College of Humanities and Social Science
Library and Academic Computing Committee 2014-2015
Friday 27 February 2015
DRAFT Minutes of Meeting
Present
Dr Galina Andreeva
Business School
Alexandra Baker
Secretary - CHSS Head of Academic Administration
Richard Battersby
IS Head of Library Academic Support
Dr Andrew Clausen
School of Economics
Erin Jackson
School of Law
Prof Timothy Lim
School of Divinity
Prof James Loxley
Convener - School of Literature, Languages and Cultures
Dr Alan Macniven
School of Literature, Languages and Cultures
Dr Matt McDowell
School of Education
Abdul Majothi
IS Head of IT Consultancy
Fraser Muir
CHSS Chief Information Officer
Cindy Nelson-Viljoen
PG Student Representative
Janet Rennie
CHSS Director of Academic and Student Administration
Dr Ulf-Dietrich Schoop
School of History, Classics and Archaeology
Dash Sekhar
EUSA Vice President Academic Affairs
Dr Alette Willis
School of Health in Social Science
In Attendance
Shenxiao Tong – Academic Support Librarian, IS
Formal Business
1. Welcome, Introductions and Apologies
The Convener opened the meeting by welcoming new members: Ms Jackson from the Law School, Dr
McDowell from Education, and Cindy Nelson-Viljoen, PG student representative.
Apologies were noted from Dr Kate Orton-Johnson (School of Social and Political Science).
2. Minutes of Library and Academic Computing Committee 17 October 2014
The minutes were approved.
3. Matters arising from the previous minutes
3.1 Talis Aspire (minute 6)
Mr Battersby informed the Committee that the Library’s webpages about Talis Aspire had
been rewritten to provide clearer information and better illustrate the benefits offered by the
service (http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/information-services/research-teachingstaff/resource-lists).
The Convener emphasised the usefulness of Talis Aspire in ensuring the availability of
materials listed on reading lists. Ms Baker reminded the Committee that the College would
be employing two student interns to upload resource lists again during summer 2015 in
support of increased usage of the system. Training and support could be provided to School
administrative staff if they would be uploading resource lists on behalf of academic
colleagues.
Page 1 of 9
A request had been received from Angela Laurins, Library Learning Services Manager, for
academic staff who are enthusiastic users of Talis to act as “Academic Champions” of the
service. Prof Lim, School of Divinity, recommended Dr Alison Jack, UG Director, School of
Divinity, for this role.
Action: academic staff interested in volunteering as Academic Champions of Talis should
contact Angela Laurins (Angela.Laurins@ed.ac.uk).
3.2 Books written by University of Edinburgh staff (minute 7):
Mr Battersby confirmed that the amendment to the Collections Policy which proposed that
two copies of all monographs written by University staff should be acquired by the Library
had been approved by University Library Committee at its meeting on 22 October 2014. Staff
are asked to donate two copies of their books during the pilot phase; procedures for donating
books will be communicated in due course.
3.3 Open Access (minute 14):
The College CIO gave a brief update on Open Access, confirming that he would be presenting
a full item on the topic at the Committee’s next meeting.
Mr Muir reminded members of the 1 April 2016 deadline for ensuring that appropriate copies
of journal articles and conference proceedings – as a minimum – are deposited in Pure. Mr
Muir would be working with Jacq McMahon, College Research Officer, to offer advice and
support to Schools in advance of this deadline. In addition, the College would be providing
funding to supplement the University fund available to facilitate open access where no “green
route” existed, via Scholarly Services in the Main Library.
Dr Willis, School of Health in Social Sciences, reiterated her request that Mr Muir also
provides information about what the University is doing to support staff and students as
consumers of, as well as providers of, Open Access content.
Action: Fraser Muir to present item on Open Access (both depositing research data in Pure and
accessing Open Access content as consumers) at meeting on 12 June 2015.
3.4 IS Helpline – response/resolution times:
The College CIO informed the Committee that he had been in ongoing dialogue with IS
regarding the availability of management information on call response times. This data is
available locally via School-based technology staff and School Directors of Professional
Services. Helpline monitoring stats are also available for all to see and via the College Intranet
at https://uoe.sharepoint.com/sites/hss/college-office/groups/cpag/projects/unidesk-stats/.
4. Convener’s Business
4.1 New Appointments in Information Services
The Convener informed the Committee of two new senior appointments in Information
Services. Jeremy Upton has been appointed to the post of Director of Library and University
Collections, replacing John Scally. Mr Upton was previously Deputy Director of Library
Services/Assistant Director of Systems and Resources at the University of St Andrews. Gavin
McLachlan has been appointed as the University’s Chief Information Officer and Head of
Information Services, replacing Prof Jeff Haywood. Mr McLachlan was previously Deputy
Divisional Director for the Information Services Division/Director of Technology and Research
Page 2 of 9
IT Services at University College London.
Prof Loxley praised Information Services on these excellent appointments. The Committee
looks forward to establishing a close working relationship with Mr Upton and Mr McLachlan.
4.2 MacDiarmid and the Jabberwock
Prof Loxley enthusiastically welcomed the recent acquisition by the Centre for Research
Collections/Special Collections of a small archive of manuscripts relating to the University of
Edinburgh literary review, The Jabberwock, by Hugh MacDiarmid and other modernist writers.
The College contributed funding to secure the purchase of this collection, which has particular
relevance to the University.
Prof Loxley informed the Committee that the School of Literatures, Languages and Cultures is
planning events relating to MacDiarmid to celebrate and promote this recent acquisition. He
commended this approach to the promotion of Special Collections materials to members.
4.3 New LACC Representative on University Library Committee
The Convener congratulated Dr Ulf-Dietrich Schoop, School of History, Classics and
Archaeology, on his nomination to represent the College at University Library Committee. Dr
Schoop would be replacing Hamish Ross, who had recently left the University.
For Discussion
5. Electronic Submission of Assessment and Feedback
The College CIO presented paper 1, Towards Full Electronic Submission of Assessment and Feedback,
to the Committee. The paper was co-authored by Mr Muir and John Lowrey, Dean of Undergraduate
Studies. It will also be presented to College Quality Assurance, Undergraduate Learning and Teaching,
and Postgraduate Studies Committees.
Mr Muir requested the Committee’s support and approval of the proposal to work towards achieving
100% electronic submission of assessed coursework and 100% electronic provision of feedback,
insofar as it was pedagogically appropriate.
In discussion, the Committee noted the following benefits of electronic submission:
 Provision of e-receipts to students at the point of successful submission removes the need to
physically submit a hardcopy as evidence of submission.
 Although it anecdotally appears that required turnaround times are being met, there is
currently no evidence to support this; software that supports electronic submission would
provide useful management information on turnaround times.
 Online submission offers a significant reduction in printing costs for students;
 Typed feedback reduces the possibility of difficulties in deciphering handwriting;
 Variety of software options available; Turnitin offers additional benefit of plagiarism
detection and was strongly endorsed by several Committee members.
However, the following concerns were noted:
 Academic staff are subject to increasing pressure to carry out marking online (i.e. the process
of marking, rather than just the provision of feedback at the end of this process); it was
clarified that this initiative is about submission and the provision of feedback, rather than the
actual marking process.
 Some staff view processes relating to e-submission and the electronic provision of feedback
as cumbersome and resource-intensive.
Page 3 of 9

Concerns had been raised in Schools regarding the ability to preserve student anonymity via
an electronic submission process. It was clarified that this can be achieved using systems
such as Turnitin, by using student Exam Numbers as file names, for example. Turnitin “deanonymises” these files according to the timeline specified in the system (default setting of
15 working days).
The Committee also noted:
 In some Subject Areas/Schools in which e-submission is already the norm, students are still
required to submit two paper copies of assessments. The Committee clarified that the onus
would be on Schools/Subject Areas – rather than students - to print hard copies of
assessments submitted electronically, should they be required for marking purposes.
 Academic staff who choose to print off hard copies for annotation during the marking process
should still provide feedback to students electronically (this could include scanning and
uploading of an annotated script; however, any text should ideally be typed rather than
handwritten).
 Some subjects require the assessment of material that includes content pedagogically
unsuitable for online submission, such as Greek language courses.
 Students are enthusiastic about the development of diverse assessment methods, such as
peer marking and presentations, in addition to essay-based assessments.
 It was acknowledged that any efficiencies achieved in relation to turnaround times through
the use of electronic submission would not mitigate the bottleneck that is often generated by
moderation.
Mr Muir asked School Reps to consult with colleagues and feedback any logistical
implications/requirements that could arise from e-submission, for example resource implications and
required changes to procedures.
It is anticipated that, further to successful consultation and the approval of the relevant committees,
electronic submission should be the norm from academic year 2015/2016 onwards.
The Committee approved the proposal in principle, pending assurance that any technical hurdles are
surmountable.
Action: School Reps to discuss the implications of the proposal with colleagues and feedback to Mr
Muir.
6. New Library Management Platform
The Convener introduced Paper 2, Library Management Platform (LMP) Replacement Programme
Update, which would be presented to University Library Committee on 4 March. He informed the
Committee that the procurement process for the Voyager replacement was concluded quickly and
successfully, with Ex Libris being awarded the contract. Ex Libris’s Alma/Primo library
management/discovery system comes highly recommended, and is used by several other researchintensive comparator institutions.
Prof Loxley chairs the Library Discovery User Group, which is leading the customisation of Primo, the
user-facing discovery element of the new Ex Libris system. Prof Loxley advised the Committee that
they would be consulted about user requirements as part of this work. The Discovery User Group is
currently considering 3 short-listed entrants in a competition to choose a new Edinburgh-specific
name for Primo. The winning name will be announced and publicised in due course.
Page 4 of 9
Prof Loxley noted that one of the key changes users will experience when Voyager is replaced by
Primo will be the loss of the “Classic Catalogue”, which means that the method of searching for
resources will also change. The approach to rollout, promotion and provision of training on Primo is
currently under consideration.
Mr Battersby commended the Almo/Primo system for its ability to offer effective integration of print
and electronic resources, whilst also providing useful management information on a variety of topics,
such as expenditure. Mr Muir also praised the ability of the new system to draw on Open Access
materials and other open resources.
Mr Battersby explained that the rollout and launch of the new service was a huge but much needed
project. The timeline was designed to provide minimal interruption to users, insofar as is possible,
but Mr Battersby noted that there is no ideal time of year during which disruption to Library service is
acceptable to users. The EUSA Vice-President Academic Affairs raised his concern that the scheduled
launch in late June could potentially lead to problems for PGT students, who would be working on
dissertations at this time. The Director of Academic and Student Administration agreed to raise this
possible issue with the Head of the College Postgraduate Office and the Dean of Postgraduate Studies
(Taught).
Action: Janet Rennie to raise the potential impact on PGT students with Head of PG Office and Dean
PGT.
7. Consultation on replacement of Edinburgh Compute and Data Facilities (ECDF)
The College CIO introduced Papers 3a and 3b, an overview of the context of the consultation for
Committee members and the ECDF Infrastructure Refresh - Requirements Consultation Document
itself.
Mr Muir explained that CHSS has historically made minimal use of ECDF (or “Eddie” as it is colloquially
known), due in part to how the facility was initially funded and also due to the style of research
generally undertaken in the humanities. In general, research that involves data processing in CHSS
tends to require the analysis of large individual datasets, whereas research undertaken in the sciences
and engineering often involves the simultaneous processing of multiple smaller complex datasets.
The former requires a small number of large nodes, the latter a large number of smaller nodes.
Eddie comprises a large number of smaller nodes, so it is ideally placed for the parallel,
computationally intensive, work undertaken in the College of Science and Engineering; however, Mr
Muir urged the Committee to use the consultation on the refresh of Eddie as a way to ensure the
College maximises its use of the facility.
Mr Muir asked School Reps to consult with colleagues on two specific questions:
1. What are the issues and challenges that create hurdles to the utilisation of centrally provided high
performance computing facilities in CHSS?
2. What support would be required to enable the refreshed Eddie to provide a valuable service for
School research needs?
In discussion, the Committee noted the following:
 The School of Economics already makes use of the local School-based “Hume” facility, which
comprises a single “fat” node, for research purposes. Mr Muir suggested that Economics
could look to complement their local facility with the new central one in order to maximise
the benefits to the School.
Page 5 of 9



Dr Andreeva, Business School, raised concerns about confidentiality, given that Eddie is a
cloud-based service. Mr Muir assured the Committee that Eddie utilises the University’s own
infrastructure, in a form of “private cloud”; however, he agreed to follow up with Dr
Andreeva to better understand the Business School’s data processing requirements.
Research conducted by the School of Health in Social Science routinely uses highly sensitive
NHS data, and its data processing requirements are therefore similar to those of the College
of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine. CMVM’s requirements are already being considered.
The availability of multiple thin nodes raises the possibility of queues when using Eddie to
process the type of datasets commonly utilised in CHSS research. Mr Muir is negotiating to
ensure that an appropriate number of fat nodes are added to Eddie as part of the refresh in
order to support CHSS’s data processing needs.
Action: School Reps to consult with academic colleagues regarding questions 1 and 2 above, and
feedback to Mr Muir.
Action: College CIO to consult with the Business School regarding their data processing needs.
8. Library Surveys 2014 – update and actions
The IS Head of Library Academic Support introduced Paper 4, Library related questions in the 2014
University surveys, which would be presented to University Library Committee on 4 March. Paper 4
had inaccurately been labelled as “disclosable”, and the Secretary asked the Committee to note that
this paper was in fact a CLOSED paper.
Mr Battersby explained that the paper summarises the Library-related results of 3 different student
surveys conducted during the first half of 2014, including: the National Student Survey (NSS), the
Edinburgh Student Experience Survey (ESES) and the Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES).
It also provides details of actions taken by the Library in response to the results of these surveys.
Overall, the results are very encouraging, with the majority of lower scores and negative free text
comments relating to pressure on study space and availability of materials in the collections.
In some cases the comments made revealed a lack of awareness of alternative study space provision
at particularly busy times, and the issue of the findability rather than availability of materials might
explain some of the concerns regarding the collections.
However, it is hoped that various initiatives being undertaken by the Library will help to remedy some
of these concerns. Initiatives include, for example, improved promotion of services such as “Request
a Book”; enhanced information about the availability of e-books (i.e. issues caused by licensing limits
to multiple simultaneous users) and other electronic resources; the introduction of “Library Resources
Plus” to assist users to find materials not held by the Library but available elsewhere; and the Course
Collections pilot.
In discussion, the Committee noted:
 The fluctuating number of survey respondents each year can significantly distort results from
year to year, making useful comparisons difficult unless considered across several years.
 IS was permitted to include 5 additional Library-specific questions in 2014’s PTES, plus a 6th
question added to provide benchmarking information prior to the introduction of the Library
Resources Plus initiative. All 6 questions will again be included in the next PTES.
 Free text comments are often quite general, making specific remediation efforts challenging.
However, analysis of these comments sometimes reveals major irritation caused by relatively
Page 6 of 9



minor issues, such as printer access.
Where results are lower in some Schools than in previous years, these are usually only minor
reductions in scores.
Academic Support Librarians examine School results in detail, with a view to identifying and
addressing key areas of concern.
The EUSA Vice-President Academic Affairs commended the Library on its strong overall
performance, which he noted should hopefully improve further as a result of the anticipated
benefits offered by the introduction of the new Library Management Platform. He suggested
that results from surveys conducted after the new LMP has bedded-in should be particularly
interesting.
The Convener and the rest of the Committee congratulated the Library on the overall results and on
their efforts to address any issues and concerns raised.
Reports and Updates
9. Head of Library Academic Support’s Report
The IS Head of Library Academic Support presented an oral update to the Committee, reporting that
there was approximately £400K still to be committed in the HSS Library Materials Budget. This
balance is spread unevenly across the Schools. Academic Support Librarians are working closely with
their Schools to get the remaining funds committed as soon as possible. It is particularly important
that all funds are committed in a timely manner this year, given all the issues around the
implementation of the new Library Management Platform and the likely early closure of the
acquisitions system in the current Voyager platform.
10.
Head of IT Consultancy’s Report
The Head of IT Consultancy presented an oral update to the Committee:
 The successful rollout of Office365 concluded with implementation in the School of History,
Classics and Archaeology in January 2015.
 The rollout of Office2013 would commence in March.
 Individual websites continue to be migrated into EdWeb (Drupal).
 The procurement process for Personal Response Systems (“clickers”) was now complete. The
system selected is a cloud-based, “bring-your-own-device” (BYOD) system, which implies an
expectation that students would have access to their own devices to make use of it in classes.
The EUSA Vice-President Academic Affairs informed the Committee that he has been working
with IS to ensure that students who do not own such devices are either provided with
alternative access or are reimbursed if using the SMS function on their smart phones.
11. CHSS Information Strategy
The College CIO introduced Papers 5a, 5b, 5c & 5d, which comprise the final version of the CHSS
Information Strategy, noting that he would provide the Committee with regular updates on the
implementation of the Strategy.
Dr Clausen, School of Economics, requested that the Learning Technology elements of the Strategy be
discussed at the next Committee meeting. Mr Muir agreed to consider this request.
Action: Mr Muir and Ms Baker to discuss including an item on Learning Technology in the agenda for
the final Committee meeting of the year, on 12 June.
Page 7 of 9
12. Proposed changes to Library Budget allocation
The Convener informed the Committee that the consultation process with Heads of Schools on the
proposed changes to the method of allocating IS Library Materials Budget within CHSS was now
complete. He confirmed that, as a result of feedback received during this useful process, the timeline
for the introduction of any changes had been moved back to 1 August 2016.
Prof Loxley explained that the next stage of this piece of work involved detailed consideration by a
number of stakeholders of the structure and safeguards required to ensure the effective and efficient
functioning of the proposed new allocation model.
To that end, he invited Committee members to sign up to attend a workshop taking place on
Wednesday 22 April, during which appropriate processes would be discussed. School Library Reps,
Academic Support Librarians and key IS staff were also being invited to the workshop. Prof Loxley
emphasised the importance of adequate representation from all Schools to ensure appropriate
consideration was given to discipline-specific needs and concerns.
Ms Baker would circulate an email providing further details on the workshop and instructions for
signing up the following week.
Action: Secretary to circulate details and sign up instructions for Budget Allocation Workshop.
Action: Committee Members to sign up for Workshop.
13. LACC Report to College Planning and Resources Committee
The Committee noted Paper 6.
14. Library Statistics
The Committee noted Paper 7.
15. New Acquisition Highlights
The Committee noted Paper 8, which School Reps were encouraged to circulate in their Schools.
Dr Willis, School of Health in Social Sciences, noted that the use of the term “acquisitions” in this
context could be misleading, since some purchases were actually subscriptions as opposed to
complete acquisitions. Mr Battersby acknowledged this concern, and agreed that further
consideration of terminology used to describe new purchases was appropriate.
Action: School Reps to circulate Paper 8.
Action: Richard Battersby to raise issue relating to terminology used to describe new
acquisitions/subscriptions with Library colleagues.
16. Any Other Business
Dr McDowell noted that the School of Education is currently considering study space issues for
academic year 2015/2016. Pressure on study space is expected to increase on the Moray House
campus due to the development of several new student residences in the vicinity. He agreed to
report back to the Committee with updates on this matter as and when they are available.
Page 8 of 9
17. Date of next meeting
The date of the next meeting is Friday 12 June, 14.00, G1 55 George Square.
The Budget Allocation Workshop will take place on Wednesday 22 April, from 13.00-17.00, to include
lunch. Committee Members should sign up for a place via the Events Booking channel in MyEd.
Page 9 of 9