ALA/ACRL ARTS Section Membership Meeting
Annual Conference Orlando
Executive Committee & General Membership Meeting Minutes
Sunday, June 27, 2004
(Approved January 16, 2005, Midwinter Boston)
Vice-Chair Sandy Mooney called the Executive Committee and General Membership Meeting to order at 9:50 a.m., Chair Ed Teague joined the meeting shortly thereafter.
Mooney polled those present regarding interest in a Dutch treat lunch following the Executive Committee & General Membership Meeting, which had been a traditional at Annual Conference that had lapsed in recent years. Past-Chair Ann Lindell offered the suggestion for future conferences of a happy hour event, perhaps on the Friday evening of Conference, or a breakfast on Sunday before the EC&G meeting at future conferences. One issue with the traditional Sunday Dutch treat lunch, and possibly the reason for the lapse in recent years, is that of scheduling – making afternoon meetings can then be difficult. Mooney will consider options for Annual ’05 in Chicago.
Once general introductions were completed, general announcements occurred:
Everyone was reminded of the Dance Librarians Discussion Group meeting on Monday morning.
Susan Allen from the ACRL Board (who was attending in place of regular board representative Rita Jones) shared news from ACRL. At Saturday’s board meeting, ACRL approved the new strategic plan. During 2004-05 the Board will be working on an implementation plan. The Board has defined the core purpose for the next thirty years with three strategic areas: higher education and research, the profession, the association. ACRL sections are expected to focus their work on these three areas.
Allen also reported on recent discussions about membership dues for the division. ACRL divisional dues have not changed in ten years ($35.00), yet the cost of membership services has “esculated”. At Midwinter, the Board named a task force to study a dues increase and the task force has brought back to the Board two proposals, which will be discussed for a decision at Tuesday’s board meeting: Option I – increase regular division dues to $50.00, student/affiliates to $35.00 (would include those retired, non-salaried, and non-librarians as defined as those without the ALA-accredited MLS). Option II – base membership dues on salary ranges, such as a) below $35,000 = $35.00, b) $35,000-$70,000 = $50.00, c) above $70,000 = $65.00. There was concern from Arts members on the validity and feasibility of Option II. It was stated that the Arts Library Society of North America found it could not institute a dues structure based on salary ranges due to privacy issues, though it was pointed out by other Arts members that privacy was only an issue in this instance if verification of salary were required. Allen did state that the ACRL task force had consulted other professional organizations during its work. A few further questions/suggestions were posed to Allen for the Board: What would be the feasibility of allowing members the option of not receiving C&RL and C&RL News as part of their membership? Would this help in any way with the revenue stream? Eric Kidwell pointed out that the librarians at his library have access to multiple copies of each issue of the ACRL (and ALA) main publications because not only does each librarian who is an ALA/ACRL member receive his or her personal copy, but the library receives copies as an institutional ALA/ACRL member. There is considerable waste in duplication. Roland Hansen asked Allen if the change in dues is a Board decision or a ballot decision. She responded that it would be a ballot decision and the Board wants to see it on the spring ’05 ballot.
Allen next reported on issues from the ACRL Board II meeting, where discussion focused on open access to publications. Should, for example, C&RL be made available as an open access research journal to those outside the profession? One concern is that since the profession advocates open access to research material (opening up scholarly communication), is ACRL’s current practice with its own main research journal an example of not “walking the walk”? There possibly would be the secondary benefit of enhancing the Division’s revenue stream.
At this time, Chair Ed Teague arrived and assumed leadership of the remainder of the meeting.
Chair Teague called for approval of the minutes from the 2004 Midwinter Meeting in San Diego. Minutes were approved as published on the Arts web page and in the print newsletter, with minor editorial changes.
Chair Teague then called for committee and discussion group reports.
Chair Teague first thanked Tom Caswell and his committee for the excellent Arts program Saturday afternoon, “Drawing on Fantasy: Services and Collections for Animation.” Caswell reported that a review of the evaluation forms revealed high marks from attendees.
Sandy Mooney reported for the Conference Program Planning Committee for Annual 2005 in Chicago (members include Roland Hansen, Laurel Bliss and Claudia Covert). The Arts Section has the opportunity to join the African-American Studies Section in co-sponsoring a program in Chicago. The African-American Studies Section is planning a program titled “Chicago Blues: From the Delta to the World” and would like co-sponsorship to assist in finalizing plans. Since this topic is a good fit for the Arts Section, Mooney and the Planning Committee proposed that Arts approve co-sponsorship. The original Arts program for ’05 was to focus on the destruction of Islamic art in the Middle East. The decision to change course and join the African-American Studies program centered on scheduling conflicts and the desire to avoid a situation of competing arts-related programming at Annual, and an opinion that a sizable portion of conference attendees who would normally attend the Arts Section program might find this original topic too “heavy” in light of the current global situation and military-political conflict in the Middle East, and this would overshadow any intellectual interest.
Mooney also shared a financial consideration regarding program planning. ACRL has already received funding proposals for Annual ’05 that exceed the $18,000 budget. Sections are being encouraged to co-sponsor programs. The ACRL Program Budget Committee will meet Monday (June 29) afternoon to conduct a final review of program proposals, so Mooney emphasized the need to make our program planning decision today. The Section’s decision was to co-sponsor with the African-American Studies Section the program on Chicago Blues. Arts member Roland Hansen, who lives in Chicago, volunteered to assist in making contacts for the program. The intent is to include a scholarly component on blues collections, have a representative musician in attendance and a representative from the recording industry. The Music Library Association will be approached about adding its co-sponsorship.
Before moving to the next report, Chair Teague acknowledged Haworth Press for it’s generosity in providing the refreshments for both the Midwinter and Annual Conference Arts meetings the year.
Nancy Friedland reported for the Technology and the Arts Committee. She was happy to report that the committee had a number of new members, thanks to efforts by Vice-Chair Mooney. Friedland acknowledged the unique status of this committee in that it serves as an official Arts committee and also as an interest group in LITA. The committee is focusing on new topics it can address in the coming two years through program planning and documentation. The committee is looking toward contributing to discussions being conducted in a joint effort by Carnegie Mellon and the NYPL on issues of digital technology and dance collections. The Technology and the Arts Committee will be reviewing ArtStor as a model in this area (e.g. pricing, availability, assessment, content); plans this fall to survey members of the Arts Section via the Dance Librarians Discussion Group to gather data regarding collections, use of digital technology and to survey local collections in stand alone digital format; will examine commercial products vs. in-house products and particularly from the issue of user accessibility; will look at the viability of streaming media and applications to dance collections and instruction; and finally, will examine scholarly publishing and multi-media support. Where is arts scholarship heading and what of the multi-media content? The committee expects to review at Midwinter ’05 in Boston the data it collects this fall, and will begin program planning for Annual ’05 scheduled for Chicago.
Roland Hansen reported as chair of the membership committee. Through the end of April of this year the Arts Section had 816 members (compared with 804 last year at this time). The Section continues to have one corporate member, the identity of which continues as a mystery. The committee is addressing its new outreach function by 1) working on writing the new committee charge, 2) working on the print brochure with Ann Lindell, which will be used to recruit and welcome new members and possibly be used with a renewal letter. Hansen reported that the committee is discussing the amount of effort that should be expended on those who have dropped membership. Perhaps electronic notices can be used here. And finally, 3) the committee will be fleshing out its liaison function and will report back to the general membership. Hansen asked if new members are automatically added to the section listserv. Webmaster Caswell responded that no, each member must subscribe.
Ann Lindell, as Past-Chair of the Section, reported for the Nominating Committee. She is still soliciting nominations for the positions of Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect and for Secretary. The former is a three-year commitment (Vice-Chair, Chair, Past-Chair) and the latter is a two-year commitment. Lindell reported that she has one accepted nomination for the Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect office.
The report from the Planning Committee was given by Sara Harrington and focused upon the topic of webcasts. The Committee identified two possible topics of interest to Arts Section members: 1) new technology in the arts, 2) information literacy in the arts. Responding to the question “What collections, projects, processes, principles, etc. should be covered in each of the top priorities?”, as asked on the Webcast Discussion Leader Sheet that Mooney had distributed at Saturday’s All-Committee Meeting, the Planning Committee identified the following:
1) New technology in the arts
a. images on the web and image databases
b. digitization projects across the arts
2) Information literacy in the arts
a. visual orientation of information literacy
b. library instruction
The Committee will e-mail members of the Planning Committee who were unable to attend Saturday’s meeting and solicit further ideas.
Mooney spoke in relation to the Planning Committee that the mission statement of the Arts Section is reported differently in several publications and ACRL has requested that this be corrected. This will be given to the Planning Committee along with the responsibility of looking at the other ACRL sections and reviewing the style of these mission statements and wording of committee charges, to ensure an appropriate level of consistency. Additionally, there is a need to map the activities of Arts against the ACRL mission statement.
This was followed by a discussion on how the name of the section is presented. Apparently, there is a lack of consistency. Is the section “ARTS” or “Arts”. “ARTS” tends to signify an acronym, which isn’t correct for our section. The consensus among those members present was that “Arts” should be the approved form of the Section’s name.
The Publications & Research Committee reported next. Chair Teague thanked Tom Caswell and Shannon Van Kirk for their work this year as webmaster and newsletter editor, respectively. Caswell reported that our section now has an archives of the newsletter and minutes, almost complete, and available on the section web site. The Committee would also like to archive information on past Arts programs and welcomes any help section members can offer in accumulating this information. Van Kirk reported that in its meeting Saturday morning, the Committee discussed its new charge. The most significant change was seen with regard to the oversight of Arts publications projects, something that had not be clearly defined in the old charge. The committee will continue to work on this aspect of its new charge. As for the overall charge as it now stands, the Executive Committee voted its approval.
Liza Vick reported for the Dance Librarian’s Discussion Group and reiterated information on its meeting scheduled for Monday. Though only one other member was present for its Saturday meeting, there was useful discussion of ideas for the 2005 Annual Conference. Possibilities include an off-site event, perhaps to a dance performance or related activity such as the Hubbard Street group. The Group will continue to investigate liaison possibilities with the Theatre Librarians Association, Rob Melton and MLA.
Jane Sloan reported as chair for the Film and Broadcast Studies Discussion Group. At it’s meeting Saturday afternoon, Kris Brancolini and Michelle Dalmau from Indiana University gave a presentation on the nearly completed Online Film Literature Index, an NEH project, which covers the years 1976 – 2001. There are issues still to be discussed and resolved related to the index, such as marketing and updating, since there is expressed need to continuing the print version. There is no agreement at present to continue the project after the 2001 year and for years prior to 1976, the data is on punch cards which haven’t been processed. Sloan emphasized that the print version of this source is the only quality index covering the journal literature in this area of study.
The members of the discussion group next turned their attention to the issue of webcasting, which had been presented to the Section by Vice-Chair Mooney at Saturday’s All-Committee Meeting. The Discussion Group identified a number of questions related to archiving issues, effectiveness, target audience, technical support and funding, and registration fees.
Lastly, the Group discussed its potential web site and asked that the Executive Committee of Arts approve an ad hoc committee to implement a pilot web site project. Sloan read the proposal. Teague as chair of the Arts Section approved the formation of said ad hoc committee with a two-year existence extending through Annual Conference 2006. The Publications & Research Committee can liaison with the new ad hoc committee.
Under Old Business, there was further discussion of the print membership brochure, a draft of which was distributed at yesterday’s meeting. Lindell has received comments. There is funding for this and if more is needed and it cannot be received from ACRL, Lindell proposed using section money. The deadline for funding applications to ACRL is in September. Lindell will contact Mary Jane Petrowski in the ACRL membership office to clarify details regarding submission of receipts for reimbursement and related issues. Regarding the use of section funds, a reminder was offered that the Section still has expenses from yesterday’s program to settle.
Mooney asked that members continue to send her ideas related to ACRL’s webcasting initiative.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 a.m.
Eric A. Kidwell
Secretary, ACRL Arts Section
Present: Susan M. Allen, Laurel Bliss, Tom Caswell, Claudia Covert, Nancy Friedland, Roland C. Hansen, Sara Harrington, Alan Karass, Beth Kerr, Eric A. Kidwell, Sarah Legins, Ann Lindell, Max Marmor, Sandy Mooney, Jennifer Rinalducci, Ed Rock, Jane Sloan, Ed Teague, Susan Tejada, Shannon Van Kirk, Liza Vick