Taylor
Collections
Team
Final report
David Brown
Karen Buckley
Helen Clarke
Jerremie Clyde
Heather D’Amour
Michele Hardy
Robert Tiessen
Lisa Tillotson
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
CONTENTS
COLLECTIONS AND THE TAYLOR .......................................................................................... 3
THEMES ..................................................................................................................... 3
MANDATE AND TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................... 3
MANDATE .................................................................................................................. 3
TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................................... 4
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW .................................................................................................. 4
RECOMMENDATIONS AND PRIORITIES .................................................................................... 5
INTEGRATION .............................................................................................................. 6
DISCOVERY ................................................................................................................. 6
ACCESSIBILITY .............................................................................................................. 8
TECHNOLOGY/USE ....................................................................................................... 8
RIGHTS ..................................................................................................................... 10
SPACE ...................................................................................................................... 11
CONTENT.................................................................................................................. 12
PRESERVATION/SECURITY .............................................................................................. 13
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 15
APPENDIX ONE: USER PROFILES........................................................................................... 17
APPENDIX TWO: STAFFING NOTES ........................................................................................ 19
APPENDIX THREE: SAMPLE TECHNOLOGIES ............................................................................. 21
1. VIRTUAL EXHIBITS ................................................................................................... 21
2. PRINT ON DEMAND .................................................................................................. 21
3. NEW END USER TECHNOLOGIES ..................................................................................... 22
4. SCAN ON DEMAND/IMAGE CAPTURE ................................................................................ 22
5. COLLECTION STEWARDSHIP .......................................................................................... 23
Page 2
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
COLLECTIONS AND THE TAYLOR
The Taylor is a Library/Archive/Museum, it is a digital library, and it is a learning space. This new facility
provides a platform for exploring how changes in technology, use of primary sources, and approaches to
learning will set directions in the management and building of collections.
The collections that will be used in the Taylor are complex, including



physical materials housed in the building, in branch libraries, and in the High Density Library
digital materials purchased and controlled by LCR
digital materials not purchase or controlled by LCR, but which users have access to within the
Taylor
By including materials stored in other locations, and most importantly, by including materials accessed
by users but not controlled by LCR we are able to plan user focused services and activities. In this report
we include recommendations concerning discovery, preservation, access, spaces for use, rights, format
migration, and stability.
THEMES
Our Team identified three themes that underpin all our recommendations. These themes
portray the future of LCR collections as embracing new technologies and formats while
rediscovering the importance of primary and specialized resources for learning and research.



Primary source collections are essential to providing a rich learning, teaching and
research environment, and to supporting a creative space for the production of new
knowledge, interpretations and expressions. Co-use of different formats and types of
collections is one of the most important innovations the Taylor will offer.
Use of collections in the Taylor will be enhanced by technology dependent means of
viewing, extracting, and presentation. Examples include creative multimedia
interpretations, copying, pasting, mash-ups, and format migration.
LCR should continue to value its role in enriching the usefulness of collections through
expert description and help, and in creating opportunities for interacting with
collections.
MANDATE AND TERMS OF REFERENCE
MANDATE
The Team’s mandate was to recommend collections planning directions, priorities and actions in
support of learners, staff and researchers. With attention paid to the specific environment of
the Taylor and wider implications for LCR collections.
Page 3
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
We included in our planning
 Awareness of the continuity between current and future uses of collections
 Awareness of the responsibility for stewardship of physical and virtual collections
 Suggestions for measurement and evaluation to support continuous renewal
 Communication and dialogue with the community
 Attention to the role of LCR in adding value to collections beyond basic selection and
acquisition
TERMS OF REFERENCE
1. Environment: review the environment in which collections will function
2. Education: establish the educational needs new collections and partnerships will
generate
3. Discovery: establish discovery requirements for the varied formats and types of
collections to be supported
4. Rights Management: establish requirements for a responsive and supportive rights
environment that allows for educational, research and other creative activity
5. Content: determine the types of new content and changes in emphasis required by the
advent of the Taylor and the changing nature of learning and research
6. Preservation: determine the preservation/conservation principles and actions will we
need to support use of collections in the Taylor at an individual and organizational level
7. Timelines: provide recommendations concerning opening day requirements for the
Taylor
8. Timelines: provide recommendations concerning a 5 year horizon from opening of the
Taylor
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Collections Team gathered information through a literature review, through discussions with LCR
and by meeting with potential users.
The literature review provided a wide ranging description of the information environment and led to
some basic findings regarding the Taylor. First, a clear acknowledgement that because of information
technology, change is necessary for LCR to continue to be meaningful and useful to our community.
Technology changes collections by removing barriers to access and by creating the potential for new
types of use. Second, there is a rediscovered value in collections that are the object of study (e.g.,
special collections, archives, artifacts, art). The LAM model planned for the Taylor is more than an
outcome of the organizational structure and the physical constraints of space; it is a reflection of a new
emphasis in academic institutions. Third, collections remain a key value we provide, but these
collections are increasingly varied in format and source.
The report Beyond the silos of the LAMs calls for libraries, archives and museums to move towards true
collaboration, this is working towards common goals and letting go of historical organizational
boundaries that hamper the creation of collections, services, or tools. The recommendations we make
Page 4
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
in this report reflect this approach, calling for higher degree of integration, especially in support services
such as discovery, description, and preservation.
The collection of essays No brief candle arose out of symposium sponsored by the Council of Library and
Information Resources. The focus in this document is on the future of academic libraries. Here also
there is an emphasis on integration and collaboration. The impact of technology on availability and use
of information allows us to explore new partnerships and goals, but if we remain focused on traditional
boundaries and tasks, we will not become the entities users require.
The Collections Team expanded its meetings on three occasions to have discussions regarding LCR
collections issues that where we felt external expertise was important.
Discovery: Paul Pival and Aaron Wood joined the Team for our initial discussion on this issue.
Mediated Collections: Sharon Neary, John Wright, Peter Peller and Marilyn Nasserden met for a
discussion of mediated collections.
Preservation: David Daley and Blair Cherniawsky participated in a meeting regarding care for
physical collections.
The Team reviewed interviews done by other planning Teams, gleaning information to develop a better
model of the collections related tasks and challenges users would experience in the Taylor. In addition
we met with Dr. Geoffrey Simmins and Dr. Richard Levy to discuss faculty views of collection plans.
Finally, David Brown and Jerremie Clyde met with Richard Hawkins and the members of the Innovation
Lab, a group of graduate students and researchers who work between Communication and Culture and
various other disciplines.
This information was integrated into a user model that examines three distinct use types—teacher,
learner and researcher. The user model is attached as an appendix to this report.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND PRIORITIES
Three elements greatly influenced the development of recommendations for the future of collections in
the Taylor. First, the vision articulated for the facility, which is a technology rich, creative space and an
integrated Library/Archive/Museum. Second, the literature review which indicated that the emphasis
on technology, integration and the importance of special and unique collections are part of a broadly
based trend in information services. Third, input from interviews and from meetings with internal LCR
staff that indicated challenges faced by the organization.
Throughout these recommendations the theme of integration is revisited. The recommendations
highlight areas of common concern to all participants in the Taylor and point out common goals where a
greater level of coordinated planning and shared resources will have significant impact.
Page 5
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
INTEGRATION
1. Identify common goals for collection use and enhancement, and coordinate planning and
resource sharing to achieve these goals.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Identify common activities and establish an organizational structure for
coordination
 Define common goals and opportunities and develop programs and processes to
achieve these.
D ISCUSSION
LCR’s current structure divides units by format; we should try to define how our
common goals and activities could be better supported. Some of the challenges to this
discussion include
 Coordination is resource intensive; we have little time to engage in these
discussions.
 Different units may have different priorities, coordination will challenge this.
 The workload in many units makes taking time to change processes or even
discuss change problematic.
DISCOVERY
2. Develop a single search interface for all LCR collections that helps users discover the full
range of available resources.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Aim for a single search interface on opening day with a critical mass of cross
searchable metadata, but acknowledge limitations, i.e., collections that are
underrepresented.
 Give priority to development of publically searchable, appropriate databases for
different collections or the integration of different metadata schemas into
consolidated databases. Particular emphasis towards museum collections and
archives
 Establish an organizational structure that supports a coordinated approach to
metadata creation. This should include
o staff with direct responsibility for coordination
o centralization/consolidation of metadata creation by unit and across LCR
Page 6
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
A CTIONS BY 2015
 Have in place a single search interface that presents metadata in context (e.g., pull
up full text finding aids), and which can adapt to the ongoing development of more
sophisticated, structured metadata (e.g., the introduction of tagged fields). Assure
easy navigation from the single search interface to fully functional, publically
searchable databases for all collections including museum, archives, text, images
etc.

Aim for customizable search interface which users can adjust to limit what is
searched by topic, format, collection, etc. Ideally this would include templates for
the easy creation of specialized interfaces for subjects/courses, etc.
D ISCUSSION
A single search interface that includes web 2.0 functions (tagging collections by theme,
content, readership, or course, including user generated tags) is perhaps the single most
user centered goal LCR can set itself. Easing discovery is an essential element in
promoting the use of previously hidden underused resources.
However, establishing a single search interface faces several challenges:
 Loss of context. Archival descriptions are not tagged so that different levels of the
finding aid (series, subseries) will be collated in a single search.
 Metadata is incomplete. The library may have collection level records for an
electronic package, but not item level descriptions.
 Granularity. Types of collections are described at different levels
 Identification of records by type. Records in the catalogue do not distinguish
different types of resource, video, image, book
 Impoverished metadata. Fields that can be cross searched (title, creator, etc.) are
limited and of limited value for some types of material.
3. Awareness of collections should be promoted through a deliberate marketing program
including exhibitions
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Plan for ongoing virtual exhibits in the Taylor of LCR collections and users’ creative
output
 Adopt “branding” and “badging” techniques for promotional activity and as a way to
unify the Taylor as place, collection and services to our user group. (E.g. branding by
attaching our logo to resources that we license or provide, badging by using a
Page 7
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
common design theme, colors to identify the collections and services, and branch
libraries).
DISCUSSION
Interviewees consistently indicated that they have problems identifying the range of
resources available in Libraries and resources within Archives, Special Collections or the
Museum are even less identifiable. Regarding electronic resources, users may not even
realize the role of LCR in their provision. A challenge for LCR is to market resources and
target them to groups and individual users.
ACCESSIBILITY
4. All collections should be quickly and easily accessible with a minimum of procedural and
process related delays
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Support requesting items in quantity, e.g., journal runs, large archival sets, call
number ranges, etc.
 Embed use information, or links to such information, in metadata—how to page
items, locations for consultation, hours of use, contact numbers
DISCUSSION
Policies and procedures in the Taylor must be designed to encourage use of collections.
All users will rebel against delays in access and overly complex or onerous access
procedures. However, many of the collections we are trying to encourage use of are
also fragile or require mediated access. Challenges include:




Storage of collections in the HDL creates delay
Some materials must be protected (mediated use, limited handling) for
preservation purposes
Users must be prepared for visit, may not have proper description, know what is
available, know about time delays
Some materials may not be in the format user needs, e.g., microforms to print
or digital, digital to print, different digital formats, analog to digital, etc.
TECHNOLOGY/USE
5. Support migration of information between different formats depending on user needs.
Specifically include print on demand and digitization on demand. Include audio and image
formats as well as text in this service.
Page 8
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Provide digitization on demand services for HDL print collections.
 Pilot the use of third party services as a way of learning about demand for and uses
of format migration. (e.g., print on demand, scanning projects, image capture of
artifacts)
 Survey users to see where format migration demand exists.
 License resources with an understanding that format migration is expected.
A CTIONS BY 2015
 Provide user operated technology for the creation of digital surrogates (including
artifacts, art, special collections). Where specialized training or handling is needed,
service should be offered during open hours of operation. Surrogates should be
suitable for desktop delivery, re-use in creative projects, use in scholarly
communication and in scholarly sharing.
 Provide a service that migrates content between all types of format, digital to print
on demand, print to digital, analog to digital (e.g., LP to audio file, film to digital
video)
 Create discoverable, well described, accessible inventories of high quality images
starting with art and artefacts
DISCUSSION
Format migration is critical to supporting the types of use expected in the Taylor. The
most frequently articulated migration is print to digital which improves the
manipulability and deliverability of information. However, with the advent of print on
demand technologies the Taylor should be a place where users can obtain tangible
outputs of digital products, both images and texts. Finally, support for migrating one
digital format to another is needed to assure long term preservation of digital content.
Challenges facing format migration include:




Digitization on demand may require high staff/equipment availability.
Sophisticated technology, such as large format printers, print-on-demand
equipment, may be expensive to acquire and maintain.
Not certain what the demand will be for different services
Format migration may not be possible under license agreements, e.g., printing of ebooks, downloading to personal devices.
6. Support technology that improves LCR stewardship, marketing, or use of collections. For
example, a paperless hygrometer, 360°image capture for online exhibits.
Page 9
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Pilot the introduction of such technology to review impact and develop principles
and guidelines for investment
 Examine the role of developing internal expertise through experimentation and
exposure to new technologies.
DISCUSSION
Specific examples of technology suggested by members of the Team can be found in the
appendix. A key challenge identified was that investing in technology for internal LCR
use may be perceived as being in competition with user based needs; this could
particularly impact technology for collection conservation or technology for description
and other “back room” activities.
RIGHTS
7. Where LCR holds copyright, policies and procedures should be set up to make it easy to
obtain free, high quality copies for non-commercial use.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Develop standards and practices that recognize the importance of re-use. Include
use rights and restrictions as a standard part of metadata.
DISCUSSION
Rights management is important in the Taylor because of the impact this has on the
ability of our community to make creative use of collections. The British Museum and
the British Library provide models for the type of low barrier access that should be
adopted in the Taylor. Some challenges in doing this are:



While, we negotiate for copyright for archival and special collections, in some cases
these have not been granted.
Metadata regarding copyright is incomplete
Image files may not have been created at a resolution that supports re-use
8. For commercial resources, LCR should strive to establish license permissions that are
reasonable, allowing for non-commercial reuse.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Establish a working collection of resources with unambiguous permissions,
particularly in the areas of image, audio and video.
Page 10
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
A CTIONS BY 2015
 Expand collection of re-usable resources.
DISCUSSION
Digital rights are an area of constant struggle in purchasing commercial digital
resources. The Taylor will demand the purchase of a wider variety of formats—audio,
image, moving image, data—with vendors who are less familiar with the library market.
One of the critical challenges is that permission information may not be available for
many resources, for example, images in digital publications.
9. LCR should promote the ethical use of information including guidance on plagiarism,
proper referencing, and commercial re-use of copyright material.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Maintain the copyright officer as an LCR function that provides advice and acts as an
intermediary with copyright bodies.
 Develop LCR wide resources to support learning regarding ethical use, emphasizing
the importance of academic accountability.
DISCUSSION
The Taylor will be a complex rights environment, and it would be easy to take on a
policing rather than an educational role. Other challenges will include:


New ways of incorporating and re-using information and the introduction of
novel and ephemeral sources will complicate questions of ethical use.
Users will want to make use of information that is under copyright for projects
which may turn into commercial ventures.
SPACE
10. Provide spaces that are designed for the use of collections, conducive to study, co-use and
extended interaction with collections.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Design spaces for use of collections—exhibition, review, study—include direct,
ongoing input from staff and users.
 Policies for the use of space—security, booking, co-use—should be tentative at the
beginning of the Taylor’s operation, open to clients finding undiscovered needs and
uses in the space.
Page 11
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
DISCUSSION
Much of the Taylor space is designed to support social learning independent of direct
interaction with collections. However, space conducive to the integration of collections
into user tasks is critical to the success of many of the goals of the space.




Spaces that teachers can use for extended periods of time as dedicated
workspaces/laboratories
Spaces and policies that support co-use of different formats for long and short
term projects
Attractive and comfortable spaces conducive to the use of specific types of
material
The design of space for use of collections is a widespread concern, especially for
individuals who are dependent on specific types of collections and for the staff
who work with these materials. Staff and users express a desire to have more
involvement in planning for these spaces.
CONTENT
11. Build collections across LCR and in all relevant formats to respond to the programmatic
research, teaching and learning needs of faculty, staff and students.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 We should retain room for productive variety and responsiveness in our collection
building practices. At the same time, the collections are built as a resource for the
community, and the community’s needs and input are critical in making choices
regarding priorities.
 New formats and types of purchases that support the program of the Taylor should
be included in collection development plans.
 Plan for collection building across all formats that creates areas of strength and
focus suitable for intensive research
DISCUSSION
The Taylor and LCR include a range of resources and collection building activities. The
standards and methodologies that apply in one area may not be suitable for another. For
example, University Archives have programmatic imperatives that create collections in a
different way than collections built through the purchase of commercial products. The
decision to purchase items that are the objects of study (special collections, fine art) may be
based on different criteria than collections of secondary resources.
Page 12
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
PRESERVATION/SECURITY
12. Ensure that preservation concerns for physical objects are addressed in the design of
physical space and in procedures
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Assign direct responsibility for coordinating physical preservation policies and
activities to individual (s) in the LCR.
DISCUSSION
As LCR develops a program that encourages use of primary source materials, it should
also take on a more serious, long term planning approach to questions of physical
preservation. Some challenges already identified include:




Temperature and humidity (T&H) levels in the Taylor and in the HDL are set to levels
appropriate for paper. Non-paper materials may be compromised by this.
Movement of items from the HDL to the Taylor may subject items to significant
changes in T&H while in transit.
More liberal policies regarding access to and use of objects challenges preservation
concerns.
Many staff, including most curators and archivists, include preservation as a part of
their general function, still the organization does assign this as a line responsibility
for any staff member.
13. Ensure security of open stack and mediated collections.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Actively record and monitor security breaches and gaps (number of lost items,
reading room incidents or staffing problems, gate alarm incidents) to evaluate
security of collections on an ongoing basis.
DISCUSSION
We predict more intense use of open stack collections as lower use material is moved to
the HDL and higher demand material is easier to identify and retrieve. Security for these
collections and for mediated collections needs to be a central part of designing space
and allocating resources (security gates, lines of sight, staffing of reading rooms).
Challenges to security planning include:

Focus on the Taylor as an open social learning space
Page 13
Taylor Collections Team


July 1 2009
Allocating limited staff resources to security, which may not be viewed as a high
priority
Security holes that are inherent in the building design
14. Ensure preservation of digital collections that have been purchased or created by LCR.
A CTIONS BY 2010
 Assess the digital collection and its current preservation and stability status.
A CTIONS BY 2015
 Ensure that licensed digital material carries the right to preserve copies and migrate
formats for future use.
 Develop a strategy for preserving electronic content.
 Continue to look for collaborative opportunities for preservation across disciplinary
and institutional boundaries, at the local, national, and international levels.
DISCUSSION
As digital content matures, we anticipate significant changes in electronic formats and in
licensing and vendor business models. LCR must be prepared to preserve the
investments that the University of Calgary has made—and continues to make—in
purchasing and licensing digital collections. Under section 30.1 of the Copyright Act,
libraries, archives and museums have the right to make copies of copyrighted works for
preservation purposes, including migration from obsolete formats. In a licensed world,
we need to ensure that licences allow at least the same types of preservation and
migration rights as the Copyright Act.
In the case of locally-developed collections LCR bears ongoing responsibilities for
storing, preserving, and continuing to provide access. In many cases, LCR will have the
only digital copy available, and may have assumed preservation responsibilities under
the terms of granting agencies
Page 14
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
REFERENCES
No Brief Candle : Reconceiving Research Libraries for the 21st Century. 2008 142.
Bennett, Scott
2003 Libraries Designed for Learning.
Brazier, Caroline
2007 Resource Discovery at the British Library: New Strategic Directions. In WORLD LIBRARY AND
INFORMATION CONGRESS: 73RD IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND COUNCIL. Durban, South Africa.
Chan, Sebastien
Tagging and Searching--serendipity and museum collection databases. Electronic document,
http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/papers/chan/chan.html, accessed 12/11/2008, 2008.
Courant, Paul N.
2008 The Future of the Library in the Research University. In No Brief Candle: Reconceiving Research
Libraries for the 21st Century. Pp. 21. Council on Library and Information Resources.
Dillon, Andrew
2008 Accelerating Learning and Discovery: Refining the Role of Academic Librarians. In No Brief Candle:
Reconceiving Research Libraries for the 21st Century. Pp. 51. Council on Library and Information
Resources.
Luce, Richard E.
2008 A New Value Equation Challenge: The Emergence of eResearch and Roles for Research Libraries. In
No Brief Candle: Reconceiving Research Libraries for the 21st Century. Pp. 42. Council on Library and
Information Resources.
Marcus, Cecily, Lucinda Covert-Vail, and Carol A. Mandel
2007 NYU 21st Century Library Project: Designing a Research Library of the Future for New York
University.
Nichols, Stephen C.
2008 Co-Teaching: The Library and Me. In No Brief Candle: Reconceiving Research Libraries for the 21st
Century. Council on Library and Information Resources.
Rentfrow, Daphnee
2008 Groundskeepers, Gatekeepers, and Guides: How to Change Faculty Perceptions of Librarians and
Ensure the Future of the Research Library. In No Brief Candle: Reconceiving Research Libraries for the
21st Century. Pp. 58. Council on Library and Information Resources.
Smith, Abby
2008 The Research Library in the 21st Century: Collecting, Preserving, and Making Accessible Resources
Page 15
Taylor Collections Team
July 1 2009
for Scholarship. In No Brief Candle: Reconceiving Research Libraries for the 21st Century. Pp. 13. Council
on Library and Information Resources.
Wittenberg, Kate
2008 The Role of the Library in 21st-Century Scholarly Publishing. In No Brief Candle: Reconceiving
Research Libraries for the 21st Century. Pp. 35. Council on Library and Information Resources.
Zorich, Diane M., Gunter Waibel, and Ricky Erway
2008 Beyond the Silos of the LAMs Collaboration among Libraries, Archives and Museums.
Page 16
Appendix One : User Profile
May 8 2009
APPENDIX ONE: USER PROFILES
Throughout our interviews, readings and meetings we gathered information that we believed pointed to
specific characteristics/expectations of users in the Taylor. These formed the basis for many of our
discussions and recommendations. The Team clustered this information into three profiles, researcher,
instructor and learner. Any individual can take on any of these roles, depending on their current needs,
as well users will move between the different roles over time.
Researchers
Content
Not flexible regarding content,
need specific items and can't
really substitute
Instructors
Content
Will use what is available, don't
want to invest time in gathering
resources
Space
Supports working with large
amounts of material
simultaneously
Space
Supports repeat visits by
classes—able to book/reserve
space and collections
Supports co-use of different
collections
Students can be sent to
independently with confidence Can be entered with minimum
they will find collections and
advance preparation
help
Allows use of personal
technology (software and
hardware)
Quiet spaces for concentrated
work
Learners
Content
Only interested in content that
fits the course mandate, not
likely to spontaneously explore
alternative formats or content
Space
Supports exploration of large
amounts of material
simultaneously, don’t want to
page items individually
Supports independent
exploration with help on hand
Quiet spaces for concentrated
work
Effort
Able to wait and spend time
getting access to specialized
content
Effort
Want easy to use tools to extract
content for re use and
collaborative learning.
Not willing to spend time on
processes or procedures
Don’t want learning technology
to take away from the actual
topic
Want to explore new tools and
resources with little effort
Not willing to spend time
learning new tools unless they
see the value ahead of time
Knowledgeable staff easily
available to help with
Not willing to spend time on
processes or procedures
Knowledgeable staff easily
available to help with
technology, learning and
research
Page 17
Effort
Very time sensitive, work within
fixed schedule
Collections should be available at
all times, difficult to adjust
personal schedules
Unwilling to spend time learning
new tools or using novel
formats without clear mandate
from instructor and course
requirements
Not willing to spend time on
processes or procedures
Appendix One : User Profile
Researchers
technology, learning and
research
Discovery
Want the discovery resources
for the materials they are
interested in to be integrated,
fewer places to search
Want information on internal
and external collections (UofC
and non UofC)
May 8 2009
Instructors
Learners
Knowledgeable staff easily
available to help with
technology, learning and
research
Discovery
Want to create customized entry
points and collections for
student use
Discovery
Want single point of entry
Are interested in hidden
collections including
microforms
Often working from known items
at lower levels—assigned
readings and texts
Be able to find out what other
people are using
Want a browsing option
Want single point of entry that
allows easy navigation to
desired resource
Are interested in hidden
collections including
microforms
Want to know the content and
types of collections in the
Taylor before visiting
Are interested in hidden
collections including
microforms
Want a browsing option
Uses
Want to be able to re-visit
resources at a later date
Ability to document sources so
that others can revisit them at
a later date
Uses
Want to extract content and
make digital copies for class
use
Students need to cite sources
Store and create copies of own
creative works
Integrate Taylor collections into
other sources to create a
seamless learning environment
Allow/prevent access to own
creative works
Creative assignments can be
difficult to grade
Cross disciplinary work is
challenging
Page 18
Uses
Need to document and cite
sources
Lack skills to use non-print
format, e.g., visual literacy
Hard to do cross disciplinary
work, don’t understand the
expectations of different
disciplines
Limited life experience makes it
harder to make creative
associations or novel
interpretations
Appendix Two : Staffing Notes
May 8, 2009
APPENDIX TWO: STAFFING NOTES
The Collections team did not have extensive discussions regarding staffing, however, some themes
became apparent over our meetings.
1. Specialized skills and knowledge are part of the value LCR adds to collections. Expertise ranges
through preservation, rights, description, and how learners and scholars use information.
There is concern that planning for services and facilities in the Taylor are not calling upon this
expertise. As planning for the Taylor moves into operational considerations, and while physical
plans are being finalized, expert staff should be more involved. For example, in the design of
exhibition spaces, security and research/teaching support programs.
2. New services will be offered in the Taylor, however it is unlikely that overall staffing levels will
increase. Supporting high priority collection activities—preservation, description, discovery, format
migration, rights—will require the allocation of resources.
The group often discussed that there was a need to integrate support for functions that span all
types of collections, while maintaining specialized resources targeted to specific types of
information.
Another concern with the provision of new services is that this will lead to the realignment of staff,
and the questions of reclassification and combination of like duties should be considered as part of
this. For example:
It is worth noting that in a combined service point that AUPE staff that do reference have a
classification of Specialist Advisor II. So if we expect circulation staff to do reference as well as
circulation at the new combined service point in the Taylor, we will have to reclass staff that
currently classed as Operational Administrative II up to Specialist Advisor II.
In the behind the scenes moving around of material, many of the behind the scenes tasks
combine elements of both Circulation and current LFS staff. It may make more sense to
combine create a new combined circulation unit that includes some of the current LFS staff.
Rather than LFS, we may want a new unit that can do wayfaring, building security and
monitoring of the Taylor loading docks, and leave stacks maintenance and shelving to the new
Circulation unit.
3. There are fundamental responsibilities aligned with specific collections in the Taylor, which cannot
be overlooked even when they may not be perfectly aligned with the program of the Taylor.
Examples include Archives responsibility to handle University records, donor agreements which may
limit use of special collections, MADGIC restrictions on use of certain data sets.
We should be careful not to allocate staff away from these specialized needs.
Page 19
Appendix Two : Staffing Notes
May 8, 2009
4. New skills will be needed. Much of this will be aligned with using technology to support innovative
uses of collections—scanning, digitization, printing, copying, etc.
As well, integrating how we offer collections to users will require staff to work much more
aggressively across the LAM boundaries, and with digital as well as physical collections.
Page 20
Appendix Three: Sample Technologies
May 8 2009
APPENDIX THREE: SAMPLE TECHNOLOGIES
A cheerful, freewheeling, non copyright regarding survey of different technologies that exemplified to us
the best of what the Taylor can aim to provide.
1. VIRTUAL EXHIBITS
FIGURE 1 SYNTHESCAPE 3D IMAGING
Synthescape provides a third party service to museums for the digitization of collections. As well
they have worked with museums to produce innovative online exhibits. The above example is of an
exhibit of Joe Farfard’s work at the National Gallery of Canada.
2. PRINT ON DEMAND
FIGURE 2 ESPRESSO BOOK MACHINE
The Espresso Book Machine provides an in-house
solution for printing and binding digital texts.
Other options include third party services that
provide print on demand using off site equipment.
Page 21
Appendix Three: Sample Technologies
May 8 2009
3. NEW END USER TECHNOLOGIES
FIGURE 3 SONY EBOOK READER
Mobile Phones, Laptops, Notebooks, and
dedicated reading devices. We need to
find ways to provide content that can be
used on all these platforms, and as
important, moved between platforms at
will.
Pictured is the Sony Ebook Reader.
Dedicated e-book readers are growing in
acceptance.
4. SCAN ON DEMAND/IMAGE CAPTURE
FIGURE 4 SCAN PRO 2000
Moving print (in paper or microfilm) to
digital format increases portability and
usability. We need to explore a range of
technologies that make this possible.
Pictured is the Scan Pro 2000, which
rapidly converts microfilm and micro-card
to usable digital images.
Page 22
Appendix Three: Sample Technologies
May 8 2009
FIGURE 5 SYNCHRON TABLE SCANNER
Fine Art and other special print images
required scanners with special lighting and
high resolution.
Pictured is an example of the Synchron line of
Fine Art and Book scanners.
5. COLLECTION STEWARDSHIP
FIGURE 6 DIGITAL HYDROMETER
Taking preservation and control of the collection on as a
core role means investing in the technology that makes
this possible
Pictured is a digital hydrometer which would provide
superior record keeping and reduce staff time devoted to
maintaining version that rely on paper rolls. Records like
these help in negotiating loans from other collections
Page 23