objectives to be attained in the next one to three years.

Each work group met and strived to stay focused on the goal and objective level of the assignment. It was obvious how passionate some participants were for their theme as they seemed to jump right into troubleshooting/task mode. Some groups, including ours, had to continually remember that we were not at the "tasks or strategies" level. In the end, each group was successful and submitted their completed pieces of the plan.

The Mission and Vision team was reconstituted as the Goals and Objectives team (GOT) to pull a cohesive document together. This document was then again submitted to the Dean, Provost, and retreat leader. Our Provost offered several suggestions which were easily incorporated and one that took some detailed effort. This one observation was to the whole document being too inward focused. The GOT chair was charged with further refining the document with special attention for connecting the Library's Strategic Plan directly to the University's Strategic Plan.

At the chair's request, I was involved in this process. We sat with the document and made two major enhancements - links to the University Strategic Plan at both the theme and goal levels AND adjusting goals to directly address students, faculty, and staff where possible. With these adjustments in place, the Dean approved the GOT's presentation of the plan to the Dean's Council meeting in December 2006. (Feel free to email for copies of resulting document or presentation.)

Our next steps are to form new task forces to develop strategies, prioritize those tasks, and begin our work with a new purpose.

Another First - ALA Midwinter

I was fortunate enough to attend ALA Midwinter this year. In my 13 years in the profession, this was the first time I had attended. Normally, I have participated on a local level and have been recently encouraged to broaden my scope.

For those that do not know, ALA Midwinter is the place where much of the "business" of the organization takes place. Meetings are held for just about every entity related to ALA. I found it quite difficult to decide which meetings should take priority as I was new to ALA, ACRL, LAMA, and LITA all at the same time.

In the end, I found myself attending few actual meetings and spending the bulk of my time in the exhibit hall. The IT girl in me marvelled at a first hand view of ContentDM, investigating RFID options for our Media Center, and setting up trials for Central Search (SerialsSolutions) and WebFeat for testing in our upcoming book project.

Those meetings I did end up attending were Heads of Library Information Technology (LITA), Hot Topics (ACRL/CJCLS), and a new Taskforce on Recruitment and Retention of New Library Professionals from the incoming ACRL President, Julie Todaro.

• The Heads of Library Information Technology meeting addressed budgeting, organizational structure, and collaborative opportunities. They are currently looking for a Vice-Chair, which I said I would consider.
  

• The Hot Topics meeting focused on Distance Education Collection Development needs and challenges - eBooks, pay-per-use plan for NetLibrary, media at a distance, a need for vocational collections, and inserting library instruction throughout the curriculum.

• Finally, I was invited to participate in the incoming ACRL president's new Taskforce to increase recruitment into the profession and retain newer librarians. A broad cross-section of ALA's Emerging Leaders, those who've been in the profession a while, and others interested in succession planning were brought together for this discussion. As a goal, the discussion will spawn Focus Groups to be conducted at ACRL, ALA Annual 2007, and ALA Midwinter 2008.