Saturday, June 23, 2007
Washington, DC, Renaissance Washington, Ballroom
(RSS All Committee Meeting)
The meeting was called to order at approximately 9:00 a.m.
Gregory Crawford, Chair
Robert Daniel Vega
Lesley Bell (Toronto Public Library)
1. Introductions – members introduced themselves.
2. A sign-in sheet was distributed so that committee members could update their contact information.
3. The minutes of the Saturday, January 20th meeting at ALA Midwinter (Seattle) were approved.
4. The status and next steps for the Guidelines for Measuring and Assessing Reference and User Services and Resources, the work of this committee for the past several years were discussed. The “Guidelines” appear to be a political football between RSS and RUSA. The RSS Executive Board in reviewing its notes can not find that they have been approved, although they have been discussed and the Board updated during the process. However, RUSA’s Standards and Guidelines Committee approved them with some editorial and other changes. Previously, at the same time our committee was working on the guidelines, the RUSA Board appointed its own committee with a charge to define a reference transaction, unbeknownst to us. At Annual in New Orleans, at a RSS Executive Board meeting a voted in favor of the RUSA definition of reference failed. Our Guidelines are scheduled to be voted upon by the RSS Executive Board, following this committee meeting, and by the RUSA Board on Tuesday, June 24th.
The committee was reminded that it had decided at the January 20, 2007 meeting not to continue development of the guidelines if the RSS or RUSA boards did not approve them. Emily made a suggestion that the guidelines could possibly be put up on a wiki to seek feedback from others. Ruby noted that she had distributed the guidelines to others already and had gotten positive feedback.
There was general concern that RSS did not have a process in place to make sure that appropriate steps were being taken in an appropriate order so that committee work could be vetted properly.
Emily suggested that we could solicit reports from local institutions of their best practices that could be added to the appendix. There was general interest in having the guidelines, approved or not, distributed for use and comments.
5. Our web page, A Guide to New Members, will be updated by David Vidor and Ruby Licona. Rob Vega offered to serve as a reader.
6. Emily reported that she has been updating web pages with the RSS Web leader Virginia Ann Cole.
7. New Business
a) There was support for having a discussion group/open forum on the guidelines at Midwinter in the time slot of the Sunday committee meeting. A possible title for the discussion could be “Assessment: Quick and Dirty.” This would be informal, like an in-person wiki, where people could share best practices and describe quantitative and qualitative measurements.
b) There was interest in following up an open forum with a RUSA RSS New Reference Research program on reference evaluation.
c) Possible co-sponsoring of a discussion or program with other RSS groups like Hot Topics or Research and Statistics.
Submitted by David Vidor.