Volunteer Reporters Cover ALCTS Programs In Toronto

ALCTS members attending ALA Annual Conference 2003 provided these summary reports. We thank the volunteers who covered a program or preconference sponsored by ALCTS or one of its units, so that the rest of us can benefit from the presentations. We regret that we had no volunteers for two additional programs.

Preconferences

Programs

Business of Acquisitions - Working Together To Get It Done: Acquisitions Librarians As Collaborators

Ann S. Doyle, University of Kentucky

This Business of Acquisitions (BOA) preconference may have had a relatively small attendance this year, but the intimate atmosphere contributed to a feeling of collaboration among the 40 of those present. Opening and closing keynote speakers added additional structure to the already well-organized program. The event, presented by the Acquisition Section's Education Committee, received generous sponsorship from TLC The Library Corporation (principal sponsor), and Casalini Libri, Midwest Library Services, and Majors Scientific Books.

Joyce Ogburn (Associate Director of the Libraries for Resources and Collection Management Services at the University of Washington), the opening keynote speaker, applied recent leadership theory to library acquisitions. Stressing the importance of learning and understanding the values of others, Ogburn also underlined the importance of creating and achieving organizational vision by planning and leading change. Types of change range from adjustments to transformative. Ogburn then went on to describe why acquisitions needs transforming, including complexity of the work, automation of the work, the fusing of content and delivery, and changes afoot in scholarly communication and publishing in general. Acquisitions librarians can respond to change by learning the how their local "system" (formal administrative structure and informal power structure) works and working that system effectively.

For the rest of the morning, the program offered three repeating breakout sessions:

  • "Collaboration with Vendors," Julia Gammon (University of Akron) and Michael Zeoli (YBP);
  • "Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting Acquisitions Data," (or "Demystifying the Budgetary Process - a case study") Jim Mouw (University of Chicago);
  • "Redesigning Workflows for Innovation," Jack Montgomery (Western Kentucky University).

After lunch, those attending could choose from five discussion groups:

  • "Core Competencies for Acquisitions Librarians," Patrick Steele (Cuyahoga County Public Library), combined with "Acquisition Department Staff as Collaborators," Rhonda Glazier (Emporia State University);
  • "Core Competencies for the Next Generation of ILS Acquisitions Modules," Ted Fons (Innovative Interfaces, Inc.) and Cathy Jones (SIRSI);
  • "Library Acquisitions with Credit Cards," Nancy Gibbs (Duke University);
  • "Managing Standing Orders and Approval Plans," Sharon Propas (Stanford University Libraries) and Jannette Schuele (YBP);
  • "Secrets of the Backroom: Managing Acquisitions of Internet Resources," Christa Easton (Stanford University Libraries).

As the closing keynote speaker, Dan Halloran (President, Blackwells Book Services, Inc.) brought everyone back together and onto the same page. He spoke about the future of acquisitions from a bookseller's perspective. Halloran identified macro-trends: economics of library funding and operations, down-sizing library technical services staff, economics of the publishing industry and related components such as booksellers, and the huge growth of electronic information resources and their unique demands on libraries. He then spoke about the five-point plan Blackwells Book Services, Inc. developed to respond to these macro-trends.

Collaboration turns out to be a key element in all work in acquisitions. Effective acquisitions librarians must collaborate with co-workers and colleagues, with internal and external customers, and with materials and library systems vendors.

Dewey Decimal Classification 22 and Beyond: An Introduction to the New Edition of the Dewey Decimal Classification

Jessica MacPhail, Racine Public Library

After a continental breakfast and a welcome from David Miller, Chair of the CCS Subject Access Committee, Joan Mitchell (Editor in Chief of DDC) gave an introduction to the new features of DDC 22. Several major updates include Computer science, religion, social groups and cultural institutions, law, mathematics, chemistry, medicine and health, history and geography, and tables. Good news for Dewey libraries, no schedule has been completely reordered, although there have been multiple revisions and expansions.

Jessica MacPhail (Racine Public Library and member of the Editorial Policy Committee), described to the attendees how the committee functions to prepare new editions of Dewey. Julianne Beall and Giles Martin (Assistant Editors of DDC) gave a thorough overview of the changes in religion and social groups, and in computer science and mathematics. Libby Crawford (Marketing Manager for OCLC) provided information on the role of Dewey Web services.

After lunch, Beall, Martin, and Gregory New (Assistant Editor of DDC) led breakout sessions to focus in-depth on the Dewey schedule changes. For two hours, attendees were able to delve into specific areas and see examples of DDC 22.

Linda Woodcock (Catalogue Division, Vancouver Public Library) presented strategies for implementing the new Dewey, and Joan Mitchell wrapped up with information about what else can be done with Dewey, including new and exciting international projects.

With a newly revised manual as part of DDC 22, and a new edition of Dewey Decimal Classification: Principles and Application being published, Dewey users will have plenty of assistance as they move to the new edition.

Serials Cataloging Cooperative Training Program (SCCTP): Electronic Serials Cataloging Workshop; Integrating Resources Cataloging Workshop

Robert Alan, Pennsylvania State University

Twenty-five participants attended an all day workshop held in conjunction with CONSER's thirtieth anniversary. Serial catalogers as well as non-catalogers who were interested in becoming more knowledgeable in electronic serials cataloging issues participated in this event.

Trainer Steve Shadle (University of Washington) did an excellent job keeping the workshop on track and covering all of the material within the allotted time. Cataloging of electronic serials is ever changing, and the course materials have been revised since the workshop was first offered a year ago. Shadle very adeptly introduced both revisions and new concepts during the course of the day.

The workshop was divided into six sessions; the first session outlined its goals, including coverage of basic terminology, techniques, tools and problem solving approaches; practice creating catalog records for a variety of electronic serials; discussion of problems of multiple electronic versions and common problems in cataloging online serials; and a look at trends in electronic serials cataloging. Session one also discussed differences between serials (including electronic serials) and integrating resources (a separate SCCTP workshop). Prior to the AACR2 2002 revisions, definitions addressed monographs and serials, with some monographs being updatable Web sites and databases. Shadle discussed what types of electronic resources should now be treated as serials or as integrating resources, suggesting decisions be based on whether there are numbered issues of discrete parts being issued. However, if an online resource consists of volumes or issues of multiple journals, or is an updated Web site, then the resource should be treated as an integrating resource.

Session two described the steps involved in cataloging online serials, the application of AACR2 rules and MARC 21 fields, and unique features of online serials. Discussion included choosing a chief source of information, choice of entry, and choice of format (serial or computer file). Three cataloging exercises followed to provide participants with some practical experience applying what they had learned, with time allocated for discussion. Session three addressed aggregators and options available for improving access to online resources packaged in a database. Shadle presented the aggregator neutral record concept (single bibliographic record that is separate from the print and covers all versions of the same online serial). Vendor solutions, the OpenURL, and link resolvers were also discussed.

Session four addressed online versions of a serial with the session focused on the single record approach. Changes that affect cataloging, such as title changes, URL changes, and format changes, were discussed in session five. The workshop concluded with six case studies covering additional characteristics of online serials (e.g., organization of the Web page) that challenge catalogers, and strategies for making sound cataloging decisions.

The workshop provided an excellent introduction to electronic serials cataloging by providing participants with a good understanding of current cataloging standards, applications, and current options available for providing access to online serials. Additional information on SCCTP (Serials Cataloging Cooperative Training Program) is available on the program's Web site.

Digital Audio/Digital Video: Is Your Library/Media Center Digital Ready?

Brian McCafferty, Wabash College

The internet and local networks are increasingly becoming avenues of delivery for digital audio and digital video content. Widespread experience with electronic journals and books is generating expectations for electronic access to audiovisual materials as well. The speakers for this program reported on their experiences in making digital audio and video available to their user communities, and addressed issues of delivery technology and standards, acquiring and creating digital content, and questions surrounding intellectual property rights and fair use.

Jon Dunn (Indiana University Digital Library Program) addressed the advantages of digital audio files in libraries for sound reproduction, network delivery, and new forms of interactivity. He discussed existing digital audio formats, the differences between uncompressed and compressed files, how compression programs use psycho acoustic techniques to retain sound quality while allowing for more efficient storage, and differences between streaming and downloading audio files. He described process of creating digital audio files and how the Variations and Variations2 projects at Indiana University are replacing traditional library collections and services as well as providing new opportunities such as the interactive linking of digital recordings to digital scores.

Claire Stewart (Digital Media Services, Northwestern University), drawing on her experience with digital video distribution at Northwestern University, discussed issues relating to the creation of a digital video delivery system including content creation, file storage, and access. Stewart listed a number of questions libraries should consider focusing on its motivations and capacity for providing and delivering digital video. She then walked through the mechanics of capturing, compressing, and formatting digital video files and described alternate strategies for accomplishing these activities. Storage is major consideration since digital video files are huge. Libraries must also confront management and delivery issues including streaming vs. downloading, client support, the creation and maintenance of metadata, and integrating digital video resources into existing library information systems.

Allan C. Rough (Nonprint Media Services, University of Maryland) reviewed the history of video marketing and pricing for libraries and media centers emphasizing the similarities between video and research databases. In both cases initial restrictions and fears of value loss on the part of producers have given way to more inventive and less paranoid marketing and pricing models as technologies have caught up with demand. At the University of Maryland digital video is delivered through a video-on-demand system (VideoHawk) that permits authenticated, simultaneous and independent access. Rough described the University's services and its arrangement with Films for the Humanities and Sciences by which 1000 video titles have been licensed for digital encoding and delivery. FH&S is now licensing digital rights commercially as are a growing number of other video distributors, though concerns about intellectual property rights are a continuing issue for both producers and libraries.

In their presentations and in follow-up questions all three speakers addressed the issues of copyright and fair use. Each institution represented in the program has adopted a slightly different approach based on the opinions of university counsel; some university attorneys take a more liberal view of fair use than others. Currently rights licensing is more developed for video, which has a bigger market in academic institutions and more commercial activity. The audio market is smaller and commercial distributors have not developed licensing strategies for institutional customers.

Digital Rights, Digital Wrongs: The Impact of International Copyright Law on What Gets Published (And What Librarians Can Buy)

Bob Nardini, YBP Library Services

The complex and turbulent area of international copyright law was examined from the respective vantage points of publisher, aggregator, academic librarian, public librarian, and attorney, in a program organized by the ALCTS/Association of American Publishers Joint Committee. Sponsors included McGraw-Hill Professional, the Scholastic, Inc. Trade Book Group, and John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sarah Sully (Morrison & Foerster, formerly General Counsel and Director of Publisher Relations at JSTOR) was the program's keynote speaker. Her address, "International Copyright: Current Legal Issues Affecting Publishers and Librarians," was a summary of the legal issues surrounding international publishing today in six general areas: information security, privacy, copyright, licensing, jurisdiction, and libel. Sully reported that key questions in each of these areas are far from settled; that harmonization among the laws of different countries is no more than a distant goal; and that publishers may find themselves unprepared for a variety of hazards and risks they might not have imagined. The online projects of many companies, for example, are vulnerable to hackers, and piracy is nearly unchecked in some parts of the world. North American firms will find that privacy laws in the European Union and elsewhere offer far more protection to users than laws at home on the gathering of personal information.

While dozens of countries have signed licensing treaties, local regulations and practice on matters such as censorship, taxation, and registration still vary widely. The same is true for libel, where the claimant-friendly laws of some nations must be taken into account. The state of international agreement on jurisdiction questions, finally, is "a mess," as claimants may shop for the best choice of law (e.g., contract law vs. copyright law), choice of forum, and choice of jurisdiction for enforcement. Thanks to the universality of the Web, there may be risk of legal action even in countries where a firm never intended to do business. "The risk for a publisher today," warned Sully, "is that it's going to be sued all over the world."

Ian Jacobs, consultant to Oxford University Press, New York, and formerly Editorial Director for Palgrave Macmillan and Grove's dictionaries, addressed two main themes in his presentation "Online Product Development and International Copyright Law." Assignment of copyright to the publishers of an online work is essential, enabling a quicker and more flexible response to challenges than is possible with content licensing. However, online publishers devote far more of their energy ensuring that the content and functionality they have created will result in a profitable business. While copyright provides a necessary foundation, the level of trust among partners is more important to the success of an online publishing venture. He drew upon examples centered on music, where uncertainty over online copying in that industry has spilled over and affected online reference works: legal questions over server location have as yet prevented Grove's from offering access to recorded music. A Japanese music site's success rests upon not only on the complexities of a legal agreement, but upon the trust of the project's several content and technical partners.

Canadian Library Association President-elect Stephen Abram spoke on "Copyright and Electronic Publishing: Reality Check." Abram based the talk upon his experience as Vice President, Corporate Development, Micromedia ProQuest (Canada), a firm whose head office, in Ann Arbor, Michigan, maintains tens of thousands of agreements with owners of content, employing some 35 staff to carry out negotiations. Other staff support this work by maintaining the firm's massive publisher rights database, which records such information as changes in ownership, rights by market, royalty payments, and payment of taxes. Abram referred to "rights layering," the determination and tracking of who owns what rights to a work mounted online. The intersecting and overlapping interests of author and publisher are only the beginning, as photographers, composers, illustrators, artists, directors, editors, actors, and many others with a hand in creating at least some part of a print, or especially, an audio-visual work, all must be accounted for in this enormously intricate and time-consuming task. Three hundred separate rights agreements, for example, were necessary to secure all permissions to mount one particular 3-minute video clip.

Echoing Sully, he characterized the state of international contract and licensing law as unstable-although a "house of Lego," since it has held together, and so not quite a "house of cards." On the other hand, he described a "transmission environment where the old copyright law is going to break," as emerging standards such as XML, open URL, and SFX create systems which present material to end-users in contexts beyond those envisioned by most agreements. Virtual reference service in libraries, whereby through a "guided search" a librarian might lead a remote user to licensed content, presents a similar situation. The film, video, and music entertainment industries have an undue influence upon the academic world, according to Abram, as these high-stakes producers gain rights tilted toward content owners. Abram concluded with an overview of the factors an aggregator must consider in decisions about launching new online products, including estimates of customer demand; cost and pricing forecasts; format conversion and technical support; hosting and storage questions; competitive and strategic issues; and the duration, security, and terms of agreements on rights.

Peggy Johnson (University of Minnesota) described how her institution had changed its policies in "Copyright and Fair Use, Libraries and Users: Where Does the Responsibility Lie?" As has been true for most large academic libraries, Minnesota traditionally had issued prescriptive guidelines to users, limiting user activity which seemed out of bounds. Under their new policy, however, the library will shift responsibility to users to make their own informed good faith decisions on the boundaries of fair use. It will be the responsibility of a faculty member, for example, to determine copyright status of a work, to gauge the applicability of fair use, and to secure whatever permissions might be necessary. Instead of enforcing policies, the library will attempt to educate users in a statute-based understanding of fair use. Each fair use claim will depend upon its own particulars in light of the rights and responsibilities set forth in 17 U.S.C. Section 107. These concern the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion to be copied, and the effect of the use upon the potential market for the copyrighted work.

The library's further goal will be to avoid entering into agreements with content providers that restrict fair use rights. Johnson noted that licenses in fact often place greater restrictions on use than do copyright law. This will be a part of a larger library goal to advocate within and beyond the university community for the strengthening of fair use rights. This shift in orientation is the focus of a project team consisting of members from the library, university attorney's office, and the campus copyright permissions center. The project is co-sponsored by the Vice Provost for Distributed Education & Instructional Technology and the University Librarian. The library expects the greatest frontline impacts on staff working in reference and library instruction, interlibrary loan, document delivery, and copy services.

"A View from the Street: Providing Access to Unaffiliated Users," was delivered by Paul Whitney (Vancouver B.C. Public Library). Whitney argued that copyright is too often seen as an economic right, rather than as a means to balance private and public interests. Fundamental change in the law, he believes, is needed, to prevent large commercial audio-visual interests from entirely co-opting the agenda. Today's copyright climate, for example, is preventing materials recorded for the visually impaired to move freely from country to country. He sees geographical market segmentation as "really insidious," since attempts to keep DVD markets intact are affecting the free movement of printed materials. Different sets of rights, he believes, should correspond to different formats. In Canada, copyright law is being used to enforce third-party contracts. Libraries are denied the avenue of "parallel importation," and instead normally must buy non-Canadian materials from licensed agents, rather than from a source in the country of origin. More generally, he asked how library users not affiliated with large institutions were to have access to the breadth of published works that a member of most university communities enjoy? It's in everybody's interest, Whitney concluded, to build and nurture a broadly educated community.

Don't Be Dysfunctional; How to Put the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) in Your Future

John Radencich, Florida International University

The joint CC:DA/MARBI program on FRBR offered presentations by Barbara Tillett and Tom Delsey (Library of Congress), Glenn Patton (OCLC), and Vinod Chachra (VTLS). Matthew Beacom (MIT), ALA's representative to the Joint Steering Committee, served as moderator. Beacom read Tillett's presentation, an overview of FRBR, in which she subdivides cataloged entities into four increasingly specific elements. A "work" is an abstract entity that is realized through an "expression;" a "manifestation" is the physical embodiment of an expression. An "item" is the physical copy of the manifestation. As an illustration, "Hamlet" is a work that is expressed through texts, films, etc. These expressions are manifested by the Signet Classics edition, the Oxford University Press edition, the Bantam Books paperback, and so on (for the text). The movie "expression" (let's say the Kenneth Brannaugh film) is "manifested" by videotape, DVD, etc. Items are the three copies of the Oxford University Press edition on your library's shelves.

Vinod Chachra gave a demonstration how FRBR records look in reality, on a library's OPAC. Though this was through a particular system (VTLS), it gave the audience an idea how FRBR will work in an actual library setting. Sally McCallum read Tom Delsey's presentation titled "Mapping MARC to FRBR." This took all the fields present in MARC and showed which fields went with which FRBR elements, that is, which MARC fields were appropriate for Works, which for Expressions, etc.

Glenn Patton concluded by addressing "What FRBR Can Do For You." FRBR gives clearer understanding of what catalogers do; provides better collocation and navigation; gives clearer, more useful relationships; and brings more controlled, authoritative information for productivity.

Getting the Most Out of Subject References in the Online Catalog: Better Than It Used To Be?

Tony Olson, Northwestern University Health Sciences Library

This program, presented by CCS and co-sponsored by the Canadian Library Association Technical Services Interest Group, focused on improving the use of subject references in the online catalog. In 2001 the CCS Subject Analysis Committee formed a Subcommittee on Subject Reference Structures in Automated Systems. The Subcommittee prepared a report, targeted at both vendors of library management systems and librarians who implement these systems, containing 25 recommendations for improving the use of subject reference structures in the online catalog. Sara Shatford Layne, Chair of the Subcommittee, in her presentation: "Using Subject Reference Structures" highlighted the most important recommendations:

  • Provide keyword indexing of authority records in addition to keyword indexing of bibliographic records.
  • Use punctuation, capitalization and subfielding present in controlled vocabularies to create meaningful arrays of headings.
  • In order to display all valid references, make it possible to display references to a heading with 0 postings, if that heading exists only in a subdivided form.

A draft report containing all 25 recommendations with examples can be found on the Subcommittee's Web site.

The Subcommittee also recommended providing linking references between equivalent headings from different controlled vocabularies. Very few library management systems provide this capability, but one that does is AMICUS, the Library and Archives of Canada (L&AC) online catalog. AMICUS includes headings from the Canadian Subject Headings (CSH) list and French subject headings from the Répertoire de vedettes-matière (RVM). In her presentation: "Navigating Bilingual Subject Headings in AMICUS"; Pam Armstrong (L&AC) described the generation of references between equivalent terms from CSH and RVM using the 7XX fields of authority records.

Representatives from four vendors of library management systems briefly discussed the current state and future enhancements to the use of subject references in their systems. The representatives were: Shelley Hofstetler, Endeavor (Voyager); Michael Kaplan, Ex Libris (Aleph); Claudia Conrad, Innovative (Millennium); and Berit Nelson, Sirsi (Unicorn).

International Standard Bibliographic Descriptions (ISBDs): Do we still need them?

Rachel Wadham, Brigham Young University

In a program offered by the ALCTS Networked Resources & Metadata Committee, four speakers discussed the topic from several points of view. John Byrum (Library of Congress) described the origins and purpose of the ISBDs: for thirty years ISBDs have been the accepted standard to facilitate interchange of bibliographic records from different sources. The ISBDs have been translated into twenty languages and have been internationally applied. Byrum indicated that currently the major controversy is whether prescribed punctuation is needed at all. The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) has reviewed the ISBDs in their entirety several times, and despite this controversy has recommended against eliminating punctuation.

Glenn Patton (OCLC) then described how the ISBDs have been integrated into cataloging codes, including AACR2 and the codes used in France and Italy. Patton indicated that IFLA's current priorities are to study how the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) terminology can be used in the ISBDs. Olivia Madison (Iowa State University) discussed the results of IFLA's study to look at the purpose and roles of the bibliographic record, with a focus on user needs and requirements. As a result, a working group developed FRBR. Many organizations and systems are currently examining how FRBR will impact the future of bibliographic control. The final speaker, Lynne C. Howarth (University of Toronto) discussed putting the ISBDs in metadata. An IFLA Working Group on Metadata Schemes has been formed to study this issue. After the analysis of ten metadata schemes, the ISBDs, and FRBR, the working group identified a core of ten metadata elements that are schema independent. The working group will also develop guidelines about when to use metadata records and to discuss the relationship between metadata and other descriptive standards.

Metadata Harvesting: Using the Open Archives Initiative Protocol to Expose the Deep Web

Norm Medeiros, Haverford College

Sponsored by the ALCTS Networked Resources & Metadata Committee, this program drew approximately 125 attendees to hear presentations from three speakers: Thomas Krichel, economist and faculty member at the Palmer School of Library and Information Science; Tim Cole, Mathematics Librarian & Associate Professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; and Jeff Young, Consulting Software Engineer for the OCLC Office of Research. The panelists discussed, in both theoretical and technical terms, the role of the OAI's Protocol for Metadata Harvesting in supporting information retrieval.

Krichel's presentation, "Open Archives and Open Libraries," introduced the audience to the data repository model, as illustrated by the RePEc data archive. He discussed the changing nature of scholarly communication, and specifically the impact the open source movement has had in this arena. He implored the audience to be more imaginative, entrepreneurial, and collaborative in their work. Cole's presentation described in a more technical manner how both data repositories and service providers use the protocol. He reminded the audience that good metadata is the foundation of good retrieval; that the OAI Protocol for Metadata Harvesting is not a magic bullet. He emphasized the role of the protocol as being interoperability at the metadata level. Tim highlighted his work at the University of Illinois, and touched on some of the OAI-compliant tools being developed, including the DSpace digital repository, Endeavor's ENCompass system, and OCLC's ContentDM application.

Young's presentation focused on OAICat, an OCLC open source project designed for OAI repositories. Jeff noted OCLC's involvement in the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations project, an OAI-compliant initiative. Jeff discussed the use of PURL redirects to ensure URL accuracy. He described the pieces of an XML record, and the links to various component parts such as thesauri, registries, and schemas.

olivia madisonMinding the Gap: Generational Issues in Recruitment and the Workplace

Pamela Bluh, University of Maryland Law Library

An audience made up largely of baby boomers, with a few traditionalists and gen Xers, gathered to hear consultant and author Lynne Lancaster deliver an entertaining, thoughtful commentary on the multi-generational workplace as part of ALCTS President Olivia Madison's program "Minding the Gap: Generational Issues in Recruitment and the Workplace." Since the mid 1940s, four distinct generations can be identified: Traditionalists (those born before 1946); Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964); Generation Xers (born between 1965 and 1981); and Millennials (born between 1982 and 2000). Using streaming video, Ms. Lancaster provided amusing and relevant illustrationsof the generations interacting and working together. Drawing on information from her book, When Generations Collide, co-authored with David Stillman, and her consulting work with BridgeWorks (the consulting company she co-founded with Mr. Stillman), she outlined the special characteristics of each generation. In addition, she described "clashpoints" - "the troublespots where generational conflicts are most likely to explode" (p. xxv) - and suggested how to use those areas of conflict to build stronger, more vibrant organizations. Whether dealing with library patrons or co-workers, managing diverse groups is a challenge. Statistics indicate that within the next 15 years, 58% of librarians working today will be retired or will be poised to retire. To attract new professionals and to retain those already in the profession, today's librarians have a responsibility to use their experience and wisdom wisely while celebrating and rejoicing in their differences.

lynne lancaster Ms. Lancaster confessed to a life-long love affair with libraries and her lively, thought-provoking presentation was laced with references to and memories of libraries and librarians. Her enthusiasm was ably matched by the remarks of Jessica Albano, a Gen Xer librarian from the University of Washington. Ms. Albano spoke about her experiences as a young librarian seeking to balance the demands of the organizational culture while giving voice to her individuality. Her talk was energetic and a perfect complement to Ms. Lancaster's presentation.

The third speaker, Mary Chute, Deputy Director for Library Services of the Institute of Museum and Library Services, was unable to attend, and her remarks were summarized by Jennifer Younger, Chair of the ALCTS President's Program Planning Committee. audience The key to a successful work environment depends on collaboration. With a diverse workforce and an equally diverse customer group, it is essential to keep in mind the value that each individual brings to the workplace. Ms. Chute chose a quotation from the American poet Wendell Berry to convey the importanceof communication in the workplace:"� when a community loses its memory, its members no longer know one another. How can they know one another, if they have forgotten or never learned one another's stories, if they do not know one another's stories, how can they know whether or not to trust one another?"

A brief but lively question and answer session concluded the program and was followed by the distribution of autographed copies of Ms. Lancaster's book, generously provided by her publisher, HarperCollins. The ALCTS President's Program was also handsomely supported by Elsevier.

A New Seal of Approval : Print & Electronic Approval Plans in the 21st Century

Amy McColl, Swarthmore College, and Bob Nardini, YBP Library Services

This program received generous financial support from Kluwer Academic Publishers, and was co-sponsored by ALCTS Publisher/Vendor Library Relations Committee, ALCTS Collection Development Issues for Practitioners Committee, ALCTS Acquisitions Section's Technology Committee, RUSA CODES, and the Canadian Library Association's Collection Development & Management Interest Group.

Moderator Rick Lugg (R2 Consulting) explained that our speakers would talk about both traditional print approval plans as well as emerging technologies that might allow us access to a "virtual approval shelf" in the future. Do approval plans look the same as they did ten years ago? Will audiovisual and electronic resources be incorporated into these plans? Approval vendors and librarians will need to adapt to a new set of realities.

Judith Niles (University of Louisville) described the history of approval plans. The emergence of the approval plan in the 1970s changed the way many libraries acquired their materials, which had been previously largely through individual item selection. She talked about the work of Richard Abel in the 1960s who recognized that library book budgets were growing faster than personnel budgets, and that a core group of publishers produced the majority of scholarly publications. Librarians soon realized that the benefits of approval plans included the ability to acquire large numbers of books easily, that discounts were available, and that collections could be kept more current with less staff effort. Niles went on to describe the various types of plans available, and to talk about more recent trends, such as vendors providing MARC records for approval books and shelf-ready processing.

Bob Nardini (YBP Library Services) described some very early approval plan profiles. According to legend, the first YBP profile was written on a napkin-a very simple and brief profile by today's standards. When the economy worsened in the 1970s, approval plans had to change and many libraries wondered if they would be able to continue to acquire books in this way. Profiling became more exact and much more complicated, with the addition of slips, exclusions, choice of publishers, and series decisions. Nardini then described what approval plans don't do: a book's quality has not been a part of the approval profiling process thus far. Book vendors employ bibliographers with a great deal of subject expertise (although not usually with PhDs) and (equally important) a great deal of publisher knowledge. He concluded by stating that it might be possible for vendors to develop profiling to include book quality as part of the criteria used in approval selection.

Kit Wilson (University of Alberta Libraries) spoke about a new development in her institution's firm ordering practices. The libraries have a $4 million CAD budget to spend on monographs, and because of the university's fiscal year (April - March), funds need to be spent in a timely manner. To address these issues, a pilot project is underway in which subject specialists order monographs directly and online with their book vendor, without intervention by technical services staff. Six issues arose in the course of planning the project: 1) How would paper slips be replicated in an online environment; 2) The chosen vendor will have to have a good fill rate and a good turnaround time; 3) Controls are needed to avoid duplication; 4) Budget controls and up-to-date financial data needs to be in place in order to monitor funds; 5) The online system has to be easy to use, but needs to provide enough space for all necessary information which can be easily understood by the cataloging agent and technical services staff; and, 6) The vendor has to work very closely with the library staff on perfecting the system. Ongoing communication between the library staff and the vendor is crucial, and there is still much tweaking to be done. The project has been a big success, and both subject specialists and technical services staff are pleased with the results.

Stephen Pugh (International Division of YBP Library Services) spoke about the emergence of "World English" in approval plans. Pugh, based in Australia and Managing Director of YBP Australia, described the need for book vendors to develop value-added service as markets grow tighter. Libraries now expect complete service, including compatibility of vendor systems with library ILS systems, cataloging data, and pre-processing of books before arrival. In addition, the emergence of library consortia has heavily affected book vendors. Two recent trends include the growing feeling among selectors that they don't know enough about non-domestic titles, and that selection of these materials should be as easy and seamless as the process for domestic titles. Consultants have been hired in Australia and New Zealand to expedite selection of new titles for distribution to American and other markets. Core titles in Australia have been selected using lists of new acquisitions at the National Library of Australia, after "Australiana" titles have been excluded. The program should ensure that these titles are as easy to obtain as domestic titles through YBP's approval program.

The program then focused on possibilities for approval plans enabled by online access to metadata. Lugg wondered if there is a need for vendors to ship approval plan books prior to a library's online inspection of a title. Since librarians often can access facets of a book such as tables of contents, summaries, sample chapters, jacket images and text, reviews, and, in the case of eBooks, the entire book, an "accept" or "reject" decision can be made at the "virtual approval shelf," which could displace the physical review shelf. He referred to the "Amazon effect," the expectation that online book purchase decisions can be informed by a considerable amount of metadata made possible by standards such as ONIX. Vendor databases already can offer an "Amazonlike" experience, linking their own source title records to selected metadata targets. He illustrated his points with examples shown from Blackwell's Collection Manager, where "do not send" instructions can be based upon an inspection of various online surrogates for a book, including, in some cases, the full text of eBooks. "Good metadata," Lugg concluded, "can change approval plans."

Jenny Walker (Ex Libris USA) showed examples of what is already possible for users of library systems and databases enabled for open URL linking. Ex Libris capabilities are based upon SFX, a standard invented at the University of Ghent, one example of a link server which enables a user to start in a "link source," such as an OPAC, and be presented with a "link menu," a list of available "link targets," which might include, for example, a book vendor's database. A few examples of other link sources and targets might include e-journals, citation databases, local digital repositories, collections of electronic theses and dissertations, and online reference works. Examples of uses might include copyright clearance, ordering, and checking library holdings for inter-library loan. Precisely which link targets are made available to library users is entirely up the library, as long as a target is enabled for open URL searching.

Ted Fons (Interfaces, Inc.) first described the traditional role of integrated library systems (ILS) in approval plans, referring to functionality which allows electronic invoicing, accepting or rejecting of titles, cataloging, and, in generation of spine labels, physical processing. He also talked about reports, whereby the ILS system can be a collection analysis tool through its ability to correlate and compare expenditure and circulation data for approval plan titles and titles acquired via other means. Fons envisions an even more centralized approval plan role in the future for the ILS system, thanks to the sort of Web content links that Lugg and Walker had referenced. Starting in the ILS system, a user can inspect a book from a variety of angles such as reviews, Books in Print, Amazon, other library OPACs, and vendor databases. Remote users and users located in the library building are on equal footing, Fons noted, given the scope of online metadata available through links from an ILS.

Eric Pumroy (Bryn Mawr College) described the Tri-College Consortium, a group that under a Mellon grant is exploring possibilities for collaborative collection building. Bryn Mawr, Haverford College, and Swarthmore College, operate an approval plan in a consortial environment. Bryn Mawr and Haverford, geographically adjacent, already share an approval plan. Each week, librarians review the shipment and parse out the books. How this shared venture can also integrate the geographically more distant Swarthmore, which has its own approval plan, has been the project's top concern. Pumroy reports that members of the respective teaching faculties have accepted in principal the idea of the three collections as in effect a single collection. Since the three libraries collectively spend some $450,000-$500,000 annually on approval plan purchases; since Haverford and Bryn Mawr together buy about 80 percent of the titles acquired by Swarthmore; and since data show that many titles purchased have low circulation or no circulation at all, the idea of a shared three-way approval plan holds much appeal.

What is needed, Pumroy said, is good metadata for the "virtual approval shelf" described by Lugg, straightforward online buying mechanisms, and a willingness to rely upon the judgment of selectors at partner institutions, so that time is not wasted on easy buying decisions. The Tri-College group is in the process of setting up pilot projects to begin its exploration of a shared three-way approval plan.

Serials Pig in the Aggregator's Poke III

Janet Siar, University of Maryland, College Park

Judy Luther, President of Informed Strategies, LLC and moderator of this program presented by SS Policy, Research & Publications Committee, began by explaining the southern phrase, "pig in a poke," means something that you don't have much control over. She then posed this question to the panel members: 'What are your priorities regarding access, and how did you establish them for your aggregated collections?' Janet Gaisford (Toronto Public Library) responded that her institution found that the benefit of more title availability for the price provides easy full text availability for users. Given the subject approach most users prefer, TPL decided on a single search strategy that yielded research results from multiple databases. Scott Dennis (University of Michigan) related the decision to catalog all e-journals using the "one record" approach for all formats was key to yielding beneficial access. New records were created only if there was no print equivalent. He recommended that a link server was vital to come up first when migrating to a new system. Having existing catalog records has been extremely helpful in providing feedback to vendors and service to their users.

Nina Saklikar (Simon Fraser University) emphasized the need to know what they had access to and the importance of having journals catalogued. She also agreed with Scott that there was tremendous advantage to having catalog records for e-journals. The session then was opened up for questions from the audience that revealed the wide range of concerns this topic always seems to generate. Speakers and audience engaged in a lively and interesting discussion of common problems from many viewpoints.

Training for Effective Subject Cataloging

Dale Swensen, Brigham Young University

This session's purpose was to introduce a training program currently under development by the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) Training Committee and the ALCTS CCS Subject Analysis Committee (SAC). Ana Cristan (Library of Congress) first provided a brief account of how the PCC came to be involved. In 2000, Carol Hixson of the University of Oregon and chair of the PCC Training Committee, charged her group to survey training needs of catalogers with the view that the committee might assume an expanded role in fulfilling those needs. The aim was to provide programs that would be accessible to catalogers nationwide and open to all, not just to those who participate in the PCC.

Lori Robare (University of Oregon) then summarized how SAC entered the picture. In the spring of 2001, SAC members David Miller and Merry Schellinger began discussing ways in which the committee could promote better training in basic subject cataloging, to compensate for the apparent lack of such training in most library school curricula. They also were hoping to stimulate greater involvement in SACO, the PCC program that allows catalogers at all institutions to contribute to the Library of Congress Subject Heading list.

Once the two groups got together, work progressed rapidly and in a short time a complete course outline was developed, with the preparation of training materials well underway. To bring the program to the awareness of catalogers and supervisors, the joint committee decided to present a sample module in a conference program. Bill Garrison (Syracuse University) spent the following hour presenting a training capsule on the application of subdivisions in subject headings. Bill explained the various types of subdivisions in the Library of Congress system-established, free-floating, pattern headings, etc.-and discussed how each is applied to headings to form subject strings. He also introduced catalogers to the tools where they can find help in accomplishing this task. Finally, he outlined a series of steps to follow in creating and checking subject strings, and provided an exercise to illustrate the process. PowerPoint slides and handouts accompanied the instruction.

At the conclusion, plans were announced to offer the complete training program as a two-day preconference in Orlando in summer 2004. Thereafter, the program will be made available through a core of trained trainers for local library associations and institutions to bring to their own sites. Response from the audience to these plans was very positive.

What's the Big Deal? The Impact of Consortial Purchasing on the Acquisitions Process

Wendy Robertson, University of Iowa

To begin this program, sponsored by the AS Organization and Management Committee, and supported by a contribution from Kluwer Academic Publishers, moderator Cindy Clennon asked the three panelists (Trisha Davis, Ohio State University; Warren Holder, University of Toronto; and Cynthia Shelton, UCLA) a variety of questions regarding the benefits of, problems with, and changes brought about by the "Big Deal." All three speakers focused on it as a consortial arrangement and agreed on all major points. They stated that bundling and package plans have changed everything in acquisitions. Most importantly, the work has become more complex, and generally must be done by higher-level staff, or at least more highly trained staff. Another major aspect of the Big Deal is the role of the coordinator of the deal, particularly in licensing, saving time of both the library and the publisher.

One of the biggest challenges is determining what is being purchased and how the deal relates to print subscriptions, including cancellations and discounts. Invoicing has become much more complex and may require getting credits long after payments. Typically, libraries must work directly with publishers who do not understand the needs of libraries. Big Deals have made tremendous impact on selection, bringing about a general loss of control over individual titles, with decisions made at the package level.

The panelists expressed several concerns regarding whether the Big Deal is a monetarily sustainable model. These arrangements usually require more money or a non-cancellation commitment. It is not clear that use of the increased content warrants its cost, but Big Deals are hard to leave, especially after patrons have become accustomed to the access they provide. Additionally, publishers who have not done Big Deals now find their titles are easier to cancel, as budgets get tighter. The speakers reminded us that we are not powerless and need not take offers as presented by publishers. Our power is money, centralized licensing and one point of invoicing, and we should use these to negotiate more favorable terms.

Why Can't Johnnie and Jane Get Published: Research Basics

Cecilia Botero & Steven Carrico, University of Florida Libraries

This well attended, interactive program was a joint presentation of three ALCTS committees designed to maximize communication between the panel speakers and the participating audience. The panel consisted of three librarians: moderator Trisha Davis (Ohio State University), Christian Boissonnas (Cornell University), and Donald Riggs (Nova Southeastern & University of Michigan). The panel first discussed the basic format and structure of the research paper, what constitutes a valid research project, and the process of publishing a paper in a peer-reviewed academic journal. They provided the participants with some general advice on various aspects of research and publishing, and emphasized the importance of reading and becoming familiar with the writing style and format used in various professional journals. The panel members warned the participants that rejections do happen, but if a submitted article is rejected, the author should study the reviewers' comments and revise accordingly.

Don Riggs presented some interesting facts about publishing in the library profession in general, pointing out that academic librarians do most of the research and writing in the library literature, but the number of research articles published in the field is on the decline. Affirming that the purpose of research is to discover and create new knowledge, Riggs highlighted the different types of research that exist: basic research, applied research, quantitative research and qualitative research. According to Riggs, qualitative research deals with feelings and meaning, and is particularly lacking in the library profession. Riggs encouraged audience members to consider this type of research in their future endeavors. He stressed that research contributes to the growth of a profession and that the library field is in danger of losing the theoretical foundation of librarianship. Riggs believes if this happens, librarianship will become more of a trade than a profession.

The participant audience, grouped into small tables, worked through a series of problems developing a basic idea into a research format. Each group developed a hypothesis, outline, and abstract, and ultimately produced a brief, summarized portion of a research paper. Later, in a separate exercise, each group devised two research topics and chose a speaker. The moderator collected the topics, reassigned them to a different group, and each group then issued a statement of the problem, justification for the research, and their choice of methodology. The panel in turn analyzed each group's presentation and gave suggestions for improvement and ideas for alternate ways of approaching the topic.

As their final reflection, the panel reiterated that librarians are making fewer contributions to research literature than ever before. The up side to this trend is that some library journals are actively soliciting articles in an attempt to fill the void. The panel acknowledged the prevalence of "how we did it right" articles in library literature, but were quick to point out that there's nothing inherently wrong with this type of article as long as certain principles are upheld. When writing, "how we did it right" articles, authors should make sure they are presenting new ideas and adhere to the general principles of good writing; and all parts of a standard research paper should be present with the sole exception of the methodology. Especially important is the conclusion, because it is often applicable to other libraries.

back to alcts newsletter online home