Annual Program Review Update
*Be sure to include information from all three campuses.
Program: LIBRARY
Date: January 23, 2009
Name
Jason Leppaluoto, Director, LRC
Ruth Moon, Librarian
Email/Phone
Jason-Leppaluoto@redwoods.edu / 476-4264
Ruth-Moon@redwoods.edu / 476-4263
1. State your program’s mission and its relation to the mission of the college.
The College of the Redwoods Library:
•
•
•
Provides high-quality services and programs that promote information literacy, critical
thinking, lifelong learning skills, and a spirit of free inquiry in CR students and the
campus community.
Provides organized information resources that support the achievement of program and
learning outcomes throughout the college.
Provides an environment, both physical and virtual, conducive to the access, use, study,
and understanding of information resources, and to the development of a community of
learners.
The library plays both a direct and a supporting role in the educational mission of the college.
Its direct role takes the form of instruction that teaches students skills foundational to their
success, thereby “maximizing the success of each student.” In addition, library instruction
enhances the ability to perform self-directed research, a critical skill for lifelong learning.
This addresses the college’s expectation that each student will “develop an appreciation for
life-long learning.”
The library’s supporting role is found in the information resources it provides, resources that
help each student “achieve appropriate learning outcomes in his/her courses and programs.”
Likewise, the library as a place achieves this same end, most obviously by providing students
with a place to study.
2. Program Changes
Have there been any changes in your program or area since your last Program Review?
No ____ (go to next question)
Yes _X_ Describe the changes below:
A college-wide reorganization resulted in the dissolution of Student Services and Learning
Support (SSLS) and the creation of Learning and Student Development (LSD) combining the
academic divisions and student support areas. The library was part of this reorganization and
is now housed in LSD.
- 1 -
Further organization of LSD took place in November 2008 with the library joining the
academic divisions and athletics under a dean of instruction. The library will report to this
dean once the position is filled.
In addition, the library began offering courses under the LIBR prefix in fall 2008. See
section 11.
3. Program Trends
If applicable, describe how external or internal changes are impacting your program and
describe efforts within your area to address these impacts. Include supporting data from
Institutional Research or other sources in your discussion.
In 2007, the Association of College and Research Libraries completed an environmental scan
identifying the top ten assumptions for the future of academic libraries and librarians.
Several assumptions anticipate the need for an increased emphasis on technology, electronic
resources, and remote delivery:
Assumption 1: “There will be an increased emphasis on digitizing collections, preserving
digital archives, and improving methods of data storage, retrieval, curation, and service.”
Assumption 3: “Students and faculty will continue to demand increasing access to library
resources and services, and to expect to find a rich digital library presence both in
enterprise academic systems and as a feature of social computing.”
Assumption 5: “The evolution of information technology will shape both the practice of
scholarly inquiry and the daily routine of students and faculty, and demands for
technology-related services and technology-rich user environments will continue to grow
and will require additional funding.”
Assumption 8: “Online learning will continue to expand as an option for students and
faculty – both on campus and off – and libraries will gear resources and services for
delivery to a distributed academic community.”
In addition, assumption 2 identifies the need for the librarian skill set to evolve to
include, among other things, a proficiency with Web 2.0 technologies.
Some of these nationally-identified assumptions have already been realized locally. For
example, student demand for wireless Internet access suggests assumption 5, and the
college’s commitment to grow online education suggests assumption 8.
The library has been responding vigorously to such trends for at least the past decade, starting
with the purchase of an online catalog (Voyager) in 2000. Recent responses include:
(A) Purchase of EZProxy, a software gateway allowing secure remote access to the library’s
online resources through a single, uniform access point. We plan to install this in spring
2009.
(B) We have developed a library blog in an effort to engage students through the web site.
(C) We are developing a research skills course to be offered online.
- 2 -
(D) We asked the webmaster to develop an “Ask a Librarian” form for the library web site,
and this was implemented in August 2008. We are currently considering implementation
of a web chat interface to allow real-time remote reference with our librarians.
As with higher education generally, libraries are changing rapidly. The growth of online
resources and expectations of 24/7 access have compelled libraries to reconsider both their
collections and their service delivery models. Despite the increased emphasis on online
resources, however, we have not seen a significant drop-off in the use of physical resources.
Check-outs from the CR Library (all locations) have remained right around 20,000 since
2004/2005. Faculty also continue to request physical materials. These facts suggest that we
need to continue to collect physical resources to some extent.
We must also keep in mind the different way in which online resources impact the budget.
Most quality research sources (e.g. collections of full-text periodicals) are subscription-based,
often with price determined by FTES. This means that they involve ongoing costs, and that
cost will go up with enrollment. The following chart reveals some increases we will see with
growth:
Online Resource
EBSCO
CQ Researcher
Encyclopedia Britannica
Gale Small Business
Access Science
NetLibrary
Pricing Structure
Up to 2500 FTES: $13,172; over 2500 FTES: $17,186
Price increase at 5000 FTES.
$0.31 per FTES.
Under 3000 FTES: $2,472; 3000-5000 FTES: $3,146
$0.18 per FTES.
Under 3000 FTES: $3,100; over 3000 FTES: $4,100
The library will need to receive additional funding as enrollment grows. Otherwise, we will
be forced to cut resources or services as student numbers increase.
4. Budget Resources
List your department’s budget for the following categories in the table below. Restricted
funds have a sponsor/grantor/donor (federal, state, local government, etc). The funds are
restricted by the sponsor/grantor/donor. Everything else (including action plans) is
unrestricted.
Category
Supply and printing budget
Unrestricted Funds
Total: $19,667
Eureka
$19,217
Breakdown
$4,927 [Discretionary]
$3,424 (Supplies)
$1,503 (Print Services)
$1,131 [Fines]*
$4,568 [ID Card]
$8,591 [Printers]*
$6,991 (Supplies)
- 3 -
Restricted Funds
$1,600 (Xerox Charges)
Equipment replacement and
repair budget**
Mendocino
$450
Total: $40,438
District
$11,717
Breakdown
$11,717 [District/Voyager]
Professional Development
Total: $11,260
Del Norte
$11,260
Breakdown
$11,260 [Block Grant]
$11,260 (Computers)
Eureka
$28,721
Breakdown
$760 [Discretionary]
$760 (New Monitors)
$2,975 [ID Card]
$24,986 [Printers]
$15,923 (Maintenance)
$9,063 (New Equipment)
Total: $435
Eureka
$435
Breakdown
$435 [Discretionary]
Work-study funding
Total: $30,000
Additional Budget Items
Eureka
$30,000
Breakdown
$30,000 [Federal WS]
Total: $15,169
Other (i.e. Collections)***
Total: $6,104
Eureka
$6,104
Breakdown
$6,104 [Discretionary]
$4,111 (OCLC)
$167 (Software)
$258 (RAM)
$110 (Admin Travel)
$495 (Membership Fees)
$258 (Security)
$705 (Postage)
Eureka
$86
Breakdown
$86 [Block Grant]
$86 (DVD Rack)
Total: $31,030
Total: $64,952
District
$1,856
District
$35,114
- 4 -
Del Norte
$15,083
Breakdown
$15,083 [Bond]
$15,083 (Furniture)
Breakdown
$1,856 [Fines]
$1,856 (Databases)
Eureka
$23,424
Breakdown
$13,085 [Discretionary]
$6,727 (Books)
$6,222 (Serials)
$136 (Videos)
$7,877 [Fines]
$7,395 (Books)
$482 (Videos)
$2,462 [PLE]
$2,462 (Videos)
Del Norte
$2,679
Breakdown
$2,552 [Discretionary]
$1,761 (Books)
$713 (Serials)
$78 (Audio)
$127 [Fines]
$127 (Books)
Breakdown
$35,114 [TTIP]
$35,114 (Databases)
Eureka
$20,884
Breakdown
$20,884 [Block Grant]
$15,853 (Books)
$5,031 (Videos)
Del Norte
$4,477
Breakdown
$4,477 [Block Grant]
$3,397 (Books)
$1,080 (Videos)
Mendocino
$4,477
Breakdown
$4,477 [Block Grant]
$3,397 (Books)
$1,080 (Videos)
Mendocino
$3,071
Breakdown
$2,782 [Discretionary]
$1,835 (Books)
$947 (Serials)
$125 [Fines]
$125 (Books)
$164 [PLE]
$164 (Videos)
Table reflects FY2007-2008 budget.
*Revenue for Fines is generated through overdue fines and replacement fees; money
collected is used to fund collection purchases and supplies necessary to maintain the
collection. Revenue for Printers is generated through pay-for-printing via GoPrint; money
collected is used to purchase printing supplies and to maintain and upgrade the printers.
**I am including budget allocated to computer hardware under the Equipment category. This
includes maintenance contracts which may also encompass software maintenance as well
(e.g. Voyager).
***Collection development funds are administered through Eureka. Del Norte and
Mendocino receive funds proportionate to their FTES.
- 5 -
Is the funding for these areas adequate?
If not, describe the impact of unaddressed needs on your program outcomes and ability to
serve students and the community.
A qualified yes with respect to the collection. Thanks to supplemental funding (TTIP, fines,
block grants), the overall funding received was excellent in FY2007-2008. The instructional
block grants increased the library’s base collection development budget (the discretionary)
for physical resources by 164%.
Ideally, library resource costs would be built into course and program costs. Factors such as
quantity and currency of materials required, external accreditation demands, and cost of
materials in the discipline would dictate a program’s library collection allotment. Given this
complexity in the ideal, it is not easy to say to what extent the library collection is normally
underfunded without performing a great deal of research. Comparing CR to other California
community colleges of roughly the same size can at least give us a rough estimate. Using the
Council of Chief Librarians (CCL) Annual Data Survey, we find that the mean expenditure of
print and audiovisual materials among California community colleges between 4000 and
7000 FTES (a group including Gavilan, Imperial Valley, Santiago Canyon, and CR among
others) to be $58,879 in 2003-2004 and $70,462 in 2004-2005 (excluding non-reports in both
cases). Excluding block grant and PLE funds, the FY2007-2008 physical resource collection
budget for CR comes to $26,548, well short of the figures cited above. Of course, since the
survey figures presumably include grant funds as well, we should not see this shortfall as a
straightforward indictment of the library’s base budget allocation. It may be that community
college library collection budgets are generally relying on supplementary grants such as the
instructional equipment and library materials grant (known locally as the instructional block
grant). What should be noted, however, is the severe collection budget reduction that will
result if these grant funds are diverted elsewhere. The discretionary collection development
budget by itself is well below what is being budgeted at comparable institutions.
The budget is not adequate with respect to technology if the library is expected to replace its
own computers. I take it that this is better handled as part of an overall technology plan
through a dedicated district-level budget and not at the unit level, but the reality is that we
have felt compelled to replace computers and monitors when money could be obtained (e.g.
through the block grant). Specific technological needs are addressed in the Facilities and
Technology section.
The budget is not adequate with respect to staff development. While faculty are able to
receive money for such purposes through the college, other staff cannot. The library world is
changing rapidly and all staff need ongoing training to keep up with those changes. Training
opportunities are actually quite plentiful, ranging from state and national conferences
(appropriate for the director) to online courses (appropriate for anyone on staff). In the
absence of a college-wide development budget for classified staff, the director has taken it
upon himself to provide some funds for training library staff. This is minimal, however, and
does not allow, for example, the systems technician to receive valuable training in supporting
Voyager (these classes costing in the vicinity of $900 each). Optimally, the library would
have an annual staff development budget of around $5000, $2000 for online course costs used
to enhance staff skills and $3000 for the director to attend two conferences per year. Failure
to fund staff development will not, of course, impact the mission immediately or directly.
Continued lack of funding will, however, mean that library staff will have a more difficult
- 6 -
time keeping up with developments in their areas of expertise and networking with those
outside the district who might be able to offer solutions to problems encountered. This will,
in turn, inhibit innovation and delay implementation of best practices, impeding the library’s
ability to be truly excellent in the fulfillment of its mission.
5. Staff Resources
Complete the Classified Staff Employment Grid below (please list full- and part-time staff). This
does not include faculty, managers, or administrative positions. If a staff position is shared with
other areas, estimate the fraction of their workload dedicated to your area.
Staff Employed in the Program
Full-time staff
Assigned Area
(classified) (give
number)
Part-time staff
(give number)
Gains over Prior
Year
Losses over Prior
Year (give reason:
retirement,
reassignment,
health, etc.)
Library
0
Eureka:
+1 (FT)***
0
District: 7
Breakdown
Eureka: 5*
Del Norte: 1**
Mendocino: 1
Table reflects FY2007-2008 classified staff numbers.
*The library systems technician position was filled for approximately 6 months of the 20072008 academic year (from January to June).
**The Del Norte library technician is designated as a full-time library position, but the
technician is often called upon to perform academic support center duties, for example,
administering tests. The previous library technician resigned at the beginning of September
2007 to move with her husband to Arizona. A temporary employee filled in from that time
until December 2007 when the new library technician started.
***This gain in classified staff results from the library losing a managerial position, the
library technical services manager position being downgraded to a classified library systems
technician position. The overall number of approved library positions (counting both
classified and AMC positions) remained the same.
Do you need more full-time or part-time classified staff? If yes, explain why.
Eureka
No. The number of approved positions is adequate; unfortunately, these are seldom all filled.
Staffing is threadbare at best, resulting in service suffering when someone is sick or on
vacation. The current (2008-2009) situation where full-time positions are left unfilled and
temporary workers used as substitutes is untenable in the long term.
Del Norte
- 7 -
Yes. Since the Del Norte library technician routinely performs academic support center tasks
in addition to her library duties, there is a need for at least a part-time classified employee
with ASC responsibilities. Optimally, this position would include some library responsibility
(e.g. circulating materials) and be scheduled to include some evenings, allowing both the
library and the academic support center at Del Norte to extend service hours, even if only a
couple nights a week.
Mendocino
No. The number of positions is adequate. Unlike at Del Norte, there is an instructional
support specialist who oversees the ASC, allowing the library technician to focus exclusively
on library services.
6. Work study Resources
Work study students employed in the program
“Type” of
How many? (give
Assigned Area
workstudy(feder
number)
al, Calworks,
EOPS)
Library
District: 13
Breakdown
Eureka: 8
(97 hours/week)
Del Norte: 4
(31 hours/week)
Mendocino: 1
(10 hours/week)
Eureka:
Federal
Del Norte:
Federal
Calworks
Mendocino:
Federal
Gains over Prior
Year
Losses over Prior
Year
0
0
Do you need more work study student help? If yes, explain why.
Eureka
No. Work study student support is adequate to our needs.
Del Norte
No. There are times, however, when it is difficult to schedule adequate coverage due to
sharing a student worker with the bookstore.
Mendocino
Yes. The ten hours a week of work study student support provides sufficient coverage to
allow the library technician to go to lunch and attend required meetings. However, having an
additional student worker (10 more hours per week) would improve service by (1) providing
coverage during times when the technician is offering orientations or assisting other students,
(2) reducing shelving times, and (3) reducing shelving errors by increasing the amount of
shelf-reading performed.
7. Facilities and Technology
Are facilities adequate for achieving the outcomes of this department/program? ( ) Yes
- 8 -
(X) No
If No was checked, complete the following grid for each space that does not meet the needs of this
department/program:
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
Multipurpose room / LRC 103 (Eureka)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
(X)
( ) ADA ( ) Number
( ) Technology
( ) Other (briefly
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
describe):
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
LRC 103 (Multipurpose Room) becomes hot, stuffy, and smelly, especially on warm, damp
days after multiple sessions with all the computers running. Needless to say, this is not
conducive to learning. Additional ventilation is required for this room (a work request for a
window that opens was submitted 7/7/2008).
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: 159 sessions (427 hours) on
Students: Approximately 743 students in
average per semester, 29 of these being
library instructional sessions per semester.
library instructional sessions.
Data not available for non-library sessions.
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
System Technician’s Office / LRC 110B (Eureka)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
(X)
( ) ADA ( ) Number
( ) Technology
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
( ) Other (briefly
describe):
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
LRC 110B (the system technician’s office) faces south and can become quite toasty when the
sun shines. Window treatments or better shading or additional ventilation is required for this
room. A work request to this end was re-activated 10/12/2007.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: N/A
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
Library / LRC 100 (Eureka)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
(X) Technology
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
- 9 -
(X) Other (briefly
describe):
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
(1) LRC 100 contains 80 computers heavily used by students for research, writing,
communication, and recreation. It is my understanding that these computers were
installed when the building first opened, making them at least six years old. They are
showing their age. In addition to being slow, barely able to accommodate the
latest software, we are seeing them go down with increasing regularity. All these
computers (and monitors) need to be replaced. If a replacement cycle cannot be put in
place in the near future, installation of additional RAM in each of these computers would
at least alleviate some of the sluggishness and extend their useful lives.
Option 1:
Estimated cost per new computer: $1,120 (Tangent Medallion 5065 with upgrades to
CPU and RAM) + shipping.
Total cost (80 computers): $89,600 + shipping.
Option 2:
Cost per computer (RAM only): $118 (two 512MB DIMMs each) + shipping.
Total cost (80 computers): $9,440 + shipping.
(2) It takes entirely too long for student-use computers to be updated throughout the LRC.
We routinely have to inform students that they cannot perform some specific task on our
computers since they lack the requisite updates (e.g. in Flash). When a CR instructor has
assigned this task and the student discovers that they cannot complete the assignment in
the library, the college looks dysfunctional. I fully understand that this is a breakdown in
communication and seldom the fault of TSS. My complaint here is only that we have no
way to quickly solve the problem once it is brought to our attention. Is there a software
solution that would allow updates to be installed on all these computers from a
centralized location? This would allow a faster turnaround time on update requests; the
current re-ghosting procedure is slow and cumbersome and not meeting the needs of our
students. Alternately, could library staff be granted authority to install updates on LRC
computers as needed?
(3) Student computer desks are not suitable for many forms of student work. When doing
research or writing papers, students need to have sufficient desk space to open books or
consult notes while at the computer. The current desks do not provide this space, making
tasks such as quoting a passage from a physical book a clumsy enterprise. The zigzag
kiosks are especially egregious in this regard. Replacing at least some of these desks is
recommended. Replacing the current, bulky monitors with flat-screens would also help.
Estimated cost per computer desk (ADA compliant): $545 + shipping.
Total cost (12 computer desks): $6,540 + shipping.
(4) Wireless Internet access has been a wonderful addition to the LRC, and seems to be wellused. My thanks to TSS for making this possible. The one drawback is that users on the
wireless network cannot easily print. I would like to see a solution whereby wireless
users could print through the library's Go Print system. I realize, however, that this may
not be a simple matter given that these are distinct networks.
- 10 -
(5) The library could use an official bulletin board and improved signage, including signs
explicitly indicating the circulation desk and reference desk. End-of-stack signs could
also be improved. They are currently just paper stuck on with tape.
Estimated cost of bulletin board: $720 + shipping.
Estimated cost per end-of-stack sign: $12 + shipping.
Total cost (170 end-of-stack signs): $2,040 + shipping.
(6) Small step stools allow library users and staff a means to safely reach books on the
highest shelves. Most libraries require one stool per aisle. We currently have five, but
need twenty to meet this standard. Purchasing fifteen step stools is recommended.
Estimated cost per kick stool: $80 + shipping.
Total cost (15 kick stools): $1,200 + shipping.
(7) The design of the LRC results in an unfortunate traffic flow pattern. Visitors to the
academic support center or math lab must walk through the main library study space.
Students, faculty, and staff walk through individually, but also in groups of two or more,
often chatting. This foot traffic is visible and audible to anyone working in the main
library study space. As many as 30 persons may walk through per hour. The library
has designated a quiet study area in the northeast corner of the library, but we should
reduce impediments to study elsewhere. Creating a new entrance to the ASC seems to be
the obvious (albeit expensive) solution.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: Average gate count per semester was
93,439 in FY2007-2008. This number reflects
all visitors, not just students, and includes
visitors to the ASC, the math lab, the high-tech
center, and the multipurpose room.
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
Copy Room / LRC 109 (Eureka)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
(X) Technology
( ) Other (briefly
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
describe):
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
Since upgrading to new GoPrint hardware in August, we have been unable to allow students
to pay for photocopies using their ID cards. Instead, the copiers have had to be coinoperated, causing much consternation among both students and staff. We need the cables
that will allow the new card readers to successfully communicate with the copiers.
From the library suggestion box: “Students do not carry large amounts of change and the
- 11 -
copier situation is very unpractical [sic.], so set up money jars. Students will donate. They
want copiers that WORK.”
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: N/A
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
Reserves Room / LRC 108 (Eureka)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
( ) Technology
(X) Other (briefly
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
describe):
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
We are delighted to be able to assist faculty in delivering textbooks and supplementary
materials to students through our reserves service. As this has grown in popularity, however,
we find ourselves running low on space. The reserves area has space to expand if we
eliminate or move our microform cabinets. We would then need to add shelving to this
vacated space.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: Items on reserve in the Eureka library
has grown from 1,626 in September 2007 to
2,220 in September 2008. Reserve check-outs
averaged 8,809 per semester in FY2007-2008.
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
Library Server (Voyager)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
(X) Technology
( ) Other (briefly
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
describe):
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
The integrated library system (Ex Libris Voyager) server is approaching end of life. It will
need to be either upgraded or, more likely, replaced. We are no longer able to upgrade
Voyager since the server does not meet the minimum system requirements for the latest
versions. The next Voyager release is version 7.0.4, scheduled for March 2009. We are on
6.5.1, our last update taking place July 2007. Mission impact is minimal in the short-term,
but increases as time goes by. The inability to upgrade Voyager means that staff and students
will not be able to take advantage of software improvements. On the public services side,
students will be using an outmoded search interface lacking more powerful features. On the
technical services side, staff will not be benefitting from enhanced or time-saving features
and will thus be less efficient than they could be. In addition, the likelihood of encountering
- 12 -
system problems is increased when we make large version leaps as opposed to smaller,
incremental upgrades. Ex Libris will eventually stop supporting our current Voyager version,
at which point we will be on perilous ground.
Estimated cost for new server: $10,000 + Ex Libris configuration costs + shipping.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: In September and October of 2008,
the library catalog averaged 1,210 visits and
2,777 searches per month. This includes all
users of the catalog, not just students.
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
Remote Database Access
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
(X) Technology
( ) Other (briefly
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
describe):
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
Library online resources are still not fully accessible to remote users. For instance, JSTOR
currently cannot be accessed off-campus. Those that can currently be accessed off-campus
generally do so by recognizing the user's library barcode pattern. Besides being inconvenient
and particularly problematic for DE students who cannot get to campus, it is also less than
secure given that one could access library resources long after leaving the college. Our
database licenses do not extend to those no longer at the college. In an attempt to solve these
problems, the library has recently purchased EZProxy, a software gateway that will provide a
secure login for all our online resources. We will need server space and assistance from ITS
to set this up.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: Online resources are heavily used.
There were 66,536 searches and 39,260
document retrievals in FY2007-2008.
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
ID Card Software
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
(X) Technology
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
( ) Other (briefly
describe):
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
- 13 -
Our Easy Badge ID software is approaching end of life. The vendor, CI Solutions, informs
us that it only guarantees support for our software version through the end of 2009. It will
thus need to be upgraded to CI Badge v7.5 at all three centers by 2010. The library may be
able to fund this itself through its ID Card fund.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: With the exception of a few DE
students (who do not acquire a card at all), all
students acquire their college ID through this
system.
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
Learning Resource Center (Del Norte)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
(X) Technology
( ) Other (briefly
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
describe):
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
(1) While not essential, wireless Internet access has become an expected service in libraries.
Given its popularity in the Eureka LRC, we can reasonably expect that there is demand
for it at the branches as well. Indeed, requests for a wireless connection are received at
the Del Norte circulation desk on a weekly basis. Wireless access might also end up
being a cost-saver. If enough students end up accessing the Internet through their own
computers, we may not have to expand the number of computers in the library as
enrollment grows.
(2) The roof over the new LRC addition has leaked. It is my understanding that recent
repairs have eliminated the worst of the problem but that more extensive alterations may
be warranted.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: The wireless network at the Eureka
LRC has recorded 956 users transferring data as
of December 2008. This includes all visitors to
the LRC, not just students.
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
LRC Conference Room (Del Norte)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
( ) Technology
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
(X) Other (briefly
describe):
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
- 14 -
your needs:
The addition of a whiteboard would improve this room’s functionality.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: This room sees an estimated use of
600 people per semester. It is used by students
working on class projects and for staff
meetings.
List space (classroom, instructional, office) name/number:
Learning Resource Center / LRC 105 (Mendocino)
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
()
( ) ADA ( ) Number
(X) Technology
(X) Other (briefly
Ventilation /
access
of seats /
(computers,
describe):
room temp
work stations projectors, internet)
Describe the specific action and estimated cost (if available) to make this space adequate for
your needs:
(1) While not essential, wireless Internet access has become an expected service in libraries.
Given its popularity in the Eureka LRC, we can reasonably expect that there is demand
for it at the branches as well. Wireless access might also end up being a cost-saver. If
enough students end up accessing the Internet through their own computers, we may not
have to expand the number of computers in the library as enrollment grows.
(2) A people counter would provide a more accurate picture of facility use. This data could
then be used by the library technician in making scheduling decisions.
Estimated cost for a people counter: $158 + $8 shipping = $166.
If applicable, list the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room
each semester, and the total number of students enrolled in these sections.
Sections: N/A
Students: The wireless network at the Eureka
LRC has recorded 956 users transferring data as
of December 2008. This includes all visitors to
the LRC, not just students.
8. Equipment
Is the available equipment adequate to achieve the outcomes of the department/program?
(X) Yes ( ) No
If No was checked in Item 8, complete the following grid for each piece of equipment being
requested for this department/program:
Equipment
Approximate
Price
Number of
students using
equipment each
- 15 -
Describe how the equipment allows
achievement of program outcomes
semester (if
applicable)
Equipment Repair
Is the equipment used for your department/program in need of repair, which is outside your
current budget allotment? This does not include classroom specific equipment repair
described in the facilities section. ( ) Yes (X) No
If Yes was checked, provide the following information to justify a budget allotment request:
Equipment
requiring repair
Repair Cost /
Annual
maintenance cost
Number of
students using
equipment each
semester (if
applicable)
Describe how the equipment allows
achievement of program outcomes
9. Faculty Resource Needs (If applicable)
If applicable, complete the Faculty Employment Grids below (please list full- and part-time
faculty numbers in separate rows):
Faculty Load Distribution in the Program
Discipline
Name
(e.g.,
Counseling,
EOPS,
Library)
Total
Load for
fall 2007
term
% of
Total
Load by
FullTime
Faculty
% of Total
Load by
Part-Time
Faculty
% Change
from fall
2006
% Change
from fall
2005
Explanations
and Additional
Information
(e.g.,
retirement,
reassignment,
etc.)
Library
602 work
hours
100%
0%
0%
0%
The library
received
associate
faculty support
(10 hours a
week) in spring
2008.
- 16 -
a. If you are requesting a full-time faculty position develop an attachment to this report
that addresses the following criteria (as listed in AR 305.03)
• The ratio of full-time to associate faculty
• Current availability of associate faculty
• Relation to program review recommendations
• Effect on diversity of the faculty
• Effect on academic offerings and ability to serve students and the community
• Effect on the vitality and future direction of a program and/or the college
• Effect on student learning
b. If your Associate Faculty needs are not being met, describe your efforts to recruit
Associate faculty and/or describe barriers or limitations that prevent retaining or
recruiting Associate Faculty
The library received approval to hire associate faculty starting in spring 2008. This
has been a great help, allowing us to increase staffing at the reference desk. I hope
funding continues for associate librarians.
10. Learning Outcomes Assessment Report
List all expected program-level outcomes, whether you have completed the assessment loop
or not. For each outcome, identify the means of assessment and the criteria for success.
Summarize the data that have been collected in the ‘Assessment Results’ column. If no data
have been collected and analyzed for a particular outcome, use the ‘Assessment Results’
column to clarify when these data will be collected and analyzed. In the fourth column,
indicate how the assessment results are being used to improve the program.
Program Outcomes
(may be operational for
some student service and
administrative areas)
Means of Assessment and
Performance Criteria
Assessment Results
Summary
Students succeed in
achieving learning
outcomes in their
courses and
programs.
Means of Assessment:
(1) Comparing student
learning outcome
measures for students
who have taken library
instructional sessions
with those who have not,
specifically for those
outcomes associated
with research tasks.
Similar comparisons
could be made for
assignment, course, and
overall grade, course
success, success in
subsequent courses, and
retention.
(1) The measures
described have not yet
been implemented.
The library plans to
collect student IDs for
those taking library
sessions, and work with
IR to develop matched
comparisons. This will
be part of the
forthcoming library
assessment plan to be
written in spring 2009.
(2) Responses to
- 17 -
(2) A library survey has
been administered
biennially starting in
2001. The percentage
of respondents agreeing
Use of Results
question 7 of the
biennial library survey
includes: “Because my
class came to the library
for an orientation, I am
better able to do my
class-related research.”
Performance criteria:
(1) Significantly higher
outcome measures,
grades, etc. among
students having library
instruction.
Library collections
meet the curricular
needs of the college.
(2) A high percentage of
students agreeing or
strongly agreeing that
library orientations help
them do their research
better, or an increase in
percentage over time.
Means of Assessment:
(1) Responses to
question 8 of the
biennial library survey
includes: “I usually find
the books I need at the
library.” And question
9: “I usually find the
magazine / journal
articles I need at the
library.”
(2) Faculty responses to
library needs on
instructional program
reviews.
(3) Usage statistics.
Performance criteria:
(1) A high percentage of
students agreeing or
strongly agreeing that
they usually find the
books and articles they
need at the library, or an
increase in this
percentage over time.
- 18 -
or strongly agreeing
with this statement has
ranged from 65% to
73%. Caveat: since
these are student selfreports, the numbers
are not necessarily
indicative of actual
success.
(1) The percentage of
respondents agreeing or
strongly agreeing with
these statements has
ranged from 36%
(2001) to 49% (2007)
for books and 30%
(2001) to 71% (2007)
for articles. These
numbers suggest that
the collection has
improved since 2001.
(2) Needs identified in
program reviews have
not been coded or
quantified, though they
have been used as
qualitative data.
(3) These measures are
routinely collected, but
have not yet been
integrated into
collection evaluation in
any systematic way.
This will be part of the
forthcoming library
assessment plan to be
Library needs
identified by
faculty through
area program
reviews have been
used to make
collection
development
decisions. In
particular, the
library received
IELM block grant
funding for a
submission based
on needs identified
through program
reviews.
(2) A low number of
identified needs, or a
decrease over time.
Library environs and
infrastructure meet
the learning needs of
students.
written in spring 2009.
(3) High use; a high
percentage of students
and faculty using library
resources. Or an
increase in use and
percentage of users over
time.
Means of Assessment:
(1) Responses to
question 4 of the
biennial library survey
includes: “I find the
library comfortable and a
good place to work.”
(2) Comments made via
comment cards, the web
site, and the blog.
(1) The percentage of
respondents agreeing or
strongly agreeing with
this statement has
ranged from 73%
(2001) to 91% (2007).
These numbers suggest
that the library space
has improved since
2001 (probably due to
the move to a new
building).
(3) Usage statistics.
Performance criteria:
(1) A high percentage of
students agreeing or
strongly agreeing that
the library is a good
place to work, or an
increase in this
percentage over time.
(2) A low number of
complaints regarding
environs and
infrastructure, or a
decrease over time.
(3) High use; a high
percentage of students
and faculty using library
resources. Or an
increase in use and
percentage of users over
time.
(2) Comments have not
been coded or
quantified, but have
been treated as
qualitative data.
Student comments
led the library to
advocate for
wireless Internet
access in the
library.
Low newspaper
usage informed the
decision to move
the newspapers
from the reserves
area to the public
area. Newspaper
usage as measured
by browse numbers
has increased since
then.
(3) Gate count in 2007
was up from 2001, but
down from 2003 (when
the building was brand
new). Gate count per
FTES has been trending
upward since 2005.
Other usage statistics
(e.g. circulation) have
been used on an ad hoc
basis in making space
decisions.
List all course-level student learning outcomes for which some assessment activity
(assessment, analysis, or use of results) has taken place since the most recent program
review, and complete the table below as appropriate
- 19 -
Student Learning
Outcomes (courselevel)*
Means of Assessment and
Performance Criteria
Assessment Results
Summary
Students are able to
use the online library
catalog to identify
resources by title,
author, and subject.
Means of Assessment:
(1) Catalog usage
statistics and search
analysis.
(1) Catalog usage
statistics are being
collected, but have not
been analyzed. One
problem here is that
there is no simple way
to separate student
searches from staff and
faculty searches, or, for
that matter, to isolate
students who have
received library
instruction. This issue
will need to be
addressed in the
forthcoming library
assessment plan.
(2) Responses to
question 10 of the
biennial library survey
includes: “I find the
computer catalog easy to
use and understand.”
Performance criteria:
(1) High catalog use;
high numbers of
successful searches. Or
an increase in use and
success over time.
(2) A high percentage of
students agreeing or
strongly agreeing that
the catalog is easy to
use, or an increase over
time.
Students are able to
physically locate an
item in the library
using its catalog
record.
Means of Assessment:
(1) Catalog usage
statistics and search
analysis combined with
circulation data.
Performance criteria:
(1) A high percentage of
catalog use followed by
item circulation, or an
increase in incidence of
this sequence over time.
- 20 -
(2) The percentage of
respondents agreeing or
strongly agreeing with
this statement has
ranged from 42%
(2001) to 58% (2007).
Caveat: this is merely
student perception and
may not reflect actual
ability.
(1) Catalog usage
statistics are being
collected, but have not
been analyzed and have
not been linked to
circulation. One
problem here is that
there is no simple way
to separate student
searches from staff and
faculty searches, or, for
that matter, to isolate
students who have
received library
instruction. This issue
will need to be
addressed in the
forthcoming library
assessment plan.
Use of Results
Students are able to
use the library’s
online databases to
obtain information on
a research topic.
Means of Assessment:
(1) Online database
usage statistics and
search analysis.
(2) Analysis of citations
in student papers.
Performance criteria:
(1) High database use;
high number of
successful searches. Or
an increase in use and
success over time.
(2) High number of
citations from library
databases, or an increase
in this number over time.
(1) Online database
usage statistics are
being collected, but
have not been analyzed.
As with catalog usage,
there is no simple way
to distinguish between
student searches and
staff and faculty
searches, or to isolate
students who have
received instruction.
(2) No data has been
collected. This will be
addressed in the
forthcoming library
assessment plan; such a
measure will require
cooperation from
instructional faculty.
*For the library, student learning outcomes are not course-level at the present time. These
outcomes result from instructional sessions integrated into other courses, and from one-on-one
reference transactions between student and faculty (or, in the case of Del Norte and Mendocino,
between student and library technician). The proposed research skills course will, of course, have
student learning outcomes at the course level. Most of the measures described here have obvious
problems and will need to be reevaluated as the library develops a formal assessment plan.
Discuss the extent to which part-time faculty (if applicable) have been involved in the dialogue
about assessing student learning outcomes:
Part-time faculty have been involved in the discussion through informal discussion with the
faculty librarian and director, and through requests for comments during the program review
writing process.
11. Curriculum Update (if applicable)
Identify curricular revisions and innovations undertaken
a.
in the last year.
In spring 2008, Vinnie Peloso, professor of Reading, developed a one-credit, late-start,
book-of-the-year discussion group offered as a special topics library course (LIBR 99).
This course was offered in fall 2008.
b.
planned for the coming year.
With the success of the book-of-the-year discussion group as a face-to-face offering (19
students enrolled), the library will be offering it again in spring 2009, this time as an
online course. It will once again be taught by Vinnie Peloso.
- 21 -
The full-time faculty librarian and an associate faculty librarian plan to collaborate on
resurrecting General Studies 5: Academic Research. They intend to update the course
outline and receive curriculum committee approval in spring 2009, with the aim of
offering it as an online course no later than fall 2009.
Complete the grid below
Course
Year Course Outline
Last Updated
Year Next
Update
Expected
LIBR 99: Book of the
Year Discussion
Group
2008
2012
Was the course
added or
deleted?
Added
If the proposed course outlines updates from last year’s annual update (or comprehensive
review) were not completed, please explain why.
12. Communication
Are the current lines of administrative, faculty, and staff communication adequate to meet the
needs of this department/program? Describe representative example of effective or
ineffective communication.
In the recent past, the library has been housed with student learning support services. Given
regular meetings of student services administrators and managers, which includes the library
director, communication with other student services has been, and continues to be, excellent.
Since the vice president of learning and student development usually attends these meetings,
communication with upper administration has generally been good as well.
Lines of communication between the library and academic areas and academic committees
could be improved, however. For example, the library is only minimally involved in
curricular planning and development, almost never in the early stages. This hinders the
library’s ability to provide resources and services in support of courses and programs, and
prevents students from being able to access needed resources. Advance notice allows the
library to allocate available funding, analyze existing resources, and then select, order,
acquire, catalog, and process additional resources.
The routing of Chancellor’s office program and course approval forms illustrates the
problem. By the time these reach the library, the addition of the course or program is a
foregone conclusion with the library director’s signature treated as a mere formality. This
presents a problem when the library director and faculty librarian are uncertain that library
resources are indeed adequate to support the course or program in question. Should the
director sign the form in bad faith, suspecting that the resources are inadequate and unaware
of any planning to install the necessary budget? Or should he refuse to sign and impede the
launch of a course or program, undoubtedly upsetting colleagues and disrupting plans. It
seems best to avoid such a dilemma, and it would be easy to do so by engaging in a
collaborative dialogue with the library at an earlier stage in the planning process.
- 22 -
To a certain extent, the same lack of communication exists at the assignment level. Students
seeking assistance would benefit if the library received advance notice of new assignments
and revisions of regular ones, thus allowing the librarians to ensure the provision of
consistent and equitable reference service to all students. In addition, it would be helpful if
librarians were consulted during the creation of research assignments, as this helps to avoid
assignments inappropriate to the level of our resource collections.
On the positive side, documentation of resource needs in program reviews has proven to be
very helpful to the library. The program review wiki takes this a step further, providing the
possibility of dialogue between program review writers and the library. However, program
review writers should feel free to consult the library director or the librarians on available
resources when working on that section, well before it reaches the wiki.
Also working fairly well is the library’s program of routing publisher catalogs to faculty.
This has been well-received and has resulted in the library receiving a sizeable number of
recommended purchases. Many of these recommendations ended up being purchased last
year when the library received IELM block grant money.
13. Action Plans
List any action plans submitted since your last annual update. Describe the status of the
plans. If they were approved, describe how they have improved your department/program.
Information Literacy Measurement. Submitted by Ruth Moon, faculty librarian.
This proposed to identify and select an information literacy assessment instrument and
determine the best method for administering the selected instrument in collaboration with
faculty and other stakeholders. The instrument would then be administered, yielding baseline
data for further information literacy assessments, including assessments of library student
learning outcomes. The action plan was not approved by the Coordinated Planning Council.
In addition to the above action plan submitted by the library, two action plans were approved
that affected the library:
Enabling Access to Career Information. Submitted by Michael Regan, career center
director.
This action plan called for the cataloging of the career center books and the installation of
Voyager circulation on a computer at the career center. The library completed cataloging of
the collection in August 2008. These items can now be found through the online library
catalog, and can be checked out at the career center.
Eureka Campus WiFi Service. Submitted by Paul Agpawa, TSS manager.
This action plan called for installation of wireless Internet service at the Eureka Learning
Resource Center. This was installed in August 2008. The library is responsible for adding
users to the approved list after they have registered with Meraki. Library staff also perform
basic troubleshooting when users have difficulty accessing the wireless network.
- 23 -
14. Department Goals Report
List goals the department will attempt to accomplish in the next three years. Each year, you
will be asked to update the Goals Report to make adjustments to the goals the program enters
this year.
College Strategic Plan Goal
Division Goal
Department Goals FY2008-11
Library Goal 1: Improve library
policies and procedures.
Goal 2: Develop and manage
human, physical, and financial
resources to effectively support
the learning environment.
Goal 3: Build a culture of
assessment.
Objective 3.1: Increase
student learning performance
through student learning
outcomes.
Objective 3.2: Increase
performance through program
learning outcomes.
Goal 2: Develop and manage
human, physical, and financial
resources to effectively support
the learning environment.
Objective 2.3: Improve
technology services and
support.
Library Goal 2: Enhance online
instruction and services.
Goal 5: Ensure student access.
Objective 5.6: Increase
distance and online educational
opportunities.
Goal 5: Ensure student access.
Objective 5.9: Increase
student participation in campus
life.
Library Goal 3: Improve student
engagement with the library.
15. Quality Improvement Plan (QIP)
The QIP is intended to assist the program in thinking and planning for a minimum of the next
three years. Many factors that influence the implementation of the department/program’s plans
can and do change over time. Each year, you will be asked to update the QIP to make
adjustments to the plans the program enters this year.
Because this document will be used to inform planning processes, it is very important that all the
requested information be provided. The form has been designed to elicit the information needed
- 24 -
for this process. Each “block” on the form is for a single recommendation; thus, the
department/program should complete all the fields for each of the recommendations.
- 25 -
Quality Improvement Plan
Category
Department Goal the Action is Connected
Recommendation Number and Title
Planned Implementation Date
Descriptions
1: Improve library policies and procedures.
1.1: Develop and implement a formal library
assessment plan.
2/2/2009
Estimated Completion Date
7/1/2009
Action/Tasks
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
1.1A: Research best practices in library
assessment.
1.1B: Develop and/or improve library student
learning and program outcomes.
1.1C: Establish measures.
1.1D: Create assessment timeline.
1.1E: Collect baseline data.
Formal assessment plan with baseline data.
Estimated Cost(s)
Substantial staff time.
Who is responsible?
Director, Learning Resource Center
Consequence if not funded
No funding required. If plan not implemented,
library assessment will be disorganized and ad
hoc.
ACCJC/WASC Standard IB: Improving
Institutional Effectiveness.
External Accreditation Recommendations (if
applicable)
Quality Improvement Plan
Category
Department Goal the Action is Connected
Recommendation Number and Title
Planned Implementation Date
Descriptions
1: Improve library policies and procedures.
1.2: Reevaluate circulation policies; clean and
correct the Voyager circulation matrix.
5/11/2009
Estimated Completion Date
8/7/2009
Action/Tasks
1.2A: Analyze current circulation matrix.
1.2B: Analyze current circulation policies.
1.2C: Assess circulation policies; modify as
appropriate.
1.2D: Update circulation matrix to reflect
policies.
Clarity on policies and a consistent Voyager
matrix. Fewer Voyager issues during
circulation transactions and overdue processes.
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
- 26 -
Estimated Cost(s)
Staff time.
Who is responsible?
Library Systems Technician.
Consequence if not funded
No funding required. If plan not implemented,
circulation errors will be continue to be
corrected on an ad hoc basis.
External Accreditation Recommendations (if
applicable)
Quality Improvement Plan
Category
Department Goal the Action is Connected
Recommendation Number and Title
Planned Implementation Date
Descriptions
1: Improve library policies and procedures.
1.3: Complete the library disaster preparedness
plan, and train staff to respond appropriately to
protect library assets.
5/11/2009
Estimated Completion Date
8/7/2009
Action/Tasks
Estimated Cost(s)
1.3A: Complete writing of library disaster
preparedness plan.
1.3B: Update pocket response plans.
1.3C: Train staff on disaster response.
Completed disaster preparedness plan and staff
trained to implement it.
Staff time.
Who is responsible?
Director, Learning Resource Center
Consequence if not funded
No funding required. If plan not implemented,
disaster preparedness plan will remain in
incomplete form, and staff will not be fully
trained.
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
External Accreditation Recommendations (if
applicable)
Quality Improvement Plan
Category
Department Goal the Action is Connected
Recommendation Number and Title
Planned Implementation Date
Descriptions
2: Enhance online instruction and services.
2.1: Enable off-campus access to online library
resources not currently available off-campus.
2/2/2009
Estimated Completion Date
7/1/2009
- 27 -
Action/Tasks
2.1A: Download EZProxy software.
2.1B: Establish database to be used for
authentication.
2.1C: Coordinate with ITS to have software
installed on a college server.
2.1D: Configure software to use authentication
database and to recognize online library
resources.
2.1E: Modify hyperlinks to route through
software.
Remote access to all online library resources
via a single login.
EZProxy already purchased. No other cost
except for staff time, including ITS/TSS staff.
Director, Learning Resource Center
ITS/TSS
No further funding required. If plan not
implemented, some online resources will not be
accessible off-campus, and library barcodes
will be required to access others.
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Estimated Cost(s)
Who is responsible?
Consequence if not funded
External Accreditation Recommendations (if
applicable)
Quality Improvement Plan
Category
Department Goal the Action is Connected
Recommendation Number and Title
Descriptions
2: Enhance online instruction and services.
2.2: Develop an online research skills course.
Planned Implementation Date
1/20/2009
Estimated Completion Date
4/24/2009
Action/Tasks
Estimated Cost(s)
2.2A: Develop course objectives, learning
outcomes, and course outline.
2.2B: Submit required forms to curriculum
committee.
2.2C: Request course be scheduled in fall 2009.
Online research skills course offered in fall
2009.
Staff time. Faculty cost when course offered.
Who is responsible?
Faculty Librarian.
Consequence if not funded
No funding required. If plan not implemented,
the library will not be offering an online
research skills course.
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
External Accreditation Recommendations (if
- 28 -
applicable)
Quality Improvement Plan
Category
Department Goal the Action is Connected
Recommendation Number and Title
Descriptions
2: Enhance online instruction and services.
2.3: Implement online reference service.
Planned Implementation Date
9/8/2009
Estimated Completion Date
1/11/2010
Action/Tasks
2.3A: Research online reference methods and
best practices.
2.3B: Select method and purchase or download
necessary software.
2.3C: Develop online reference policies and
procedures.
2.3D: Coordinate with ITS to have software
installed.
2.3E: Market online reference service.
Online reference service available and used by
students.
Unknown at this time.
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Estimated Cost(s)
Who is responsible?
Director, Learning Resource Center
Faculty Librarian
ITS
Students taking courses remote from the
Eureka campus will not have real-time access
to professional faculty librarians.
Consequence if not funded
External Accreditation Recommendations (if
applicable)
Quality Improvement Plan
Category
Department Goal the Action is Connected
Planned Implementation Date
Descriptions
3: Improve student engagement with the
library.
3.1: Develop and implement a plan for
continuously updated blog content.
1/20/2009
Estimated Completion Date
2/17/2009
Action/Tasks
3.1A: Discuss possible content with faculty and
staff.
Recommendation Number and Title
- 29 -
3.1B: Plan regular updates of featured content
and assign responsibility.
A blog that is updated at least twice weekly; a
blog that is regularly viewed and generates
student comments.
Staff time.
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Estimated Cost(s)
Who is responsible?
Director, Learning Resource Center
Library Systems Technician
No funding required. If plan not implemented,
the blog will not be regularly updated;
marketing opportunities will be missed.
Consequence if not funded
External Accreditation Recommendations (if
applicable)
Quality Improvement Plan
Category
Department Goal the Action is Connected
Recommendation Number and Title
Descriptions
3: Improve student engagement with the
library.
3.2: Develop library programming.
Planned Implementation Date
2/2/2009
Estimated Completion Date
7/1/2010
Action/Tasks
3.2A: Develop a list of potential library
programs and possible dates.
3.2B: Collaborate with student life leaders on
campus to initiate programs and events.
Regular library events that are well-attended
and further the library mission.
Unknown at this time.
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Estimated Cost(s)
Who is responsible?
Director, Learning Resource Center
Library Technician
Less vibrant student life on campus; marketing
opportunities will be missed.
Consequence if not funded
External Accreditation Recommendations (if
applicable)
- 30 -
Appendix to Library Program Review:
I also took a quick glance at some CCC library hours. There are some that
offer weekend hours, but many (I think most) do not.
Cabrillo (which has about double our FTES) is not open weekends, and is
actually open less than we are:
Monday through Thursday
8:00 am - 8:00 pm
Friday
11:00 am - 4:00 pm
Saturday & Sunday
CLOSED
Solano (about our size) is also open less than we are:
Mon - Thurs 7:45 am - 7:50 pm
Fri 7:45 am - 2:50 pm
Sat - Sun Closed
Meanwhile, Imperial Valley College (about our size) is open more than we are:
Monday - Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m
Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Jason Leppaluoto
Director, Learning Resource Center
College of the Redwoods
7351 Tompkins Hill Rd.
Eureka, California 95501
707-476-4264
Fax: 707-476-4432
jason-leppaluoto@redwoods.edu
Gate Count (P Count Only)
Monday
February 4 - February 8
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
7:45 AM
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
12 Noon
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
8:00 PM
9:00 PM
Day Total
26
37
41
28
620371
623060
626026
628624
81
55
45
623240
626148
628724
617539
108
156
108
122
33
617779
620,717
623480
626420
628798
99
191
119
60
617,999
621,141
623744
628932
175
67
189
270
74
618,388
621,289
624164
627020
629096
209
227
188
131
74
618,852
621,793
624582
627310
629260
137
31
142
106
61
619,156
621,861
624898
627546
629396
146
117
117
142
61
619,480
622,120
625158
627862
629532
120
121
119
92
31
619,747
622,388
625422
628066
629600
112
85
87
32
619,995
622,576
625616
629672
66
68
82
158
620,141
622,726
625798
628416
29
47
20
29
620,205
622,830
625842
628480
28
33
26
16
620,267
622,904
625900
628516
21
33
16
21
620,313
622,978
625936
628562
1,248
1,199
1,331
1,182
500
Gate Count (P Count Only)
Monday
March 24 - March 28
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
7:45 AM
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
12 Noon
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
16
22
22
20
695245
697802
700030
702612
704748
61
43
76
49
48
695381
697898
700198
702720
704854
114
122
133
90
45
695635
698,170
700494
702920
704954
113
56
107
94
61
695,885
698,294
700732
703128
705090
148
113
204
116
64
696,213
698,544
701186
703386
705232
158
170
125
135
65
696,563
698,922
701464
703686
705376
105
95
97
113
65
696,797
699,134
701680
703938
705520
145
112
118
98
88
697,119
699,382
701942
704156
705716
91
77
95
73
31
697,321
699,554
702154
704318
705784
44
71
50
55
20
697,418
699,712
702266
704440
705828
75
112
62
59
697,584
702404
704570
31
30
30
697,652
699,960
702470
704636
32
8
29
17
697,722
699,978
702534
704674
20
2
14
14
9:00 PM
697,766
699,982
702564
704704
Day Total
1,134
997
1,162
963
8:00 PM
506
Averages
Gate Count (P Count Only)
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
Noon
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
26
81
108
99
175
209
137
146
120
112
66
29
28
21
37
55
108
191
67
227
31
117
121
85
68
47
33
33
41
61
122
119
189
188
142
117
119
87
82
20
26
16
16
43
114
113
148
131
106
142
92
44
75
29
16
21
22
76
122
56
113
158
105
145
91
71
62
31
32
20
22
49
133
107
204
170
95
112
77
50
59
30
8
2
28
45
90
94
116
125
97
118
95
55
30
29
14
20
48
33
60
74
135
113
98
73
32
17
14
45
61
64
74
61
61
31
20
65
65
88
31
Mean (All)
Median (All)
27
57
97
100
128
148
95
114
85
62
69
31
24
18
24
52
108
99
116
147
101
117
92
55
67
30
27
18
Mean (M-Th)
Median (M-Th)
27
61
114
111
145
168
103
124
99
72
69
31
24
18
24
58
114
107
148
164
106
118
94
71
67
30
27
18