Reports of Meetings — 32nd Annual Charleston Conference

Issues in Book and Serial Acquisition, “Accentuate the Positive,” Francis Marion Hotel, Courtyard Marriott Historic District, Addlestone Library, and School of Science and Mathematics Building, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC, November 7-10, 2012

Charleston Conference Reports compiled by:  Ramune K. Kubilius  (Collection Development / Special Projects Librarian, Northwestern University, Galter Health Sciences Library)

Column Editor’s Note:  Thank you to all of the Charleston Conference attendees who agreed to write short reports that highlight sessions they attended at the 2012 conference.  All attempts were made to provide a broad coverage of sessions, and notes are included in the reports to reflect known changes in the session titles or presenters highlighting those that were not printed in the conference’s final program (though some may have been reflected in the online program).  Please visit the Conference Website, http://www.katina.info/conference, for the online conference schedule from which there are links to many presentations, handouts, plenary session videos, and plenary session reports by the 2012 Charleston Conference blogger, Don Hawkins.  Visit the conference blog at https://www.against-the-grain.com/category/blog-posts/charleston2012/.  The 2012 Charleston Conference Proceedings will be published in partnership with Purdue University Press in 2013.

In this issue of ATG you will find the third installment of 2012 conference reports.  The first two installments can be found in ATG v.25#1, February 2013 and v.25#2, April 2013.  We will continue to publish all of the reports received in upcoming print issues throughout the year. — RKK

 

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2012
PLENARY SESSIONS

I Hear the Train a Comin’ – LIVE — Presented by Peter Binfield (Co-Founder and Publisher, PeerJ);  Timo Hannay (Managing Director, Digital Science);  Greg Tananbaum (CEO, ScholarNext)

Reported by:  Ramune K. Kubilius  (Northwestern University, Galter Health Sciences Library)

In some respects, with the stage set-up of three chairs on a small stage in a large room, the train was relatively low-key, but as moderator Tananbaum indicated, the two speakers, Binfield and Hannay, were “thought leaders in our space” and the voiced trends gave everyone some food for thought.  Per Hannay, when you don’t know if something is going to work, you take a leap of faith.  It’s incumbent on us to experiment.  We need to be adept and develop capabilities.  No money is needed if you have good ideas and smart people.  Per Binfield, the “train in the face” is that new markets in a consolidated industry are less profitable (an innovators’ dilemma), and innovation is coming from outsiders.  Incumbents need to learn from innovators and bring in our expertise.  In one thread, Tananbaum talked about the reactive role of libraries, to which Hannay responded that librarians should work with publishers.  During the question and answer session, the audience and panelists shared thoughts, about how:  all take risks at their own levels, a confluence is needed to spur the adaption of a great idea:  serendipity, timing, and sometimes the result is not what people had in mind.  The world is changing around us and we should be part of the change or else…

 

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2012
HAPPY HOUR SESSIONS

Accidental Collection Assessment: the NCSU Libraries Collection Move — Presented by Hilary Davis (North Carolina State University Libraries);  Annette Day (North Carolina State University Libraries);  John Vickery (North Carolina State University Libraries)

Reported by:  Margaret M. Kain  (University of Alabama at Birmingham, Mervyn H. Sterne Library)

Members of NCSU libraries faced with the daunting task of moving over 1 million volumes to a new library turned the move into an opportunity for collection assessment.  The physical move which began in July, 2012 will be complete in December 2012.  The move will place approximately 1.4 million volumes into an auto retrieval system [bookbot].  Approximately 28,000 volumes of current monographs and journals from 2007 to the present, plus other select materials will be available on open shelves.  The planning process began approximately four years ago with the mapping of all call numbers, as an accurate count of the items would be necessary;  a detailed timeline was developed.  All physical items and eventually bins for the bookbot had to be barcoded.  Using SAS programming, the standard ILS reports were enhanced to ensure that the data would move in sync with the physical items.  During the move, no study space has been off limit to students;  and students have been kept up-to-date on the library’s progress through postings on social media, blogs and the library Website.  To ensure this process would not have to be repeated any time soon, SAS was used to create a forecast of future growth over a five-year period, taking into account budget highs and lows.

 

How to Engage Faculty with Academic Video — Presented by Carolyn Bain (Bain Pugh & Associates, Inc.);  deg farrelly (Arizona State University);  Eileen Lawrence (Alexander Street Press)

Reported by:  Glenda Alvin  (Tennessee State University, Brown-Daniel Library)

I found this to be a very interesting session with beneficial ideas that I could take back to my library and implement.  The panelists discussed the curation, discovery and marketing of academic streaming videos.  Libraries are investing in streaming videos, but they need to find strategies to encourage the faculty to use them to support the teaching and learning process.  The panelists made several suggestions, such as creating Libguides on streaming videos and embedding  subject-related videos in Libguides.  They can be linked or embedded in Blackboard and other teaching software.  They also suggested creating playlists and sending them to faculty to build awareness.

 

Moving Technical Reports Forward: New Roles for Libraries & Librarians — Presented by Maliaca Oxnam (University of Arizona);  Roberto Sarmiento (Northwestern University);  David Scherer, Moderator (Purdue University);  Charles Watkinson (Purdue University)

Reported by:  Ramune K. Kubilius  (Northwestern University, Galter Health Sciences Library)

Moderator Scherer provided an introduction to technical reports and the partnership opportunities they offer, since libraries’ staffs often have expertise in matters of standardization, stewardship, and access.  Sarmiento described the many types of reports handled by Northwestern University’s Transportation Library and others in that niche area, where the challenges are of a proliferating publishing area that is often mandated by federal, state, local, corporate, and other funding agencies.  Involvement in consulting, disseminating, cataloging, and public relations roles can sometimes even result in financial opportunities for library partners.  Oxnan described the technical report partnership archive, TRAIL, its vision and progress to date, and also some of the challenges in dissemination, bibliographic access issues, quality of media and documents that need special handling, “deciphering” of government contractor rights, etc.  Watkinson mentioned the increasing membership in the Library Publishing Coalition (LPC), described the newest ventures of the Joint Transportation Research Program, and how addressing the issues of hidden print and unstable online collections has spurred a move to a coordinated repository environment.  Through publishing solutions, communication of impact, and expansion of collections, the publishing of grey literature has become a way, he feels, Purdue and other libraries can make an impact (some already have).  The small audience was interested, and among the questions was one about the estimated costs of digitization (the enticing answer — 300% ROI!).

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2012
SHOTGUN SESSIONS

Acquisitions Socialism — Presented by Victoria Koger (Eastern Kentucky University);  2) Oh the Possibilities! Repurposing a Citation Study — Presented by Andrea A. Wirth (Oregon State University);  3) Running a Contest to Encourage Timely Monograph Ordering — Presented by Carol Cramer (Wake Forest University);  4) The Changing Landscape of Course Content: Electronic Textbooks and Electronic Course Packs — Presented by Heidi Schroeder (Michigan State University);  5) Library Serials and Electronic Subscriptions Project — Presented by Jo Flanders (St. Cloud State University)

Reported by:  Kyle McCarrell  (Augusta State University)

Charleston Shotgun Sessions are designed to present a lot of practical information in a short amount of time.  These sessions achieved that goal.  Koger’s presentation described how Eastern Kentucky dissolved their allocation system for monographs and combined this money into one pot.  Six months into their trial, feedback from selectors has been positive, saying it has forced them to prioritize their purchases instead of recklessly trying to spend a minimum amount.  For those that still use allocations, Cramer discussed how they ran a contest for monograph ordering, taking 1% of their monographic budget and applying a bonus to the different funds for which selectors spent 65% of their allocation midway through the ordering season.  Just under half of the eligible funds took advantage of this promotion.  The overall goal, however, of leveling out requests over a number of months was inconclusive as the swamped month moved earlier in the process.  The three other presentations focused on developing relationships with stakeholders and users.  Wirth showed how a project looking at enhancing collection resources was tweaked to develop subject guides and make inter- and multi-disciplinary connections with new communities.  Schroeder shared the results of Michigan State’s e-textbook and electronic course pack pilot that was funded by the Provost and integrated within the Course Management System (CMS).  The pilot occurred in six courses utilizing 1,300 students with usage varying by department.  Mixed results, namely because of accessibility issues with the platform, were also mentioned.  At St. Cloud University, Flanders described how they created an electronic resources spreadsheet to assist faculty in making decisions regarding databases and serial content.  After communicating with faculty, staff, and students, the library was able to reallocate nearly $45,000 from the budget.  Additionally, because of the openness of the process, communication with users increased and healthy collaborations began.  Following the presentations, the presenters engaged in a lively ten-minute question and answer time with the attendees.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2012
PLENARY SESSIONS

Contemporary Trends and Debates in E-Journal Licensing — Presented by Kristin Eschenfelder (University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Library and Information Studies)
NOTE:  Doctoral student Mei Zhang joined the plenary presenter and helped field questions.

Reported by:  Genevieve E.T. Barbee (American Economic Association)

Eschenfelder, a “newbie” to the conference, began her presentation on with two caveats: her information included no pricing data and the data collected was between three and twelve years old.  That being said, the two studies she and her doctoral student Zhang conducted are an interesting snap-shot into the early rules that people have created around their willingness to share content of which they possess the rights-a special interest of Eschenfelder’s.  The first study focused on Inter-Library Loan (ILL) and Scholarly Sharing (SS) while the second and ongoing study focused on Perpetual Access Terms (PA).

She concluded that PA was more likely provided by either the publisher or the library than a third party with libraries gaining in this role.  The three greatest concerns were the lack of back files, special conditions (such as a publisher pulling the title or disaster damaging materials) were rarely addressed if at all, and Portico was barely mentioned.  SS was addressed overall 55% of the time but not always defined in the license. ILL unfortunately featured a print requirement by many of the licenses.  Commercial licenses were more likely to follow the best practice model.

Eschenfelder hopes to continue following the next set of trends by expanding the data selection.

 

What Provosts Think Librarians Should Know — Presented by J. Bradley (Brad) Creed (Samford University);  Jose-Marie Griffiths (Bryant University);  Karen Hanson (University of Minnesota);  James O’Donnell (Georgetown University)
NOTES:  James O’Donnell served as moderator.  Karen Hanson did not participate in this session.

Reported by:  Deborah Thomas  (University of Tennessee, Hodges Library)

Three provosts covered all the bases in an entertaining session that ranged from the visionary to the practical.  Creed characterized libraries as the “GPS for the intellectual highway.”  The economic downturn prompted data-driven decisions and accountability requirements, and libraries must practice stewardship of resources.  Creed asked librarians to see themselves as educators rather than information providers and to encourage students to read.  Griffiths provided an overview of key issues in higher education.  These issues included economic trends (influencing funding, tuition, costs, and the ability of faculty to relocate) and competition in higher education (2+2 programs, for-profit colleges, and overseas campuses attracting U.S. students.) She suggested that libraries could lead in open access/open data support, in digital publishing, as an integral part of curriculum committees, and in the structuring of e-portfolios.  O’Donnell’s presentation gave the audience a glimpse into the mind of the provost.  He urged the audience to remember that provosts have many stakeholders, and that many people show up on the provost’s doorstep seeking funding.  Libraries must persuade provosts that they are making good decisions, and having other people tell your story is the most effective persuasive tool.  All the provosts encouraged libraries to find new roles, build coalitions on campus, and seek connections and shared goals.

 

The Twenty-First Century University Press: Assessing the Past, Envisioning the Future  — Presented by Douglas Armato (University of Minnesota Press);  Alison Mudditt (University of California Press);  Leila Salisbury (University Press of Mississippi)

Reported by:  Ramune K. Kubilius  (Northwestern University, Galter Health Sciences Library)

The occasion of the 75th Anniversary of the Association of American University Presses understandably was noteworthy to the panelists, though, unfortunately, they took up the entire conference plenary session time slot, leaving no time for any audience comments or questions.  Moderator Salisbury provided a lead-in introduction, followed by Armato who took the audience on a “tour” entitled “What was a University Press?” which featured historical notes (with vintage photographs), visions of Eden, and the original (accidental) founding of the monograph format.  At one time, universities, through their university presses, published the majority of U.S. scientific research.  Kathleen Fitzpatrick’s 2011 book (New York University Press), Planned Obsolescence: Publishing, Technology, and the Future of the Academy, analyzes many of these points and addresses possible future avenues.  The theory of creative destruction (vs. public investment) can provide insights into OA (balanced against sustainability) and other utopian outcomes.  Evolution (in place of creative destruction) can result in co-evolution or co-extinction of both university presses and libraries (per University of Chicago’s Andrew Abbott).  Osmosis may be a model for scholarly communication, and reports on the death of authors are exaggerated, he maintained.  Mudditt called herself an “outside insider”, given that only 18 months had elapsed since her arrival at the University of California Press.  “Understanding what customers want to do” is more important than “Understanding the customer,” she claimed, and readers are not passive recipients.  Reinvigorating the core mission of university presses is key, and there should be “conversations” beyond publications (add impact and visibility), a shared commitment, and engaged scholarship.  Providing some examples of university press research and scholarship endeavors (content partnerships, breaking boundaries, educating the next generation, regional publishing), she recommended connecting what we find with what we know.

 

Building the Digital Public Library of America: the Hubs Pilot Project  — Presented by Emily Gore (Digital
Public Library of America)

Reported by:  Anne K. Abate  (Library Discount Network)  

The speaker started out by providing background details on the Digital Public Library of America (DPLA) including how the project originated, how it is funded, and the current goal of the project to transition from the planning phases to actual deployment.  The speaker is the Director and only staff member of the DPLA and does not expect the staff to grow very large.  She outlined the five essential elements of the DPLA: Code, Metadata, Content, Tools & Services, and Community.  Community is a vital element of the project.  As they lay the groundwork for the DPLA there have been several work streams put into action: Audience & Participation, Content & Scope, Financial & Business Models, Legal Issues, and Technical Aspects.  A list of the Service Hubs across the country, including many state digital libraries was detailed, along with their various service offerings and initial exhibition topics.  A two-year timeline was provided from the initial launch planned for April 2013 through development of content and metadata.  The audience was invited to find more information and get involved with the project through the forum on the DPLA Website.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2012
LIVELY LUNCHES

Point of Care Tools and Libraries (the 12th Annual Health Sciences Lively Lunch) Presented by Deborah Blecic, Moderator (University of Illinois at Chicago);  Nicole Gallo (Rittenhouse Book Distributors, Inc.);  Susan Klimley (Columbia University);  Ramune K. Kubilius (Northwestern University)
NOTE:  Wendy Bahnsen substituted for Nicole Gallo.

Reported by:  Beth Ketterman  (East Carolina University, Laupus Health Sciences Library)   

After greetings from Bahnsen, Kubilius distributed and discussed a handout of developments (news and trends) in collection development as it related to health sciences libraries since Charleston 2011.

Klimley presented on point-of-care trends — why now?  She noted that these popular tools have seen double-digit cost increases when library budgets have either decreased or, at best, remained flat.  Differences in popular tools (currency of information, ease of use, reputation), student opinion, marketing practices, pricing, and legal issues were all mentioned in the presentation.

The rest of the lunch then centered on a lively discussion amongst the attendees, with moderator Blecic trying to provide an opportunity for all to share their stories and comments.

Most agreed that the exorbitant cost of point-of-care tools takes away money from other acquisitions.  The new Clinical Key product from Elsevier also was a hot topic.  Discussion around it included cost, coverage analysis, and best practices in negotiations.

 

Dirty Little Secret: What’s Your Plan for Managing Your Legacy Collection? — Presented by Sam Demas (Sam Demas Collaborative Consulting);  Bart Harloe (Connect New York);  Mary Miller (University of Minnesota) and Maria Savova (Claremont Colleges Library)
NOTE:  Bart Harloe was unable to attend due to flight cancellation.

Reported by:  Victoria Koger  (Eastern Kentucky University)   

The represented institutions, all clients of Demas, described the process of writing a collection management plan. The instigator was a familiar one;  space, in all three cases.  The suggested elements of a collection management plan look very helpful for those needing to develop or revise their own plan.  Savova said Claremont was outlining principles behind decisions, not including every little detail in their collection management plan.  Miller really had fun with the Dirty Little Secret theme in her slides.  She said they looked at usage statistics but did not make a blanket decision based on low usage.  Savova shared why they needed to give faculty lists of titles and time to review.  Someone commented that we shouldn’t let faculty paralyze us and make libraries keep everything.  Demas provided that you could build in a way to be able to modify those decisions made by faculty later.  He explained you must be attuned to your own institutions’ culture and don’t give in to that fear of bringing up issues to faculty because they will find out later and that will erode trust. His final advice to us was to write a plan with a team and have lots of conversations.

 

Do We Need E-book Aggregators? Presented by Jay Askuvich (Midwest Library Service);  Forrest Link (The College of New Jersey);  Kari Paulson (EBook Library);  Rebecca Segar (Oxford University Press);  Luke Swindler (UNC Chapel Hill Libraries)

Reported by:  Kristen Ribero  (ebrary)   

This topic came up because libraries were looking alternative to eBook aggregators, and involved the perspectives from three libraries, one eBook aggregator, and one publisher.  From the library’s perspective, there cannot be one single solution that fits all: library, publisher, and aggregator.  Not only is there one single solution, but there cannot be one single aggregator.  This competitive landscape should be welcomed and affords for a healthy ecosystem that allows for even more options.  Beyond providing content, aggregators are also the technology providers, giving libraries the platform features and service tools.  The Q&A session summarized many thoughts that yes, eBook aggregators, are necessary.  But to go even further, what’s really needed is a focus on segmenting eBooks: chapters and then the associated pricing models and availability.  This is what really makes eBook aggregators important because sophisticated information and technology.

 

Enhancing User Accessibility in Library Products — Presented by Timothy Babbitt (ProQuest);  Frank Menchaca (Gale,
Cengage Learning);  Rajini Padmanaban (QA InfoTech);  Mukesh Sharma (QA InfoTech)

Reported by:  Robert Smith (MLIS Student, University of South Carolina) 

Yet another “hit” session in the conference!  Padmanaban and Sharma of QA InfoTech hosted a brilliant discussion.  The session took the form of prepared questions for the panel of experts comprised of Menchaca of Gale, Babbitt of ProQuest, as well as Padmanaban of QA InfoTech.  The topic of user accessibility of library materials is an extremely important issue facing libraries and archives today, and there was pointed and informative discussion on the various products available to the library professional to enhance the user’s ability to access information.  The differently-abled patron has the same right to library materials as anyone else and these companies appear to be on the fore-front of the technology to enhance this particular patron’s needs.  “Well done” to all of the panelists and a special note of thanks for Miss Sharma for keeping the discussion going and keeping the panelists on target.

 

Giving Our Users a Voice: Faculty and Students Talk about Their Perceptions and Use of Library eBooksPresented by Helen Aiello (Wesleyan University);  Lorraine Huddy (CTW Library Consortium)
NOTE:  Christa Poparad (College of Charleston) also joined the panel.

Reported by:  Kathleen Spring  (Linfield College, Nicholson Library)

This excellent panel discussion featuring faculty and students from the College of Charleston grew out of (was inspired by) an ACRL-NE meeting on users’ perceptions of eBooks.  The panel was given questions prior to the session as a way to help frame the discussion, which focused on such issues as eBook/eTextbook usage for courses, discovery of eBooks, preferences for print vs. electronic, and access and related technology issues.  Panelists shared the ways in which they use eBooks on various devices and stressed the need for content to be platform- and device-agnostic, particularly if eTextbooks are to be widely adopted.  Comments from the panel suggested some students are using eBooks to determine if materials are relevant for research but are then requesting those items in print;  other comments suggested that learning styles play a role in individuals’ preferences for using eBooks for academic work.  The session included questions from the audience and was thought-provoking for the librarians and vendor representatives in attendance.

 

Giving Our Users a Voice: Faculty and Students Talk about Their Perceptions and Use of Library eBooksPresented by
Helen Aiello (Wesleyan University);  Lorraine Huddy (CTW Library Consortium)
NOTE:  Christa Poparad (College of Charleston) also joined the panel.

Reported by:  Helen Aiello  (Wesleyan University) and Lorraine Huddy  (CTW Librarian for Collaborative Projects)

The session was moderated by Helen Aiello, Acquisitions/E-Resources Librarian, Wesleyan University, Lorraine Huddy, CTW Librarian for Collaborative Projects, and Christa Poparad, Head of Reference, College of Charleston.

The panel was composed of five members of the College of CharlestonJoey Van Arnhem (Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology);  Tim Carmichael (Dept. of History);  a sophomore student in Communications;  and two seniors, one majoring in Biology/Education and the other in History/Education.

Panelists were asked to respond to the following general questions:

  • Discovery:  how do you find eBooks?
  • How do you use eBooks?
  • General comments on your experience with eBooks.

The primary takeaways from the panelists were:

One of the faculty, Arnhem, noted that eBooks/e-textbooks might be better options for selected fields of study that go out of date quickly.  She will assign e-textbooks to her classes, but specifically mentioned checking on the price and DRMs, and will tell students to get the title in print when cost or tight DRMs are an issue.

The other faculty panelist, Carmichael, expressed concern about the technology of the several different platforms being an impediment to accessing the content.  He stated a preference for print and expressed concern about the learning curve needed to figure out various eBook platforms.  He prefers to focus on the course content, not the technology needed to get to the content.

The youngest student, a sophomore, liked the idea of being able to access eBook content from her laptop since this meant she did not have to haul physical books around.  She seemed to be more of a digital native in that she stated a preference for eBooks, but would use print as necessary.

One of the seniors stated a preference for print but used the online eBook content as a search tool that then allowed him to select the print book from which to read.  He specifically said that when writing research papers, he wants to refer to print copies.  This same student noted that eBooks impacted his ILL requests.  He was unable to request a title via ILL because the lending institution only had an e-copy.

“Portability” was mentioned as a benefit by all three students.  The Science education major had not used eBooks but was a proficient e-journal user who read journal articles on his smartphone.  The other students cited the ease of carrying eBooks around, and also the ability to download PDFs of eBook chapters they needed.  PDFs were the file format of choice, and they liked the ability to annotate/highlight/copy-paste portions of the e-content they were able to bring down to their devices.

 

Lessons from the Charleston Conference for Law Libraries Presented by Paula Tejeda (Director of Technical Services, Charleston School of Law)

Reported by:  Clanitra L. Stewart  (MLIS Student, University of South Carolina)

Geared towards law librarians, law library staff members, and those with an interest in law libraries, this open forum session provided attendees with the opportunity to share their questions and experiences related to collection development issues in law libraries, as well as to specifically discuss how to apply the information learned through the other sessions at the Charleston Conference to the law library environment.  Led by Tejeda, key issues discussed during the session included the implementation of Patron-Driven Acquisitions (PDA) programs in law libraries, the feasibility of moving towards a “paperless” law library, how to work successfully with publishers and vendors, and practical methods to serve the information needs of members of the public.

The opportunity to engage in a group discussion on how these types of issues affect law libraries, especially in the context of more general information freshly learned in the other conference sessions, added an extra dimension to the session.  Further, there was much for less-experienced law librarians and staff to gain from the session, given the attendees’ substantial collective experience and willingness to share it.  The success of this well-attended session may well indicate the need to add other specialty-related sessions to future conference schedules.  At the very least, it reflects the need to continue this session in future years.

 

Yet Another PDA Presentation! Presented by Janice Adlington (McMaster University);  Julie Kliever (Providence College);  Harriet Rykse (Western University);  David Swords (EBL)

Reported by:  Rob Tench  (Old Dominion University)   

Three librarians and one vendor convincingly proved that one size does not fit all in PDA land!  Adlington and Rykse are from large university libraries;  in contrast, Kliever works at a private liberal arts college much smaller in comparison.  One moderates all loan requests — two don’t.  One PDA is almost exclusively a short-term loan program, while the other two combine loans and purchases.  Regardless of parameters and models, PDA is popular and heavily used at all of their institutions.  The librarians thoroughly described their programs including best and worst experiences, challenges faced in implementing PDA, and recommendations on best practices.  Not to be outdone, Dr. Swords, acknowledged as one of library’s leading PDA authorities, concluded the program with an overview of changes in PDA since 2010, current trends in PDA, and an insightful perspective on where PDA might be headed in the future.  More consortia involvement and higher publisher costs for titles may be on the horizon!  All of the presentations were excellent, engaging, and informative.  Whether new to PDA or an experienced user, there were a multitude of helpful take-aways from this outstanding session.

 

Your Library Transformed: A Strategic Partner for Your Institution — Presented by Lana Jackman (National Forum on Information Literacy);  Anice Mills (Columbia University);  Kate Sawyer (South University);  Roger Schonfeld (Ithaka);  Bob Scott (Columbia University);  Mike Sweet (Credo Reference)
NOTE:  Lana Jackman participated via video-teleconference.

Reported by:  Grant Robertson  (MLIS Student, University of South Carolina)

Sweet started off this panel with the message that “change is the new normal,” emphasizing that we all need to be good at managing change.  He said that the way to serve all stakeholders in your organization is through continuous inquiry, and constantly looking for unmet needs.  He pointed to open access and direct participation in the curriculum as areas for libraries to show leadership.  Schonfeld followed this up by examining attitudes towards the role of the library through the lens of the faculty, and then through library directors.  He noted that the views of these two groups of the library are often inverted.  Scott and Mills added to this by stating that the primary goal of academic libraries should be to produce good researchers, not smart search engines.  Sawyer made the point that libraries need to be leaders in collaboration and in that same vein, need to take back their power as the buyer, by being proactive and asking for what is wanted.  Jackman, finished up the panel via video-teleconference by recommending that librarians work with professional organizations, conduct surveys of organizations that hire your students, and to enhance outreach efforts to your counterparts both locally and regionally.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2012
CONCURRENT SESSIONS 1

Discovery Systems: Analyzing the Gap between Professors’ Expectations and Student Behavior — Presented by Craig Brians (Virginia Tech);  Bruce Pencek (Virginia Tech)

Reported by:  Aaron Wood  (Alexander Street Press)  

A continuation of a Charleston 2011 presentation, this session sought to convey the results of extended research into student search behavior in discovery systems and faculty expectations.  The importance of making student searchers into researchers was stressed throughout the presentation.  Pencek and Brians highlighted the tendency to outsource relevance to the discovery tool being used as a core problem of student search behavior.  To help develop the insourcing of relevance, 2012 assignment instructions for students encouraged full article reading and identification of main topics.  Students were given a full article citation, asked to find it in Summon, and set the task of identifying the main idea and finding two more related articles.  This resulted in students being less likely to claim relevance based on articles being in the same journal, sharing a facet, or being on the same page of a search result than in similar assignments given in the previous year.  However, Pencek and Brians noted other issues in student search behavior in discovery systems that affect overall effectiveness, including difficulty differentiating formats, such as blogs, letters to editors, news articles, and scholarly articles.  From these findings, they concluded that discovery systems force the novice researcher to try to make sense of the information landscape in addition to forcing them to find relevant content.  Discovery systems are seemingly simple, but they require sophisticated ongoing instruction to be made truly effective in student research.

 

Enhanced E-Books, Part II: Publishers, Libraries and Digital Humanities — Presented by Nancy Gibbs (Duke University Libraries);  Sylvia K. Miller (University of North Carolina Press)

Reported by:  Amanda Mays  (University of South Carolina, SLIS)   

In this session we learned about the “The LCRM Project” (Long Civil Rights Movement Project), which is grant funded and just got the grant renewed.  The LCRM project involves using Enhanced eBooks, which are called “portal books” and “multilayered books.”  This discussion focused on the enhanced eBook, “Freedom’s Teacher: The Life of Septima Clark” which is part of a Southern oral history project.  The multilayered eBook included audio interviews, author excerpts, and newspaper articles, and the user can pan over a page like in MapQuest.  There are also DOIs in the bibliography.  The book’s publishing format is called EPub with mp3 and mp4 files in it and html navigation, and Kindle for iPhone and iPad, Nook Color, Nook Tablet, and iBooks for iPhone and iPad can play this and other multilayered multimedia eBooks.  The speakers noted that they are currently waiting for Google Books and other platforms to take up the multimedia books.  I really enjoyed this session, especially when they played the audio recording of Septima Clark’s voice from the book.

 

That’s all the reports we have room for in this issue.  Watch for more reports from the 2012 Charleston Conference in upcoming issues of Against the Grain.  Presentation material (PowerPoint slides, handouts) and taped session links from many of the 2012 sessions are available online.  Visit the Conference Website at www.katina.info/conference. — KS

Sign-up Today!

Join our mailing list to receive free daily updates.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest