James Madison University
Libraries & Educational Technologies
Self Study Report
December 2006
Executive Summary
Rapidly changing user expectations and the behaviors that accompany them have
significant and far-reaching implications for L&ET services, content, and facilities. As
our student population becomes more demographically diverse, they bring with them a
variety of needs and expectations for support. Concerns about the preparation and
readiness of incoming students have also begun to emerge. New faculty bring with them
constantly changing expectations for teaching and research support. All of these factors
have serious implications for almost all aspects of L&ET services, for both internal and
external L&ET constituents.
Across the organization, L&ET is proud of the variety of services offered, even as it
struggles to provide a clear picture of all possible services to users. The JMU community
expresses high levels of satisfaction with L&ET services. Standard technology
classroom systems are available in almost every classroom across campus. Blackboard
is highly regarded as the university’s course management system. The library liaison
program is widely recognized as an exemplary service. Faculty development
opportunities in instructional technology and information literacy are taken advantage of
by faculty from all academic departments. Web services enable L&ET staff and users to
create content, provide access to services, and to play a vital role in promoting the
organization. In addition to the library web site presence, L&ET supports the systems for
accessing local collections, including LEO Library Catalog, the Madison Digital Image
Database, and streaming servers to name a few.
A swiftly changing area of service is the provision of online education. Online education
includes programs that require no physical attendance at JMU and “hybrid” programs
that use web-based instruction in conjunction with traditional face-to-face instruction.
Many instructors use online instruction simply to augment traditional face-to-face
instruction. L&ET offers several virtual collaborative spaces and continues to explore
new products and emerging technologies to enhance the online learning experience.
L&ET provides numerous types of trusted, authoritative content from the traditional
books and journals to new forms such as digital images, streaming audio and video, and
datasets. The activities related to managing content are critical to the organization’s
ability to serve our patrons well; customer service is an important aspect of evaluating,
selecting, and ordering materials; cataloging and preserving materials; and obtaining
needed materials from other libraries.
More content is now available electronically and often requires mediation from librarians,
staff, and programmers. Digital content also requires server space, bandwidth, and often
licensing. Funding all aspects of digital content is a challenge. Open access content
holds the potential to relieve some of the financial burdens that the new formats have
brought, but it comes with its own set of maintenance requirements. Membership in and
contributions to consortia, like the Virtual Library of Virginia (VIVA), will be essential to
the provision of library services.
2
A new library building will be completed in March 2008. Designed following the
information commons model, the new facility includes an integrated service desk for
circulation, reference, reserves, and media; flexible and technology-enhanced study and
production space; and a 24-hour study and computer lab with a coffee bar. The fifth
floor of the new building houses both the Center for Instructional Technology and the
Center for Faculty Innovation, a department in Academic Affairs, and includes a faculty
seminar room that will be available for programs related to faculty development,
teaching, and scholarship.
Even as plans are underway for the opening in 2008, L&ET staff and users yearn to
redesign existing spaces and create more flexible spaces that are well-equipped with
technology and conducive for collaboration. An increase in the use of the library’s virtual
services has expanded, but this has not lead to a decrease in usage of the physical
space. In addition to providing spaces for people, L&ET devotes a large amount of
resources to housing and maintaining network infrastructure, computers, and
applications, which make work in our facilities possible.
A significant issue for L&ET is staffing: obtaining the resources necessary to hire
sufficient personnel to preserve successful existing services while providing for emerging
needs. The professional skills required for the provision of high-quality services have
also increased.
Libraries merged with Educational Technologies to form one organization in 1998. In the
past five years, huge achievements have been made in both areas of the organization –
and in some cases, with both units working together. However, L&ET still faces the
challenge of understanding which of its structures truly span the organization and which
are still tied to either the library or educational technologies area. Committee formation
and membership and communication processes are obvious places for greater
integration to occur.
Through numerous focus groups, interviews, and research efforts, the Strategic Planning
Team identified key findings for many areas of the organization. Strategic goals have
been drafted based on these findings; however, the opportunity for organizational
feedback will likely not exist until the new year – and that feedback will be critical. The
contributions of the External Review Team are also warmly welcomed as a means of
identifying appropriate strategic goals.
Key Findings:
People:
 L&ET is understaffed, which limits opportunities to preserve successful existing
services while developing new services.
 Data reporting across the departments and divisions within L&ET is inconsistent. In
keeping with the move toward accountability, L&ET needs a more unified way of
gathering, analyzing, and using data.
 Central coordination of communications to L&ET’s external community is critical to
inform our users about our services.
 New and emerging technologies mandate a more planned approach to staff
development in order to keep skills current.
3

The identity of the Educational Technologies division within the L&ET organization
and the relationships among the Ed Tech units are ambiguous and require
clarification.
Physical Space:
 Users cite lack of group study space and lack of computers as major problems. The
new east campus library in early 2008 promises increased study spaces and
services, but Carrier Library and the Music Library must also be redesigned to
recreate a functional user space.
 Media Resources Equipment Loans needs a suitable new location to provide optimal
service.
 More staff spaces are needed as new positions are created.
Systems and Applications:
 The need for data storage will continue to grow as content requires more space.
Larger content will also require greater bandwidth.
 The use of open source applications and operating systems within the organization is
growing. L&ET must stay informed of this emerging approach to integrating software
systems into the organization’s computing infrastructure.
 There is a growing demand for Mac machines and therefore Mac technical support.
Content:
 L&ET needs to make a commitment to open access. Recognizing that open access
does not mean “free,” L&ET must secure funding for open access publishing.
 Users have increasing expectations for online content. The desire for online content,
however, is highly discipline specific. While the sciences want predominantly online
content, the humanities still desire ready access to print materials. The shift in user
expectations will continue to challenge library budgets, staff, and services.
 An awareness program must educate faculty on scholarly communication issues and
provide assistance to faculty in publishing their research, perhaps in partnership with
the Center for Faculty Innovation.
 The increase in electronic resources puts an increased demand on the network
infrastructure and on staff to negotiate licenses, design more intuitive web interfaces,
and assist users in accessing library resources.
 L&ET must provide support for emerging forms of content, such as blogs, podcasts,
and wikis, and consider the implications of new devices for viewing content.
 The Library needs a strategy for supporting a digital reference collection and
promoting its usage.
 The Library should use optimal methods for collection analysis and assessment.
 By partnering with larger institutions in the state, L&ET is able to subscribe to
packages of journals and databases that would otherwise be unaffordable. It is
important to sustain current collections through cooperative licenses and look for
future opportunities.
 In order to successfully meet the special software and dataset needs of the
University, designated funding must be allocated on a continuing basis with periodic
adjustments for price increases and licensing changes.
 Preservation of digital content, including purchased content and unique content held
in Special Collections, is a major concern.
4
Services:
 Students prefer to use virtual services and spaces for finding information. They also
want easily navigable systems that delineate clear paths to information. L&ET must
use the knowledge of users’ preference for services like Google and Yahoo to create
intuitive search paths and consistent pages that provide point-of-need assistance.
 Use of the Library’s virtual resources continues to increase. Staffing and
maintenance of the virtual services must be adequately addressed.
 The Library Liaison program faces some challenges: unified library communication,
support for instruction and collection development, and assignment to academic
departments. Librarians expressed a need for more coordination for this program in
order to explore how to best serve the campus and the many ways students study
and faculty teach.
 With improvements in database technology and searching technologies, the
functionality of the integrated library system (ILS) as a discovery tool must improve.
 The complexity of library instruction competes with the scarcity of time each liaison
has with students.
 The Library will increase efforts to collaborate with faculty on developing information
literacy assignments into coursework of majors.
 Reference as a service must serve a growing non-traditional student population. Not
only have user expectations and behaviors changed, but the information they need
to access has also changed. The simplicity of the traditionally defined library
reference service belies its complexity today.
5
Acknowledgements
The Self Study and Strategic Planning Team thanks everyone who contributed to the development of
this document. Their contributions were invaluable. We especially want to thank Ralph Alberico, Dean of
Libraries & Educational Technologies, for his constant support, extraordinary leadership, and inspiring
vision.
Strategic Planning Team
Jody Fagan
Kevin Hegg
Jenne McCabe
Karen Snively
Melissa Van Vuuren
Jim West
Sarah Cheverton, Co-Chair
Sharon Gasser, Co-Chair
Academic Affairs
Douglas Brown, Vice President
Jerry Benson, CISAT
David Brakke, Science & Mathematics
Linda Halpern, General Education
David K. Jeffrey, Arts & Letters
Marilou Johnson, Visual & Performing Arts
Robert Reid, Business
Phillip Wishon, Education
Documentation Team
Cheri Duncan
Patricia Hardesty
Rita Gentile
Reba Leiding, Chair
Other Consultants
T. Dary Erwin, AVP, Assessment & Public Policy
Dale Hulvey, AVP Information Technology
Jim Schaeffer, Associate Dean, Outreach Programs
Donna Sundre, Executive Director, CARS
Vicki Wise, Asst. Director of Institutional Research
L&ET Documentation Consultants
Mary Ann Chatelain
Ellen Defriece
Alma Hale-Cooper
Bill Hartman
Claudette Lee
Susan Thomas
L&ET and JMU Staff Assisting with Focus Groups
Brian Charette, AVP, HR Training & Performance
Dr. Karen Ford, Social Work
Jennifer Testa, Training & Development
Cathy Thomas, Human Resources
Diane Yerian, Training & Development
Kathy Clarke, L&ET
Claire Clemens, L&ET
Brian Cockburn, L&ET
Jody Hess, L&ET
Kristi Lee, L&ET
Meris Mandernach, L&ET
L&ET Leadership
Ralph Alberico, Dean
Mary Ann Chappell
Sarah Cheverton
Jeff Clark
Brian Cockburn
Sharon Gasser
Jerry Gill
Jennifer Keach
Reba Leiding
Sandy Maxfield
Jim Mazoué
John McGehee
Mission-Vision-Values Team
Ralph Alberico
Mary Ann Chappell
Sarah Cheverton
Jeff Clark
Kathy Clarke
Sharon Gasser
Kevin Hegg
Susan Huffman
Jenne McCabe
L&ET Staff Assisting with Self Study Document
Craig Baugher
Mary Ann Chatelain
Ellen Defriece
Alma Hale-Cooper
Bill Hartman
Cheryl Lantz
Claudette Lee
Patrick Stinnett
Susan Thomas
Special Thanks
Phil DuBose, Associate Dean, College of Business
Facilitator, Mission-Vision-Values Team
Diane Foucar-Szocki, Department Head, Learning,
Technology and Leadership Education
Team Building Consultant
Diane Yerian, Director of Training
Team Training Facilitator
6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... 6
I.
Introduction .............................................................................................................. 9
II.
Self-Study Methodology ........................................................................................ 11
III. Libraries & Educational Technologies Milestones ............................................. 13
IV. Mission, Vision, and Values .................................................................................. 17
V.
Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................. 19
VI. Environmental Scan............................................................................................... 21
A.
1.
2.
3.
4.
B.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
EXTERNAL TO JMU..........................................................................................................................21
Demographics ............................................................................................................................21
State and Federal Influences ......................................................................................................22
Technology .................................................................................................................................23
Scholarship and the Information Marketplace ...........................................................................25
INTERNAL TO JMU ...........................................................................................................................26
Student Enrollment .....................................................................................................................26
Programmatic Expansion ...........................................................................................................27
Funding ......................................................................................................................................27
Faculty and Instruction ..............................................................................................................28
Lifelong Learning and Access ....................................................................................................28
VII. Organization and People ....................................................................................... 29
A.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
B.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
C.
D.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ........................................................................................................29
Standing Committees ..................................................................................................................36
Communication ..........................................................................................................................36
Partnerships ...............................................................................................................................39
Advisory Councils.......................................................................................................................42
Data Reporting ...........................................................................................................................42
PEOPLE ............................................................................................................................................43
Employees and Positions ............................................................................................................43
Classified Staff ............................................................................................................................45
Library Faculty...........................................................................................................................46
Administrative/Professional Faculty ..........................................................................................47
Student Employees ......................................................................................................................47
Faculty and Staff Credentials .....................................................................................................48
Professional Development and Training ....................................................................................50
LibQual+ Survey Data ...............................................................................................................51
L&ET BUDGET ................................................................................................................................52
KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................54
VIII. Physical Spaces ....................................................................................................... 55
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
CARRIER LIBRARY ...........................................................................................................................55
CISAT LIBRARY—HEALTH SCIENCES BUILDING ............................................................................57
MUSIC LIBRARY—MUSIC BUILDING ...............................................................................................57
EQUIPMENT LOANS—SPOTSWOOD AND CARRIER LIBRARY ............................................................58
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION SERVICES—MEMORIAL HALL .................................................................58
NEW LIBRARY ON EAST CAMPUS.....................................................................................................58
LIBQUAL+ SURVEY DATA..............................................................................................................59
KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................60
IX. Systems and Applications ...................................................................................... 61
7
A.
B.
C.
X.
HARDWARE......................................................................................................................................61
COSTS FOR SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS ........................................................................................64
KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................65
Content .................................................................................................................... 66
A.
LIBRARY MATERIALS BUDGET ........................................................................................................66
Collection Development .............................................................................................................68
LibQUAL+ Survey Data .............................................................................................................68
B. CONTENT TYPES ..............................................................................................................................69
1.
Books ..........................................................................................................................................71
2.
Journals ......................................................................................................................................73
3.
Research Databases and Resources ...........................................................................................75
4.
Government Documents .............................................................................................................77
5.
Video...........................................................................................................................................78
6.
Sound recordings and Streaming Audio .....................................................................................79
7.
Scores .........................................................................................................................................79
8.
Images ........................................................................................................................................79
9.
Special Collections Resources ....................................................................................................80
10. Software and Datasets ................................................................................................................81
C. KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................82
1.
2.
XI. Services.................................................................................................................... 83
A.
B.
C.
D.
LIAISON PROGRAM ..........................................................................................................................83
LIBQUAL+ SURVEY DATA..............................................................................................................84
WEB SERVICES ................................................................................................................................85
ACCESS TO COLLECTIONS ................................................................................................................86
1.
LEO Library Catalog .................................................................................................................86
2.
Research Databases and Resources ...........................................................................................87
3.
Reserves ......................................................................................................................................88
4.
Periodical Locator and LinkFinderPlus .....................................................................................88
5.
Proxy Server ...............................................................................................................................88
6.
Special Collections .....................................................................................................................88
7.
Interlibrary Loan ........................................................................................................................89
8.
Physical Delivery Service ...........................................................................................................90
9.
Madison Digital Image Database...............................................................................................91
10. Streaming Service .......................................................................................................................91
E.
VIRTUAL COLLABORATIVE SPACE ...................................................................................................91
1.
Blackboard .................................................................................................................................92
2.
Centra Symposium ......................................................................................................................93
3.
Video Conferencing ....................................................................................................................93
4.
Technology Classrooms..............................................................................................................94
5.
Media Equipment Services .........................................................................................................94
F.
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES .................................................................................................................95
1.
Information Literacy & Library Instruction ...............................................................................95
2.
Instructional Technology Workshops .........................................................................................97
3.
Reference Desk Service ..............................................................................................................97
4.
Reference Consultation ..............................................................................................................99
5.
Instructional Technology House Calls .....................................................................................100
6.
DDLS Support ..........................................................................................................................100
7.
Guides & Tutorials ...................................................................................................................100
G. KEY FINDINGS ...............................................................................................................................101
XII. Glossary to Terms and Acronyms ...................................................................... 102
XIII. References ............................................................................................................. 112
8
I. Introduction
Libraries have a long history and tradition within academe. While educational
technologies have been around for a considerable time as well, institutions have only
recently envisioned an opportunity for their library and educational technology units to
share the same mission. At James Madison University, both functions are seen as
essential to the educational experience. This self-study identified numerous areas
where the missions of the Libraries and of Educational Technologies are the same as
well as areas where they are quite different.
One similarity across the Libraries & Educational Technologies (L&ET) organization is its
dissimilarity from academic departments. Although an academic unit reporting to the
Provost, the organization is not a credit producing entity, so output cannot be measured
in the same way. Library collections and services must support existing areas of study
while maintaining the flexibility to accommodate new programs. Educational
technologies must provide for current pedagogy while testing new, cutting-edge ideas.
Market forces dictate much of the technology needs that L&ET must support, while a
large constituency of our users is constantly adopting new technologies. In a very real
sense, L&ET is charged with protecting access to the past while paving access to the
future.
Emerging forms of information, new avenues of dissemination, a changing information
marketplace, and increasingly disparate expectations from users complicates this
challenge. The professional skills required for the provision of high-quality services have
also increased. Library skills considered essential 100 years ago are still vital; however,
they keep company now with an ever-changing set of additional skills, which includes
everything from providing expert research assistance to providing sustainable
information architecture. Educational technology requires a similar responsiveness to
the changing landscape, as it must preserve principles of pedagogy with deep roots in
higher education. Measures of what happens in a modern academic library or in the
areas of educational technologies are being developed.
When one compares the JMU L&ET organization of 2006 with that of 1998, the changes
are quite apparent. The collections, staff, budget, physical spaces, and services have all
grown substantially. There are over 350 individual databases from which to choose,
over 10,000 electronic books in the collection, and over 1,000 streaming videos available
in the classrooms and homes of our users. FY 2005 saw 2,639 Blackboard courses in
use, an increase of over tenfold from FY 2001. FY 2006 saw a fourfold increase in the
number of students enrolled in distance learning courses from FY 2001. Library users
now have access to nearly 35,000 journals, and in 2006, over 652,000 articles were
downloaded from these journals. Despite this progress, the 2006 LibQual+ survey
revealed that the JMU faculty continues to experience moderate dissatisfaction with the
collection. As JMU grows and becomes more diverse, proposed programs promise to
require specialized resources and attention to be competitive. Additionally, current staff
will continue to be pushed beyond their limits to provide core services.
9
The central challenge facing L&ET over the next five years will be to preserve its
reputation for high-quality services and trusted resources while simultaneously meeting
rapidly-evolving user expectations. This has significant and far-reaching implications for
L&ET staff, facilities, content, and services.
10
II. Self-Study Methodology
The L&ET Dean determined that the academic program review and strategic planning
process required two teams: a steering committee and a documentation committee. He
also determined that because this program review and strategic planning process
involved the entire organization, it was critical to involve representatives from both
Libraries and from Educational Technologies. Thus, team members were selected from
both divisions. One co-chair, three steering committee members, and two
documentation team members were selected from Libraries. One co-chair, three
steering committee members, and one documentation team member were selected from
Educational Technologies. The two committees were created and given their charge in
February 2006. The co-chairs decided to use the names Strategic Planning Team and
Documentation Team to identify these groups.
In March 2006, the Strategic Planning Team participated in team training with Dr. Diane
Foucar-Szocki and Diane Yerian. Team members created a short list of general
operating procedures and elected to use Blackboard organization sites to share and
store documents, use e-mail when necessary, and meet regularly. The team decided
that every effort would be made to study the organization as one entity rather than two
separate divisions under the direction of the same Dean, i.e., the team would look for
commonalities across both parts of the organization instead of their differences. Over
the next several weeks, the group created a project timetable, reviewed the 1998 Self
Study Report, established a format for this self-study document, identified key
stakeholders, and provided direction for the Documentation Team.
The Documentation Team collected data from annual reports, departmental records,
system reports, and human resource records. Where appropriate, team members
prepared charts and graphs. All data were stored in the Documentation Team’s
Blackboard site, which was accessible to the Strategic Planning Team.
While the Documentation Team collected data, the Strategic Planning Team held formal
and informal meetings with individuals from many areas of the University. For example,
in June 2006, five internal focus groups took place, with audio tape recording and live
transcription. A facilitator outside of the L&ET organization held a focus group with the
leadership group. In fall 2006, focus groups were held with students and faculty. All
focus group tapes were transcribed and analyzed by members of the Strategic Planning
Team.
The Team also met with key informants internal and external to the organization. The
purpose of these informational sessions was to conduct an environmental scan, i.e., to
learn more about the future directions of select programs and services internal and
external to L&ET and JMU. Internal key informants included the Educational
Technologies Librarian, the Liaison Program Coordinator, the Coordinator of LibQual+,
and the Interim Liaison General Education, Cluster One. External key informants
included the College Deans, the Provost, the Associate Dean of Outreach Programs, the
11
Director of Information Technology, the Associate Vice President of Assessment and
Public Policy, the Executive Director of the Center for Assessment and Research
Studies (CARS), and the Assistant Director of Institutional Research.
The information gathered through these meetings was used to identify trends and
concerns internal and external to the organization. Results were shared in the
aggregate with the L&ET organization at the opening meeting for the 2006 academic
year and will be used to identify future strategic directions. In fact, strategic goals and
objectives for the next six years are already in draft form based on this data and the
results of the self-study.
The Dean also charged the Strategic Planning Team with the task of writing new
mission, vision, and values statements that would reflect the entire L&ET organization.
These new statements would replace the divisions’ separate statements created in
earlier years. To accomplish this task, the co-chairs invited the Associate Dean of the
College of Business, an expert in organizational development, to facilitate the process.
Four members of the Strategic Planning Team and five other L&ET staff members were
selected to participate in the process. The group met over a period of several weeks to
discuss ideas and slowly craft statements that would reflect the core purpose of the
entire organization and in some way distinguish it from the work of other University
organizations. The group members came to agreement on mission and values
statements; they are in the final stages of coming to agreement on a vision statement.
These statements will be shared with the entire organization for review.
The final self-study document was written over several months starting in July 2006.
Each member of the Strategic Planning Team and several members of the larger
organization contributed to the final content. A draft was shared with the entire
organization and feedback meetings were held in November. L&ET staff members were
encouraged to provide written feedback. The team co-chairs also received feedback
from the L&ET Leadership Team. Based on input from members of the organization, the
team finalized the document for the External Review Team in early December.
The purpose of this document is to describe the L&ET organization and the major
activities and accomplishments that occurred over the past five years. Thus, it includes
and references a large body of information and documentation. To assist the reader
with navigation, the electronic version of the report (available on the enclosed CD)
includes active hyperlinks to the appendices and to external websites. The table of
contents includes links to all sections of the document and the associated use of
heading styles enables the reader to browse by those sections. A glossary is included at
the end of the document and includes a clickable alphabetical index.
12
III.Libraries & Educational Technologies Milestones
FY 2001









FY 2002










Budget crisis: rolled back over $20,000 in budget reversion. Offset by
external funding: $20,000 from Class of 1999 and $41,000 from the
Class of 1951.
Music Library launched Digital Orpheus (online streaming of audio
reserves).
Classroom Technology Services becomes responsible for East
Campus Technology Classrooms.
CISAT Library opens in new facility in Health & Human Services (HHS)
Building.
New HHS building added 23 Technology Classrooms.
Carrier Library hours extended to 2 a.m. in response to students’
requests.
Library staff and services get 82.5% satisfaction ratings in Faculty
Morale Survey.
Media Resources and Classroom Technology assumed responsibility
for procurement, management, and distribution of licensed software for
campus-wide instructional use.
New director of the Center for Instructional Technology (CIT) holds
joint position as Director, Library Public Services—a significant step
towards closer integration of service across library and educational
technology boundaries.
JMU L&ET awarded one-million dollar Small Business Administration
grant.
Second year of budget crisis: rolled back over $90,000 in budget
reversion. VIVA also forced to cut selected databases and online
journals.
Library identified by ACRL as one of ten institutions or programs that
exemplified best practices in information literacy programming for
undergraduates.
Educational Technologies developed mission statement, goals, and
objectives.
CIT released Madison Digital Image Database (MDID) as free
resource for international community.
CIT began collaborative relationship with what is now called Center for
Faculty Innovation (CFI).
Library purchased Endeavor EnCompass hardware and software and
launched pilot project using LinkFinderPlus for linking to full-text
journal articles from research databases.
Special Collections completed the digitization of JMU pre-1985
historical photo collection.
Began e-Reserves pilot program.
Implemented pay-for-printing in Reference area.
13





FY 2003








FY 2004









Classroom Technology redesigned classroom instruction system,
significantly reducing costs and allowing for more rapid expansion of
technology classrooms.
Library participated in its first LibQUAL+ survey.
Carrier Library implemented in-building checkout for wireless laptops.
Library implemented online scheduling program for library classrooms
and meeting rooms.
Minor renovations done to Carrier Library’s first and second floor
space (e.g., new open-stacks Periodicals Room, new office space).
CIT and Distributed and Distance Learning Services (DDLS) launched
its annual Summer Institute for Online Learning.
Library instituted moratorium on book purchases (book purchases
dropped by 20 percent)
Library implemented Liaison Annual Reports for reporting on collection
development, library instruction, and other services to academic
departments.
E-Reserves task force formed to move program from pilot to full
service.
Periodical Locator implemented with Serial Solutions. Technical
services continued work on EnCompass pilot projects for federated
searching, database of databases, and SBA gateway.
Wireless network access implemented throughout Carrier Library.
Virginia bond referendum passed designating a new library facility on
CISAT campus as a capital project.
Cataloging enhanced bibliographic records for videotape contents and
Caldecott Award-winning juvenile books.
CIT hosted and organized first Teaching and Learning with Technology
Conference for JMU faculty.
Materials base budget increased by $500,000. Purchased 37 new
databases.
Library conducted its second LibQUAL+ survey.
In the 2004 Faculty Morale Survey, the library staff and services
question received the highest score of any item on the questionnaire.
Renovations in Carrier Library added two new offices on the first floor;
a recording studio, video editing area, and workspaces in the CIT; and
Technical Services workspaces.
Began planning for new library facility on CISAT campus.
Blackboard became a mission-critical system and an integral part of
teaching at JMU. Enterprise-level Blackboard software was
purchased.
Fifty percent of general classrooms and classroom labs attain
Technology Classroom status.
Library acquired streaming media services and licenses for c. 1,000
videos.
14
FY 2005











FY 2006













CIT released MDID2 as open source software, launching a large scale
open source program to the international community.
Online streaming video project began, with access through MDID
database and LEO.
Another $500,000 increase to materials budget. Monograph
purchases increase 22 percent. 31 new databases added; databases
account for 30 percent of materials budget.
Technical and Digital Services launched a major redesign of the LEO
Library Catalog web interface.
Technical Services implemented Innovative Interfaces Electronic
Resource Management.
Instituted round-the-clock library hours during finals week in fall 2004
semester.
Began usability testing for LEO and library web.
Development of "InfoApp" and "StaffDir," ASP.NET database
applications for news announcements, featured connections, FAQs,
and the staff directory.
The timetable for the new library facility updated to an estimated
completion date of 2008.
L&ET staff partner with the IT unit on researching the purchase and
development of a campus content management system and web
portal.
Implementation of eVA, the new procurement system mandated
statewide to track all purchases made within the Commonwealth of
Virginia.
Classroom Technology increased staff support for technology
classrooms during evening hours.
Seventy-three (73) summer online courses were generated from the
Summer Online Institute.
The new library project went out for bid on construction.
Digital Services launched comprehensive library web redesign with
new web applications facilitating contributions from staff.
Materials budget increased 14% over the previous year; this was the
fourth consecutive year of budget increases.
50 new research databases added.
Library conducted its third LibQUAL+ survey.
Preparations were made to the Juvenile Collection for its move to
ETMC in Memorial Hall in July 2006.
Library held first three-day Information Literacy Workshop pairing
librarians and teaching faculty on developing assignments.
Established L&ET Diversity Council.
Donations to the Library from alumni, Friends, and JMU parents,
increased by over $9,000 from the previous year; the Library received
two gifts of $10,000.
Library received a grant in excess of $150,000 from the Institute for
Museum and Library Services (IMLS) to develop an interactive game
for teaching health information literacy skills to Health Sciences
students.
West Campus is approaching “Technology Classroom saturation” with
15



just over 30 rooms remaining without technology.
Memorial Hall technology installation begun for 18 full Technology
classrooms, one auditorium tech classroom system, and five
classrooms for geology with data projection capability.
Seventy-five percent of general classrooms and classroom labs attain
Technology Classroom status.
Implementation of the Small Purchase Charge Card (SPCC) for
ordering goods and supplies.
16
IV. Mission, Vision, and Values
The Libraries’ Mission, Vision, and Value statements were formulated in 1999 as a result
of a recommendation outlined in the JMU Libraries Self Study, which was completed in
October 1998. The 1998 Self Study directed JMU Libraries to “revise the Library
mission statement to reflect the changing environment” (p. 14). The Library mission
statement referenced in the 1998 Self Study had been revised in 1990 and was almost
one page long. The 1999 task force, led by Ralph Alberico, approved the following
mission, vision, and value statements:
1999 Libraries Mission
We connect students and faculty to ideas. We collect and deliver high quality
information that reflects the richness of the curriculum and the many forms by which
ideas are conveyed. We organize and preserve ideas for current and future generations
of scholars. We teach members of our community to make intelligent use of information
resources. We create an environment that promotes intellectual inquiry, exchange of
ideas and discovery of knowledge. We collaborate with colleagues on campus and
beyond to ensure open access to information. We participate actively in the intellectual
life of the University. We support academic excellence by offering exceptional services
that reflect the mission of James Madison University.
1999 Libraries Vision
Our vision is to be recognized as the center of intellectual and academic life at James
Madison University. We aspire to be known throughout the region and nation as a
responsive, effective, innovative library that is committed to quality.
1999 Libraries Values
In support of our mission, we are committed to the following values:
o Excellent service to our community;
o Open access to information in pursuit of knowledge;
o Flexibility and innovation in meeting challenges;
o Effective stewardship of resources;
o Commitment to learning and achievement;
o Collaboration and open communication;
o Diversity in our community, staff, and collection;
o Integrity, fairness, humor, and mutual respect in interactions.
Educational Technologies independently wrote and published its mission statement in
2001. The mission statement reads as follows:
2001 Educational Technologies Mission
We promote technologies that enable a learning culture of academic excellence within
the James Madison University community. We collaborate with faculty to creatively
integrate technology, digital information collections, and educational software with
teaching, learning, and the curriculum. Our programs focus on the following areas:
17

Instructional Environment. We plan, design, implement, maintain, support, and
manage instructional technology facilities and systems such as technology
classrooms, computer labs, media equipment, satellite linking facilities, campuswide servers, testing services, and distance learning management systems.

Faculty Development Opportunities. We provide training materials, online
resources, workshops, consulting, professional development programs, and
individual hands-on technology assistance to faculty and instructional support
staff. These services focus on the use of facilities, learning resources, and
systems for the instructional environment.

Learning Resources. We manage, create, and license digital information
collections, campus-wide educational software, and multimedia learning
resources in support of academic programs.

Instructional Design and Production. We support the design, implementation,
and assessment of creative, experimental, and pedagogically sound instructional
modules, courses, and programs. We provide instructional design and
instructional technology production support.

Planning, Advocacy and Leadership. We coordinate and participate in
technology planning to improve the educational environment for the entire JMU
community. We collaborate with campus colleagues to provide leadership for
teaching and learning initiatives. We research and promote new educational
technologies that will benefit the JMU community. We publicize and promote
educational technology resources and support on campus.
New Mission, Vision and Values Statements
As part of the 2006-2007 Strategic Planning process, nine members of L&ET, working
under the guidance of Dr. Philip Dubose, formed a focus group in September 2006 to
review and revise L&ET’s Mission, Vision, and Value statements. Four members of the
focus group were selected from the Strategic Planning Team; five members were
selected from within L&ET but external to the Team. Dr. DuBose is a Professor of
Management and the Associate Dean of the College of Business. As a member of the
Madison Commission Steering Committee, Dr. DuBose helped review and modify JMU’s
Mission, Vision, and Value statements.
In September and October, the focus group met several times with Dr. DuBose. The
group agreed early in the process that L&ET should have a single mission, vision, and
value statement. The group worked individually and as a group with Dr. DuBose’s
guidance to select key concepts and words reflecting the organization.
To date, the Mission-Vision-Values group members have agreed on a mission statement
and a values statement. They are in the final stages of coming to agreement on a vision
statement. The group plans to complete this process in January, 2007 and review these
statements with the entire organization and the External Review Team.
18
V. Goals and Objectives
After developing the mission, vision, and values in 1999, the Library established its goals
and objectives for its Strategic Plan. Developed around the mission of connecting
students and faculty to ideas, ten goals reflected the importance of people, ideas, and
the technologies of connection. The goals were edited to their present form in FY 2003
(Appendix A).
The Educational Technologies Strategic Plan was developed in 2001 with goals and
objectives. Goals were established for the seven target areas of leadership, planning,
marketing, coordination, instructional environment, customer service, and staff
development (Appendix B).
For the 2004-2006 biennium, the Library objectives and Educational Technologies
objectives were combined under the Library’s goals. Annually the L&ET Dean and
Leadership, with participation by all staff and faculty, develop objectives to accomplish
for the following fiscal year. Some are selected as priorities for inclusion in the JMU
Planning Database. Each of the selected objectives is tied to a University Defining
Characteristic (http://centennial.jmu.edu/portfolio/vision_and_goals.shtml). The twentynine characteristics are part of the long-range planning process begun in 1998 and
expected to be completed by the Centennial Year 2008. The 5 Defining Characteristics
that L&ET have pursued most consistently are:





Characteristic 1. The University will strategically select innovative and new
academic programs for development and implementation.
Characteristic 5. The University’s strength is in its people and thus, we will invest in
both professional development and instructional innovation and excellence.
Characteristic 12. The University will follow a planning process that emphasizes
accountability and ties resource allocation and initiatives to the concepts of
institutional effectiveness.
Characteristic 19. The University will provide technologies and laboratories that are
widely accessible to the entire campus community.
Characteristic 21. The University will provide a high level of service to all members
of the JMU community
Assessment or evaluation methods are identified for each objective to measure results.
Student information literacy is specifically assessed by the Information Seeking Skills
Test (ISST) which must be passed by all first-year students and by information literacy
testing given to selected majors. Surveys, including the Continuing Student Survey,
Faculty Morale Survey, Technology Survey, and LibQUAL+, provide feedback from the
user community. Liaison Annual Reports, Academic Program Reviews, and other data
provide feedback for improving collections and services.
While new strategic goals have been drafted by the strategic planning team, the
opportunity for organizational feedback has not yet been possible. Forums to review the
19
possible strategic goals will be scheduled in early 2007. The contributions of the
External Review Team are also warmly welcomed as a means of identifying appropriate
strategic goals and objectives.
20
VI. Environmental Scan
A. External to JMU
This environmental scan highlights external factors with the potential to impact L&ET. It
supplements the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Assumptions
about the Relevant Future for Research and Academic Librarians and Libraries and the
Madison Commission Report (Appendix C).
1. Demographics
Demographic trends cited by the Madison Commission Report and the ACRL
Assumptions about the Relevant Future for Research and Academic Librarians and
Libraries (http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/aboutacrl/whatisacrl/acrlstratplan/assumptions.pdf)
include a shift in the age of university students to include more “non-traditional” students
as well as an increase in the numbers of traditional students. Non-traditional can mean
older students, students returning after a long absence from formal study, students
studying in distance programs, and students participating in certificate and other nondegree opportunities. These trends mean that the Library may need to increase the
overall instructional offerings to include diverse media applications and approaches that
address differences in learning styles for which instruction is targeted. Adults attending
the University for the first time or returning after an absence of several years will find the
Library to be quite different and will need more intense assistance with research.
The addition of more part-time and distance students underscores the requirement that
users be able to access all resources remotely, easily, and reliably at all times. The
suggestion that colleges will enroll more first-generation students also implies a student
group with different needs as they attempt to incorporate scholarship into their behavior
and values.
For reasons that are unclear, JMU has seen a decrease in the numbers of male students
and students majoring in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).
Employers, however, have expressed a need for employees who have advanced
analytical, scientific, and information seeking skills. Increasing the proportion of students
studying in STEM areas is a goal of the University, and one that may address the gender
ratio as well as the number of international students studying at JMU. An increase in the
numbers of international students has the potential to create increased demands for a
specific type of library instruction as mentioned above.
21
2. State and Federal Influences
a) State Funding for Higher Education
The 2005 Restructured Higher Education Act renegotiates the relationship between the
Commonwealth and the public colleges and universities. Public colleges and universities
are eligible for three differentiated levels of increased autonomy, but must meet specific
performance goals that address State needs. The goals include improved access to
education for underrepresented populations, affordability, academic programs targeted
to labor shortages, student retention, continuous review and improvement of academic
programs, articulation agreements with all Virginia community colleges, local economic
development, partnerships with K-12, and student safety (Couturier, 2006).
Increased autonomy from state funding has the potential to address certain workflow
issues particularly the biennial budget cycle and annual budgeting that consolidates the
most labor intensive functions of librarians’ jobs within the same four months. However,
with it comes the possibility of increased expectations that universities will secure more
of their own funding. The Library has been somewhat successful in securing grant
funding in recent years; however, if grant seeking is expected to grow, additional
positions will be required to assist with the applications, record keeping, and financial
reporting, and to cover release/relief time to do the work.
b) Accessibility/ADA Compliance
The Virginia Information Technology Accessibility Standard (2005) establishes
accessibility standards so that individuals with special needs can access the same
information as any person without disabilities. This act potentially affects many of the
sources of information that the library provides over the web, as many products have
interfaces that are not ADA compliant, but which offer expanded searching capabilities.
There is also the possibility that additional hardware and other adaptive technology will
be required for compliance.
c) Intellectual Property
Copyright is an increasingly vital issue in the digital age. The Digital Learning
Challenge: Obstacles to Educational Uses of Copyrighted Material in the Digital Age
(McGeveran & Fisher, 2006) identifies the following obstacles to educational uses of
digital technology: unclear or inadequate provisions for fair and educational use in
copyright law; use of “digital rights management” technology to lock down content;
difficulties in obtaining rights to use content; and excess caution by gatekeepers,
including publishers and educational administrators.
At the present time many of the copyright questions have not been addressed by case
law. Until precedents have been established, compliance with existing copyright laws
will be ambiguous. Database licensing could become more complex and expensive as
content is held more tightly by publishers and authors seeking to protect their profit
margins.
22
The PATRIOT Act is another piece of legislation that touches on core values of libraries.
Library records, including circulation and search strategies, have traditionally been
considered private and have been protected by libraries. There is concern now that
libraries may not be able to continue to protect these and may be required to keep even
more data archived.
3. Technology
a) Web Discovery Tools
Google, Amazon, and other consumer-driven web services are redefining the discoveryto-delivery process and users’ expectations (OCLC, 2005). Lorcan Dempsey, Chief
Strategist at OCLC, sees discovery of materials becoming “disembedded” from the local
library catalog or web site, done in a variety of other contexts, and linked back to the
library as “a location and availability service” (Dempsey, 2006). An example of this
would be the use of the database WorldCat to find material on a specific topic, possibly
followed by use of the catalog to confirm whether L&ET owns the item. A similar
example of this phenomenon is the use of Google to search the JMU website. This
represents a change in traditional means of searching for content that, while offering the
appeal of familiar search environments, has major implications for bibliographic access
and control.
Search engines like Google and Yahoo are viewed as competitors to databases and
catalogs not because they search the same information, but because they are easier to
use and seem, to the novice, to provide good enough results. The challenge for libraries
then is to meet a set of user expectations for ease of use while providing higher quality
results. One area of keen interest is federated searching, whereby users can search
across different databases concurrently. Federated searching has the potential to have
the ease of use of Google but the quality of information of a proprietary database.
Subject headings and cataloguing records, the cornerstones of bibliographic access,
stand to lose power as data is manipulated and records homogenized in order to be
accessed by a different tool. Regardless of varying opinions on this issue, it is clear that
these concepts need to be seriously reviewed and incorporated into more
seamless/integrated user-friendly searching of the OPAC and other web resources.
Search providers are also digitizing and acquiring content. Gartner sees the Google and
Yahoo digitization projects affecting library collection development, instruction, research,
and e-learning in the next ten years unless copyright concerns delay progress (Gartner,
2006).
b) Social Software
In the last 15 years, there has been debate about whether the Internet is a threat or a
benefit to the social lives of its users. Some writers feel that the more time spent online
means less time spent interacting with other people. Other authors cite the expanded
communication potential of the web as a unifying factor. Regardless, it is obvious that
technology has changed and expanded the ways in which some humans socialize. In
his article “The New Social Enterprise,” Jon Udell states that “Social software can be
defined as whatever supports our actual human interaction as we colonize the virtual
realm” (Udell, 2004). Examples include social networking sites (e.g. MySpace, Second
23
Life), wikis, blogs, and social bookmarking. In some cases, like the popular Friendster
site, technology that was developed to connect customers with products has been
adapted to connect people to each other. It is clear that there is a large segment of
library users who spend a lot of time in social spaces, and it would behoove libraries to
begin to investigate ways of reaching these users.
Possible ways of participating in social virtual spaces include advertising and offering
reference services in MySpace, including librarian profiles in FaceBook, and even
interacting in Second Life. All of these applications would require non-native users (e.g.
librarians) to spend time learning a new language and culture. Successful exploitation of
the benefits of social networking would require additional positions and time devoted to
learning how to work in these milieus.
c) Personal Digital Mobile Devices
The iPod, the cell phone, the personal digital assistant (PDA, Palm Pilot, Pocket PC), the
laptop, and the tablet PC are all mobile devices with the potential to both connect users
to information and transform user expectations.
Gartner’s Hype Cycle for Higher Education states that “students are the main drivers to
access networks with small, personal digital mobile devices” (Gartner, 2006). The 2006
Horizon Report sees cell phones being used to access all kinds of educational content
and to participate in online learning activities with the advent of faster networks making
data transfer on phones comparable to wireless connections (New Media Consortium,
2006). Clearly students and faculty are becoming nomadic in their study behaviors and
expectations. Increased collaboration and cross-discipline study require the maximum
use of technology. Mobile devices offer the opportunity to work anywhere, but they also
require a robust and highly secure network as well as information provided in formats
that are compatible with mobile devices. Developing content for mobile devices will
require substantial investments.
d) Internet2
Douglas Van Houweling, CEO of Internet2, states, “The network infrastructure will
support a whole new set of applications—immersive collaborative environments,
resource-sharing, real-time computation-intensive simulations, HDTV-quality video on
demand, and many others that probably can’t even be imagined today. These
applications will lead to further fundamental changes in the way we work, the way we
learn, the way we entertain, the way we govern, and the way we live” (Talbot, 2005).
User expectations in the technology realm tend to be market driven, with younger
populations having a disproportionate effect on the overall market.
Because it is so difficult to anticipate how Internet2 will change libraries and educational
technologies, the characteristics most important to cultivate are flexibility and creativity.
These characteristics are nurtured by creating a culture where people have the freedom
to collaborate, to experiment, and most importantly, to fail. This freedom comes only
when staffing levels are appropriate, thus allowing staff to expend some intellectual effort
on figuring out how to adapt and innovate.
24
4. Scholarship and the Information Marketplace
a) Changes in the Information Marketplace
Libraries face the challenge of subscribing to, rather than buying, many of our resources.
In today’s changing information marketplace, library journal and database vendors are
experimenting with different pricing and licensing models, which has both positive and
negative implications for libraries’ budgets and collections. Even when libraries “win,” the
changes in vendors’ arrangements usually have confusing implications for our patrons.
Perhaps the most critical issue is that subscription resources are much less
interconnected than the public Web and must be marketed and promoted if they are to
be “found.”
b) Changing Scholarly Process and Communication Crisis
Traditional scholarly communication was premised on the fact that dissemination of
research was slow. Today, after the research has been conducted, it can be
disseminated around the world in a matter of minutes. Impact factors still exist and are
still used in some cases to identify appropriate publications, but this scenario no longer
describes the main means of keeping up in any field. Thus scholarly communication can
be freed from the schedules of publishers. At the same time, however, the values
traditionally added by publishers—editing, indexing and abstracting, inclusion in
databases, archiving, and promotion—are still an essential part of scholarly
communication.
The Internet has been a democratizing factor in scholarly communication. What remains
unclear now is how the value added services will be provided. One solution is for
universities, scholarly societies, or even libraries to establish and maintain digital open
access repositories. These repositories require diligent maintenance and control if they
are to act as real alternatives to for-profit publishing, and the means of supporting them
has not been standardized.
With open access, authors retain the copyrights to their works and then allow their works
to go into publicly accessible archives for free access and distribution. Research funding
organizations like the National Institutes of Health are beginning to require researchers
to provide an open access version of their research. The policies usually allow an
embargo (delay) period of up to one year for the open access version. Since these
policies are new, the impact of providing an open access version will slowly emerge but
hold the potential to remove price and permission barriers that are part of the current
crisis.
Libraries can play a key role in open access. Librarians educate faculty, administrators,
and others on the benefits of open access. They promote open access materials by
providing links on library web pages and in library catalogs, and by providing access to
open access articles along with items from paid resources.
Open source is a related concept wherein computer source code is shared so that
applications can be modified. As with publishing, software writers and publishers have
traditionally protected source code, making applications like Blackboard difficult to
25
customize. Open source alternatives like Sakai, the course management program
developed at MIT, are “free” in the sense that no licensing is required, but significant
investments of time and talent are required to maintain them.
B. Internal to JMU
To survey the current state of JMU, information was gathered from many internal
sources including the deans of each college, the provost, numerous university
publications and reports, and various upper-level administrators. Factors influencing the
future of the University and L&ET fell into five broad categories: student enrollment
growth, programmatic growth, evolving faculty research needs, technology issues, and
outreach. Each of these factors has implications for L&ET services.
1. Student Enrollment
According to the JMU Institutional Research Qwik Enrollment Summaries, student
populations have increased from FY 2001 to FY 2006. The largest percentage increase
is in the graduate student population, which increased from 609 to 1067, a 75%
increase. The Provost remarked that JMU intends to protect its reputation and practice
as a primarily undergraduate university, with targeted graduate enrollment of 10% of
student enrollment. Although the undergraduate population had the largest increase in
terms of raw numbers, the undergraduate student body has only increased 10.6% from
13,824 to 15,287.
Growth in the JMU student population is difficult to predict. There is ongoing and
significant pressure for the University to increase its enrollment, particularly from alumni
and in-state students. Currently, JMU has over 20,000 applicants for fewer than 4,000
freshman seats. That the college-aged population will be larger in five years than it was
five years ago is commonly accepted. Though the growth pattern is unclear, estimates
range upwards to 22,000 FTE. Clearly increases of this magnitude present challenges
for all university services. Effects on L&ET range from increased demands on
bandwidth as more students need to access Blackboard and other resources from
remote locations, increased costs for subscription resources which are negotiated based
on FTE enrollment, and increased L&ET services for faculty and students.
Strategies for increasing enrollment include accepting more transfer students, offering
more distance learning opportunities, and increasing outreach and continuing education
programs,. Transfer students who enter with an associate’s degree from a community
college or who simply transfer from another four-year institution come with unique
needs. They generally do not complete the General Education program that native JMU
students do, thus they enter their junior year with a wide variety of experiences, and far
less familiarity with the JMU community and the support it offers.
Offering more online learning courses would strain current resources in L&ET. Distance
education requires different production tools to bring the instruction online, and these
tools all require hardware, software, and technical support offered by L&ET. The “relief”
expected from offering courses online does not extend to relief on the demands of
26
faculty. Online courses require as much and often more time as classes taught in
person. Depending on the nature of the program and the students it attracts, students
participating in online education require different kinds of assistance from their
professors, Ed Tech staff, librarians, and technical support staff. It will be important to
remember that any extension of current offerings into virtual space will likely demand
greater initial investments of time and financial resources, even if these programs are
expected to be self-supporting eventually.
Outreach and continuing education programs offer the potential to reach part-time or
non-traditional students. The current enrollment is small but it has the potential to
increase over the next few years.
2. Programmatic Expansion
The Madison Commission noted that there will continue to be a concerted effort to
establish graduate programs “of distinction,” which implies that while JMU will have
relatively few and small graduate programs, those that it does have will require the
highest caliber of support. Programs of distinction will be marked by an “innovative or
cutting edge” approach that qualifies them for national and international recognition, and
they must meet a demonstrated need in the state. The viability of such programs is
defined by many factors, including appropriate resources and infrastructure, which will
include technology and library resources. Therefore, programs of distinction, while
smaller in size, have the potential to demand disproportionate library attention.
The areas of programmatic expansion will be primarily in STEM areas. Predicted
enrollment by 2016 is 25% health sciences, 10% education, 25% STEM, 20% business,
and 20% arts and humanities. This projection has the potential to impact L&ET in a
number of ways. Several college deans noted an increased need for complex datasets
to support the research and teaching in growing departments. Examples of complex
datasets include the human genome, various census datasets, and business datasets
costing tens of thousands of dollars to acquire and support. These kinds of information
sources represent a unique demand, one that the current library collection development
policy does not address. In addition, cross-disciplinary collaboration is predicted to
increase for both students and faculty.
The development of an engineering program at JMU would also require a liaison
librarian with specialized skills. This begs the question of what the salary requirements
would be for future liaisons if they are expected to possess skills that generally garner
higher salaries in the private sector.
3. Funding
One of JMU’s areas of emphasis over the next six years is diversifying the funding
stream in an effort to decrease its dependence on state monies. This points toward
research and scholarship as anticipated areas of growth, with a growing emphasis being
placed on externally funded research. The Provost mentioned that the University will
begin to explore intellectual property as a revenue stream for the University. If the
University is successful in recruiting research faculty of distinction, it is likely that they
will bring increased demands on library materials, particularly in the area of electronic
journals, which comprise the largest expenditure of the materials budget. STEM journals
27
have historically been the most expensive, with subscriptions to individual titles costing
tens of thousands of dollars.
4. Faculty and Instruction
The faculty population will continue to grow as the student population grows. According
to the JMU Institutional Research Qwik Enrollment Summaries, the number of faculty
increased from 934 in FY 2001 to 1,448 in FY 2006, a 55% increase. Currently JMU has
some challenges recruiting and retaining younger faculty, while the retirement-age
faculty continue to leave through attrition.
Several college deans mentioned the expectation that incoming faculty be comfortable
teaching online and “hybrid” classes. This represents a challenge in terms of providing
appropriate software and hardware support, training users, and adapting the existing
library instruction program to meet the need of online students. The University is
actively exploring “hybrid” classes both to alleviate overcrowding of the physical facilities
and to expand its outreach and continuing education offerings.
Hybrid classes are only one way that the use of technology as an essential tool for
teaching and learning will continue. The University has put a wireless infrastructure in
place throughout campus and particularly the library. This represents numerous security
issues, including the requirement that users download software in order to access the
network. There seems to be an operating assumption on campus that students are
completely comfortable and competent in using computers. This opinion is not widely
shared among librarians and staff, many of whom have had experience trying to help
students and have seen computers act as obstacles rather than enablers.
It seems likely that the University will continue to expand geographically and virtually. It
is vital that approaches to growth that hinge on technology and distance students include
sufficient staffing of all kinds, from the teachers and instructional designers to the
support staff and librarians. Rather than solving the problem of overcrowding, the
adoption of distance models for education increase the need for staff and faculty. Many
speakers mentioned that the University will begin to increase its international presence
and global awareness. This is only possible with a robust infrastructure in place.
5. Lifelong Learning and Access
There is a concerted effort at the University to continue its relationship with alumni. Not
only do alumni represent potential future donors, but they also have continuing
education needs. One benefit that has begun to emerge in academia is allowing alumni
to continue to access some library resources after their separation from the University.
Currently this practice is limited or prohibited by database licensing agreements and
subscriptions. Extending these resources could fortify the University’s relationship with
its alumni, but also has the potential to require new funding.
28
VII. Organization and People
Since most of this self study tries to examine themes across the entire organization, this
section begins with a presentation of L&ET departments and the organizational chart.
Structures such as the liaison program, which defy organizational lines and departments,
are also described. It provides a comprehensive survey of committees and
communications across the organization as well as partnerships with other groups on
campus and within the state of Virginia. A section on personnel presents the types of
positions within L&ET, the number and qualifications of people within those roles, and
information about professional development opportunities. Finally, a section on the
L&ET budget provides a financial overview. Key findings about the organization and
personnel are included at the end of this section (Section VII).
A. Organizational Structure
The Libraries and the Educational Technologies organizations were officially merged in
1998 and the new organization officially named Libraries & Educational Technologies.
While not unheard of, this combination is unusual in institutions of higher education at
this time.
Most people are familiar with some if not all services that libraries offer. They are less
familiar with services offered by educational technologies. In the L&ET organization,
Educational Technologies include the Center for Instructional Technology (CIT),
Distributed and Distant Learning Services (DDLS), and Classroom Technology. CIT
works with faculty to develop the skills necessary for pedagogically-sound application of
instructional technology. DDLS provides the technologies and services for online
learning including JMU online courses. Classroom Technology installs and supports
instructional computing systems in classrooms across the campus.
The 2006 organizational chart shows that, functionally, L&ET is divided into a total of six
primary divisions: Administration; Media Resources and Classroom Technology; CIT and
DDLS; Library Public Services; Technical Services; and Music Library (Appendix D).
The Dean of L&ET leads the entire organization and reports to the University Provost in
Academic Affairs. Four directors lead one or more of the six primary units and report to
the Dean. (See Figure 1 for a simplified version of the chart.)
29
Figure 1: L&ET Functional Organizational Chart
30
Several departments reside within these larger divisions of the organization. It is at this
level where the real work of L&ET occurs. These departments are briefly described
below (in alphabetical order).
Acquisitions ensures the timely ordering and receipt of tangible, monographic
materials such as books, videos, and DVDs. Materials are received via approval
plans and firm orders.
Administration is responsible for budget planning and management, fiscal
control, procurement, travel administration, building maintenance, project
coordination, facilities scheduling, personnel administration, fund raising,
statistical reporting and analysis, official communication, and records
management.
Cataloging focuses on providing patrons with quality-based bibliographic access
to materials and selected electronic resources via LEO Library Catalog. The unit
provides descriptive and subject analysis of books and materials in special
formats. The unit also collaborates on the regional and local level to provide
bibliographic access for specialized project-oriented collections (e.g., MDID2
Photography Image Database).
The Center for Instructional Technology (CIT), an educational technologies
unit, provides direction, visibility, and proactive support for the pedagogicallysound use and innovation of technology in instruction. Instructional faculty
members are its primary customers. The CIT provides group training, individual
consultation, walk-in lab services, immersion learning experiences, research and
development services, and technical and system support. Staff often collaborate
with Liaison Librarians, Classroom Technology staff, and others within L&ET to
work on projects, support ongoing initiatives, conduct research, and present at
meetings and conferences.
Circulation Services provides assistance at the circulation desk, circulates
materials according to established policies, maintains the circulation system,
processes materials for course reserves, manages the library delivery service,
and opens and closes the building. It is also responsible for keeping the book,
periodical, and microform collections accessible, secure, and in good order.
Classroom Technology Services plans, designs, integrates, supports, and
maintains educational technology throughout the campus. It provides
infrastructure needed to support cutting-edge applications in new facilities and in
renovation situations. Classroom Technology Services provides faculty and
students with technology in the classroom that meets teaching needs and
enhances the learning experience. In these activities the Classroom Technology
staff work closely with Information Technology (IT) Lab Services and with CIT
and Libraries staff as necessary. On east campus staff members are part of IT’s
Technical Support East Campus (TSEC) unit.
Digital Services focuses on the evaluation, development, management, and use
of technology by both researchers and L&ET staff. In support of researchers, the
department is responsible for most of the L&ET website, licensed research
databases, e-mail reference service, and public workstations and printing. In
31
support of the L&ET staff, the department is responsible for library staff
workstations and computing, the StaffWeb intranet, library servers, web
programming, and usability testing. Additionally, individuals in the department
make significant contributions to outreach including reference, liaison duties,
exhibits, and campus-wide informational fairs.
Distributed and Distance Learning Services (DDLS) coordinates the
implementation, management, and support of core learning technologies, such
as collaborative and course management systems that enable faculty and
students to communicate outside the classroom through both synchronous and
asynchronous modes of interaction. In collaboration with IT, DDLS supports the
mission critical infrastructure for distributed and online teaching and learning
systems. It also serves as point of contact and communication for individual
faculty and academic units that are either interested in developing or planning
implementations of technology-assisted instruction.
Educational Technologies include the CIT, which works with faculty to develop
the skills necessary for pedagogically-sound application of instructional
technology; DDLS, which provides the technologies and services for online
learning including JMU online courses; and Media Resources, which installs and
supports classroom technology across the campus.
The Information Literacy Program collaborates with teaching faculty to develop
information literate students. Program activities include teaching course-related
sessions, working with faculty to integrate information literacy into curriculum and
course objectives, developing online instructional resources like Go for the Gold
and CheckCite, assessing student information literacy skills, providing
professional development opportunities for librarians and faculty, and managing
library teaching facilities.
Interlibrary Loan (ILL) provides access to materials not owned by the Library to
faculty, staff, students, and affiliates. ILL provides electronic and print copies
from journals, book chapters, and reports, and also borrows books, microforms,
audiovisual items, theses and dissertations, and other materials from lending
libraries.
Media Resources offers services across the L&ET organization. The Media
Resources Center in Carrier Library develops non-print media collections
(including online video) and the services related to their use. This function
involves cooperation with the Libraries and with CIT/DDLS to implement them.
The MR Equipment Loans office (temporarily located in Carrier Library) provides
portable media and computing equipment that serves several broad purposes:
(1) complementing instructional equipment installed in classrooms, (2) supporting
curricular student projects, (3) supporting faculty and staff presenting off-campus
at conferences, etc., and (4) supporting occasional campus events normally
managed by JMU Events & Conferences. The Equipment Loans office is also
the “call center” for the support of the Tech Classrooms.
The Music Library supports the unique needs of music scholarship and
materials of the University and primarily the School of Music. It provides
reference, media playback, circulation, reserve, maintain several special
32
collections, provide Midi lab support, and equipment loan. Music Library staff
digitize, catalog, bind, and preserve all formats. Additionally, staff supports much
of the technology in the School of Music.
Preservation is responsible for quality conservation treatment of traditional
library materials as well as unique manuscript/archival materials. Paper-based
materials are repaired in-house and/or outsourced for re-binding as needed.
Preservation awareness is promoted throughout the organization.
Processing handles the physical preparation of physical items for shelving and
circulation, including affixing barcodes, stamping with a property stamp, inserting
security strip, attaching barcodes to records in Millennium, and labeling items
with call numbers.
Reference provides direct professional assistance to students, faculty, staff, and
others in the location, use, and evaluation of information resources. Interactions
include consultations that take place at the reference desk, over the telephone,
or through e-mail. It also develops the reference collection and employs
appropriate technology to access to information.
Serials manages journal subscriptions, standing orders, and other materials
requiring annual fees, including licensing, ordering, cataloging, and payment.
The unit administers several library management systems, including LEO Library
Catalog, link resolver, and periodical locator. The unit compiles inventory,
financial, usage, and other data for the library collections.
Special Collections serves as the repository for rare, irreplaceable, unique, or
otherwise valuable materials on the central Shenandoah Valley that need
restricted handling to assure their long-term availability for use. Special
Collections provides internship opportunities for students interested in various
aspects of public history.
Focus group results and other data indicate that individuals internal and external to the
organization are confused or puzzled by the L&ET organizational structure. The
organizational web site (http://www.lib.jmu.edu/staffdir/) presents five primary divisions:
Administration, Educational Technologies, Public Services, Systems, and Technical
Services. In this configuration, the Music Library is included in the Public Services
division instead of existing as its own division. The Educational Technologies division,
which is not reflected in the organizational chart at all, includes the Classroom
Technology unit and the CIT/DDLS unit; two different directors supervise the unit.
In addition, the identity of the Educational Technologies division within the L&ET
organization and the relationships among the Ed Tech units are ambiguous. The
following conditions reflect that ambiguity: 1) the Educational Technologies division is
not recognized in the official organizational chart, 2) the division is directed by two
different division heads, 3) the two units of that division (Classroom Technology and
CIT/DDLS) have not met as a group since 2001, 4) Classroom Technology on East
Campus is also a part of Technical Support-East Campus (TS-EC) which includes IT,
and 5) the Classroom Technology web site resides within the L&ET web site while the
CIT and DDLS web sites do not. Some external focus group participants questioned
33
whether educational technology services should even exist within the library system.
For example, one individual suggested that Educational Technologies should be in its
own division or associated with Information Technology.
The relationship of the CIT and the DDLS units is also unclear. Some individuals, both
internal and external to L&ET, perceive that the two entities are completely separate
departments. This perception may be encouraged by the units’ separate web presences
(http://cit.jmu.edu and http://ddls.jmu.edu).
Despite the lack of clear organizational lines and certainty of “fit,” the internal focus
group results reflect a positive working relationship across what have traditionally been
perceived as the two “sides” of the organization—Libraries and Educational
Technologies. Many Library staff members stated that they appreciate and use
Educational Technologies services, collaborate (formally and informally) with
Educational Technologies staff on a variety of projects, and see currently untapped
potential for collaboration (for example, some suggested that there are opportunities for
collaborative outreach and faculty development efforts between Educational
Technologies staff and Liaison Librarians). Others suggested that a closer working
relationship between the Library’s system group and CIT software engineers would allow
the entire organization to leverage the enormous technology resources available.
Library Liaison Program
The purpose of the Library Liaison Program is to ensure that library services and
collections meet the needs of students and faculty in all academic departments. It is not
a discrete organizational unit within the library but a service model overlaid on the library
functional organization. As illustrated in Figure 2, the Liaison Librarians do not
necessarily report to the same supervisor. Except for the Director of Media Resources
and Classroom Technology, the Director of Public Services and Instructional
Technology, and the Director of Technical Services, all librarians are expected to serve
as a liaison.
34
Figure 2: L&ET Organizational Chart: Liaison Reporting Structure
35
There are several organizational roles related to the liaison program.
 The Liaison Program Coordinator is the Director of Public Services and Instructional
Technology, and is responsible for making liaison assignments. The position also
solicits liaison performance evaluations from the faculty in the departments,
assesses the performance of each liaison, and sends the evaluation to the
appropriate supervisors.
 The Library Instruction Coordinator reports to the Liaison Program Coordinator and
has no supervisory responsibilities. The position is responsible for maintaining Go
for the Gold and the ISST (420-item test bank), keeping instruction statistics,
coordinating scheduling of the classroom, providing leadership for the program, and
organizing development opportunities. In addition, the Coordinator serves as the
Liaison Librarian to Psychology and works on the Reference Desk.
 The Acquisitions/Collections Librarian reports to the Director of Technical Services,
and directly supervises the acquisitions unit but no liaison librarians. The position
provides leadership for collection development and assessment, acquisitions, and
preservation, including coordinating the library’s approval plan.
1. Standing Committees
A significant amount of work is conducted in cross-functional and cross-departmental
committees. The L&ET organization currently has ten standing committees: Collection
Development, Leadership Group, Library Faculty, Personnel Advisory Committee,
Library Faculty Hearing, Diversity Committee, Preservation Committee, Staff
Association, Staff Development, and Travel. Most of these committees are very Librarycentric although the Staff Association has in some years included an Educational
Technologies representative. Furthermore, in September 2004, the L&ET Dean invited
two Educational Technologies leaders (the Coordinator for Distributed and Distance
Learning and the Manager of Faculty Development Services) to join the Leadership
Group. The Dean currently intends to invite all faculty members from the L&ET areas of
the organization to meet regularly with the Library Faculty, a group traditionally
comprised only of professional librarians.
Standing committees are comprised of 3 to 22 members and meet on an as-needed
basis, one time per year, once per month, or twice per month. Each is governed by a
mission statement. See Appendix E or http://staffweb.lib.jmu.edu/administration/ for a
complete description of each committee, including the current membership of each.
2. Communication
L&ET makes use of several communication mechanisms. These are described below.
a) Internal Communication Mechanisms
StaffWeb
L&ET policies and procedures, a staff directory, phone and e-mail lists, committee lists,
and information related to specific areas of the organization are available to L&ET faculty
and staff through the StaffWeb web site (http://staffweb.lib.jmu.edu/). While much of the
site is unadvertised but accessible to the public, several areas require a login (e.g.,
36
Committee Assignments, phone and e-mail lists, and the Library wiki). Historically,
several individuals within L&ET contribute to and maintain the information on the site. In
the last year, this responsibility has shifted to the Digital Services unit.
Meetings
Many L&ET units and subgroups of various individuals meet on a regular basis. For
example, the Leadership Team meets the last Tuesday of every month, the Liaison
Librarians meet the second and fourth Tuesdays of every month, and the CIT staff hold
monthly staff meetings. Standing and ad hoc committees, task forces, teams, and unit
heads also meet. Supervisors are encouraged to meet regularly with individual direct
reports. Since 1999, the CIT had been using a group calendaring system
(MeetingMaker©); in 2006, the University and the entire L&ET organization adopted the
Oracle calendaring system, which has streamlined the process of scheduling meetings.
Some groups (e.g., Library Faculty, Reference, and the Collection Development
Committee) regularly post meeting minutes on the StaffWeb web site. Some
departments or units distribute minutes to group members only.
E-mail
All L&ET members are expected to use e-mail to send and receive information related to
normal organizational operations. E-mail is also used to distribute announcements
related to individual departments, L&ET, JMU, and the Commonwealth.
News Digest
The Assistant to the Dean recently implemented a weekly e-mail News Digest to all
L&ET members. These Digests contain “news items gathered from announcements, emails, minutes, and updates from supervisors and team leaders.” The Digests are
archived on the StaffWeb and can therefore serve as an historical record.
Dean’s Coffee
Every other month the Dean schedules a Dean’s Coffee for all L&ET faculty and staff.
This bi-monthly event is used to introduce new employees, say farewell to those who
plan to leave, and celebrate other events. Food and beverages are served.
State of the Library Address
In late August, before the start of each new academic year, the Dean invites all L&ET
faculty and staff to a State of the Library event. During this event, he briefly summarizes
recent L&ET accomplishments and activities and then shares his vision for the upcoming
year.
L&ET Showcase
In early January of each year, the Dean invites all faculty and staff to attend the L&ET
Showcase. The purpose of this event is to showcase current L&ET projects and
initiatives. Individuals associated with those projects and initiatives are invited to
present.
Collaboration
One question asked by the internal focus group facilitators was, “How do you collaborate
with colleagues from libraries, educational technologies and media resources?”
Responses to this question suggest that more collaboration may occur among the
37
departments involved in direct services to the user. Other observations about
collaboration included:
 collaboration is sometimes based on friendships among people within L&ET;
 collaboration occurs when a problem has been identified;
 the organization does not engage in collaborative planning, especially outside of the
established work group;
 collaboration always takes more time, but is used when other people’s skills are
needed.
b) External Communication Mechanisms
The Knowledge Edge
In the fall of 2000, the Dean’s office published the first online newsletter “by and about
James Madison University Libraries” (http://www.lib.jmu.edu/edge/). The intent of this
online publication is to inform the general JMU community and the internal community
about issues of interest.
Exhibits in Carrier Library
A staff member in Digital Services works with others across campus to present visually
compelling exhibits in the Carrier Library lobby and reference area, often highlighting
JMU research, unusual programs, and student projects, as well as library materials and
services. The exhibits rotate on a quasi-monthly basis, with 14 exhibits being shown in
FY 2006.
Informational Fairs
Staff members from both CIT and L&ET participate in numerous informational fairs held
throughout the year. As an example, in FY 2006, Digital Services participated in 10
orientation sessions for new students and related functions. The CIT participates in New
Faculty Orientation at the beginning of every academic year.
L&ET Websites
The L&ET web site is an omnibus vehicle for promoting virtually any and all aspects of
the organization. Most of the L&ET web site features database-driven "News" and
"Featured Connections" sections to which users can subscribe via RSS. Library staff
has the ability to create items for pages they maintain and to "subscribe" to items that
another may have created. So far, approximately 10 library staff members are actively
contributing to the database. Each library's web site (CISAT, Music, Carrier) has
designated staff members to determine which News items appear on the front pages.
The CIT web site does not yet share this application, but does provide database-driven
promotional content such as announcements and workshop schedules.
Bulk E-mail
Several individuals use JMU's bulk e-mail system to announce important events to
students and faculty. Such e-mails have been used to announce CIT workshops, new
library databases, and major library events such as the East Campus Library building.
Print Materials
Several printed publications feature library databases on a regular basis. JMU Dining
Services provides table tents in the dining halls to which the Library submits a short
38
advertisement for one or more research databases. The Library has also been
developing and distributing postcard announcements to faculty promoting research
databases, generally on a department-by-department basis.
Library Liaisons
Any list of external communication with the library community needs to include the work
that library liaisons do in promoting the library to academic departments and programs.
While every liaison chooses different channels, activities might include attending
departmental meetings, sending e-mails to their department, promoting the library during
instructional sessions, and distributing flyers or other print materials. Some library
liaisons also promote the work of CIT as part of their role; however, this practice is
probably inconsistent.
Workshops
The CIT promotes L&ET services through its numerous workshops and other faculty
development events held throughout the calendar year. Some events are accomplished
through collaboration with other organizations. The CIT regularly distributes fliers and
email messages to faculty to promote workshop schedules and services.
Library faculty and staff often conduct workshops or classes that promote the library to
other groups than their assigned liaison program. Several librarians participated in this
year's Center for Faculty Innovation workshop series; some make presentations to
programs or campus groups, from Residence Life programs to meetings of the
Academic Deans.
3. Partnerships
L&ET has established strong partnerships with various organizations internal and
external to the University. Those partnerships are described below (in alphabetical
order).
Center for Assessment and Research Studies (CARS)
The partnership between the Library and Center for Assessment and Research Studies
(CARS) spans nearly two decades. The focus of collaboration has been assessment of
information literacy in General Education and in the major. CARS assessment
specialists and librarians, in consultation with General Education faculty, developed the
Information-Seeking Skills Test (ISST) that all first-year General Education students are
required to pass. This test has gained national recognition. Many institutions looking for
a way to assess information literacy skills have asked to use the ISST. JMU has not
been able to share it because it is a “high stakes” test and must be kept secure.
Responding to this need, the Library and CARS developed a test called the Information
Literacy Test (ILT) that is now commercially available (Appendix F). This instrument has
been shown to be a reliable measure of ACRL Information Literacy Standards 1, 2, 3,
and 5. The Virginia Community College System and several other institutions across the
country have used this instrument. Funds generated by the ILT are split between CARS
and the Library.
Center for Faculty Innovation (CFI)
The CFI is a faculty-driven endeavor that resides within Academic Affairs. Its mission is
to provide “support for faculty in their multidimensional roles” (http://www.jmu.edu/cfi/).
L&ET has developed a strong collaborative relationship with the CFI and through that
39
relationship is touching more faculty than ever before. It participates in the CFI’s New
Faculty Orientation each year, facilitates workshops in the CFI faculty workshop series,
co-sponsors the annual Information Literacy for Teaching and Learning workshop for
faculty, co-facilitates the CFI’s annual Madison Teaching Fellows groups involved in the
study of instructional technology, and oversees the development and maintenance of the
CFI web site. The CFI center will be co-located with the CIT on the fifth floor of the new
library building, slated to open in 2008.
In addition, liaison librarians and assessment specialists have collaborated to develop
information literacy tests in over a dozen majors. Data from these assessments have
been useful to help focus library instruction to improve student learning.
Development
Fundraising is a collaborative partnership between the JMU Development Office and the
academic and administrative leadership. L&ET is working closely with Development to
develop an effective fundraising plan, and has identified several projects at the level of
$25,000 or more. Projects include Student and Information Technology Assistants
Program, Usability Testing Center, and Faculty Development support for innovative use
of technology in teaching and learning.
Electronic Campus of Virginia (ECVA)
The ECVA is a cooperative instructional technology initiative among the
Commonwealth’s public and private colleges and universities. Institutional
representatives of the Electronic Campus meet bi-monthly in Richmond to discuss
collaborative approaches to issues of common interest concerning e-learning activities at
their respective campuses. The ECVA also works closely with the State Council of
Higher Education of Virginia (SCHEV) as an advisory group providing strategic planning
for state-wide educational technologies initiatives. In addition to its role as a consultative
and advisory body, the ECVA drafts white papers on emerging trends, policies, and
resource sharing, and regularly hosts regional and state-wide conferences that bring
representative of state government, education, business, and the public together to
discuss how instructional technologies can better serve students’ educational needs. In
2005, ECVA convened a state-wide conference, “What’s next for Virginia’s E-Learning
Environment?” The ECVA web site also provides students with a marketplace for online
courses: a "one-stop" access to learning in a distributed environment that meets their
needs for convenient and high quality undergraduate, graduate and professional, and
continuing education.
JMU has been an active member of the ECVA since its inception in 1999. Educational
Technologies staff members currently serve as members of the Learning Technologies
Advisory Committee (LTAC), a SCHEV-sponsored strategic planning group. JMU has
also hosted an ECVA Retreat in 2001. Jim Mazoué, JMU Distributed and Distance
Learning Coordinator, served as Chair of ECVA from 2004 to 2006.
General Education
Another critical partnership exists between L&ET and the JMU General Education
program. Perhaps the most visible aspect of this partnership is the relationship with
Cluster One: Skills for the 21st Century, the part of the General Education program that
emphasizes critical thinking, written communication, and oral communication.
40
Information literacy is one of five key objectives for Cluster One and basic information
skills are emphasized throughout the entire General Education curriculum.
Responsibility for integrating information literacy with the General Education curriculum
is shared among librarians and General Education faculty. The two groups work closely
to develop assignments, classroom experiences and support materials such as the Go
for the Gold online tutorial, in order to ensure that students learn the skills needed by
educated citizens and that students are able to demonstrate competency in those skills.
All JMU students are required to participate in the General Education program and each
student must pass the Information Seeking Skills Test (ISST) an instrument developed
by the library in collaboration with CARS and General Education.
Librarians serve on the Cluster One committee and General Education Council and work
closely with General Education faculty and administrators on projects such as
workshops on effective assignments, out-of-class educational events for students, and a
JMU Honor Code tutorial. Instructional technologists also help to support the General
Education program by working with faculty to incorporate technology in their teaching
and by managing systems that are heavily used in General Education. One notable
example is the Summer Online Institute and other programs to help faculty develop
online General Education courses offered during the summer as a way of addressing
bottlenecks caused by high demand for those courses.
Information Technology (IT)
L&ET has a close partnership with the central campus Information Technology
organization. L&ET depends on the central IT organization for support and standards
related to technology infrastructure: networks, security, server management, and utilities
such as e-mail. In addition, leaders from both areas work hard to make sure both
organizations are moving in the same strategic directions. For instance, an annual
campus "Technology Satisfaction Survey" is jointly administered by IT and L&ET.
There are numerous established communication channels to coordinate technology
planning and services:
 Regular breakfast meeting between Dean of L&ET and the AVP for IT.
 Regular joint meeting of IT and L&ET technology directors.
 Media Resources and IT jointly organize the Labs and Tech Classroom Advisory
Group.
 Blackboard System Group including CIT and IT staff communicates regularly
through e-mail and meets at least once a semester.
 L&ET staff members participate in the IT Technology Coordinators group.
L&ET and IT also frequently collaborate on projects. Sometimes these are large
technology projects like the Campus Portal Project; other times individual staff members
are asked to work on small projects or task forces together. For example, L&ET staff
have participated on program review teams in IT and participated in IT projects like
responding to state requirements for technology accessibility. IT staff have participated
in L&ET technology projects such as the original streaming technology task force. L&ET
and IT collaborate on an annual Technology Satisfaction Survey, which measures
student and faculty/staff satisfaction with classroom technology, Blackboard, and other
services.
41
Outreach
The University is beginning to make a significant investment in outreach programs that
promises to expand the number of continuing education and distance education
offerings while diversifying revenue streams. This commitment also represents an
opportunity to continue the University’s relationship with its alumni and strengthen its
goal of preparing students to be lifelong learners. Outreach programs currently
emphasize teacher education but also include online graduate programs in areas like
nursing as well as certification and continuing education programs in many other fields.
As this effort grows, it is vital that L&ET maintain an active and responsive relationship
with the College of Graduate and Outreach Programs. The responsibility and expertise
for maintaining the online learning systems and support services, which are critical to
outreach programs, lie with Educational Technologies and to a lesser extent with
campus IT. More importantly perhaps, DDLS offers technology support and instructional
design services aimed at helping faculty offer distance education. Finally, the Library
faculty has particular talents that lend themselves to online education.
Procurement
Procurement assists L&ET in the acquisition of equipment, supplies, library materials,
computer hardware, software, systems, and other items according to State and
University guidelines. L&ET staff often request price quotes, place orders, and enter
purchases into the Virginia procurement system, eVA, for these items. However,
Procurement provides guidance in ensuring that purchases are entered into eVA
correctly and that audit trails are properly maintained. In addition, Procurement staff
issue Requests for Proposals, interpret state contracts, and work with L&ET staff to
negotiate and execute licenses and contracts for information resources, software, and
systems.
VIVA (Virtual Library of Virginia)
VIVA (http://www.vivalib.org/factsheet.html) is the consortium of the nonprofit academic
libraries within the Commonwealth of Virginia. Funding comes directly from the Virginia
General Assembly and is augmented by the local institutional library budgets and some
outside grants. VIVA consortial purchasing of electronic resources ensures cost
avoidance for member libraries. As a member, JMU users benefit greatly from the
resources purchased by VIVA. In addition, member institutions commit to deliver
interlibrary loan materials within 48 hours. Several staff members have served or are
serving on VIVA committees. JMU Procurement also negotiates licenses and
establishes contracts for resources obtained by VIVA.
4. Advisory Councils
There are currently no active advisory councils or committees associated with L&ET.
Previously existing councils and committees included an L&ET library faculty advisory
committee, an L&ET student advisory committee, and a CIT faculty advisory committee.
5. Data Reporting
L&ET is responsible for reporting pertinent data to a number of organizations, including
the University, IPEDS, and ACLS. The Assistant to the Dean files the official report to
42
many of the agencies. Data is compiled throughout units within L&ET, and it is often
difficult to know what has been compiled and what is being used. Data is often reported
within the annual reports of units, but reporting from units is inconsistent. L&ET should
evaluate ways to coordinate the collection, develop expertise in data analysis, and
coordinate use of management information for decision making.
B. People
1. Employees and Positions
As of December 1, 2006, L&ET employed 80 full-time and 10 part-time employees, per
the Office Coordinator/Human Resources Officer. Total personnel costs for the entire
organization increased 20% in the last five years from $3.5 million in FY 2001 to $4.9
million in FY 2006.
Of those in full-time positions, 51 are considered full-time classified staff, 23 are librarian
faculty, and six are Administrative/Professional (A/P). Of the librarian faculty, two work
under RTA (renewable term contracts), 12 are tenured, and seven are tenure track.1
One works under a yearly/part-time contract. All A/P faculty work under one-year
renewable contracts.
In the past five years, L&ET has created several new positions or repurposed existing
positions. Specifically, four new librarian positions have been created: an Education
Librarian, a Digital Services Librarian, a Science Librarian and, most recently, a
Business Librarian position. Other new positions include the Media Training Coordinator
position (CIT), an additional Classroom Technology Support position to provide
coverage for evening hours (MR), a Blackboard Support Technician (CIT), and the
Coordinator of Faculty Training (CIT).
Table 1 provides data from the 2004 Academic Libraries Survey (ALS) compiled by the
National Center for Education Statistics indicating that JMU has the lowest number of
total library staff reported per 1,000 FTE students compared to all other Virginia public 4year institutions (Appendix G). ALS Survey data from selected JMU Peer Institutions2
show the same trend (Appendix H). The 2006 survey data are not available. However,
even with the addition of new positions since 2004, it is likely that JMU continues to have
a low per 1,000 ratio of library staff to FTE students.
1
Virginia law states that academic librarians must have benefits and privileges (e.g., option to earn tenure)
similar to instructional faculty.
2 JMU Peer Institutions were selected from the list of JMU Faculty Salary Peers based on similar student
enrollments (http://oirsacs.jmu.edu/PerfMeasures/peerSize.asp).
43
Table 1: 2004 Comparison of Total Staff per 1,000 Enrolled (FTE) of Virginia
Source: 2004 Academic Libraries Survey (NCES)
Librarians and
Other
Professional
Staff Per 1,000
Enrolled (FTE)
Total FTE
12 month
Enrollment
Librarians
and Other
Professional
Staff
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA
20,766
105
5.03
204
44
352
16.94
COLLEGE OF WILLIAM &
MARY
7,235
33
4.49
51
29
113
15.55
VIRGINIA STATE
4,309
9
2.09
14
4
27
13.00
UVA - WISE
1,595
5
3.29
7
3
15
9.40
LONGWOOD
3,893
7
1.8
19
9
35
8.99
Library Name
All Other
Paid
Staff
Student
Assistants
Total Staff
Total Staff Per
1,000 Enrolled
(FTE)
NORFOLK STATE
5,384
8
1.49
17
23
48
8.92
GEORGE MASON
20,443
52
2.52
82
37
170
8.32
MARY WASHINGTON
VIRGINIA MILITARY
INSTITUTE
4,071
13
3.07
13
8
34
8.23
1,362
6
4.41
9
3
18
6.27
VIRGINIA TECH
25,804
126
4.88
0
35
161
6.24
RADFORD
8,699
17
1.95
17
19
53
6.10
OLD DOMINION
15,048
21
1.4
48
20
89
5.90
CHRISTOPHER NEWPORT
4,371
7
1.6
12
7
26
5.87
VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH
JAMES MADISON
UNIVERSITY
22,564
35
1.55
79
13
126
5.60
15,362
21
1.39
38
9
68
4.43
44
The average age for all full-time employees is 45.1 years. The average age for all parttime Library employees is 30.2 years. Since 2000, two faculty members and five staff
members have retired. Sixteen faculty and classified staff are 55 years of age or older
and therefore may potentially retire sometime within the next 10 years.
2. Classified Staff
The Commonwealth's job organizational structure for classified staff consists of seven
Occupational Families divided into Career Groups. Career Groups are composed of
Roles (http://www.dhrm.virginia.gov/compensation/jobstructure.html).
Nine different classified staff roles are represented in the L&ET organization.
The Administrative and Office Specialist II performs a wide variety of
office/program and administrative support duties based on agency business
needs. The range of duties includes, but is not limited to, general office,
secretarial, fiscal, and support activities.
The Administrative and Office Specialist III performs entry-level to supervisory
level duties which may include compliance assurance, report writing,
reconciliation of information or financial data, records management, scheduling,
claims review and processing, data collection and analysis, research, inventory,
budget management, personnel administration, and funds collections or
expenditures.
The Library Specialist I provides assistance in a wide variety of activities in the
library, including reference assistance, copy cataloging, stacks maintenance,
acquisitions of books, journals, and other materials, maintenance of the
government documents collections, and the handling of interlibrary loan requests.
The Library Specialist II has advanced skills in cataloging and archival
preservation as well as managerial skills in administering library units, such as
Circulation and Interlibrary Loan.
The Financial Services Specialist I performs entry-level to first-line supervisory
responsibilities ensuring or evaluating compliance and accountability of financial
programs and business operations/processes.
The Information Technology Specialist I applies basic skills in the areas of
Applications/Programming, Systems Engineering, Network Analysis, IT Analysis,
and Equipment and Applications Specialty.
The Information Technology Specialist II performs more advanced functions in
the areas of Applications Programming/Analysis, Network Analysis, and IT
Analysis and specialist level positions in Systems Engineering.
The Trainer and Instructor II is responsible for providing a variety of training,
instruction, and services to faculty, students, and staff.
45
The Trainer and Instructor III is responsible for coordinating and determining
training or organizational development needs and services for the department
and various customer groups.
Pay for classified staff positions is determined by the role and its corresponding pay
band. There are nine pay bands in the system. L&ET classified staff are dispersed
across four pay bands in the state compensation plan (Table 2). Currently, 43% of
classified staff are in pay band 2, 20% in pay band 3, 29% in pay band 4, and 9% in pay
band 5. In the last three years, five positions in pay band 4 were added across two
departments.
Table 2: L&ET Classified Staff by Pay Band and Role
12/01/2006
2
3
Salary
Minimum
$19,310
$23,076
4
$30,146
5
$39,384
Pay Band
Roles
Administrative and Office Specialist II
Administrative and Office Specialist III
Library Specialist I
Financial Services Specialist I
Information Technology Specialist I
Library Specialist II
Trainer and Instructor II
Information Technology Specialist II
Trainer and Instructor III
Number of
Full-time
1
6
18
1
8
8
2
6
1
Number
of Wage*
3
2
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
*In addition to these permanent wage positions, there are 5 temporary wage positions
3. Library Faculty
Most librarians at JMU are tenure-track faculty; tenure is awarded based on
accomplishments as outlined in the Professional Development Document, which was
updated in March 2004. Faculty must complete a certain amount of academic
scholarship in order to receive promotion and tenure. Examples of academic
scholarship include professional contributions to formally-organized panels, forums,
debates, and staff seminars; publication of research in national, regional, or state
journals; and in-house research that influences services and activities of Carrier Library,
e.g. research and proposals leading to a new service, scholarly bibliography, etc.
Scholarly achievement is considered 20% of a librarian’s output for purposes of
evaluation. Perhaps more importantly, however, it is one means by which librarians are
able to extend their expertise beyond the University and engage in scholarly
communication.
Librarians under the renewable term contracts also have a scholarship requirement and
are eligible for promotion; they are ineligible for tenure.
46
4. Administrative/Professional Faculty
The JMU Faculty Recruitment Handbook (2006) states that administrative faculty are
required to “perform work directly related to the management of the educational and
general activities of JMU, its departments or subdivisions thereof. Incumbents in these
positions exercise discretion, independent judgment and generally direct the work of
others.” Professional faculty members are required to have “advanced learning and
experience acquired by prolonged formal instruction and/or specialized work
experience.”
L&ET currently has seven A/P faculty positions (one position currently vacant). All
seven of these positions are in jobs related to computer or instructional technology. Five
are in the CIT; two are in the Digital Services unit.
While there are no scholarship requirements for these positions, several of the
individuals currently in them have contributed significantly to scholarship in their fields.
Most have presented at local, state, and national conferences; contributed articles and
other publications; and served on local, state, or national committees.
5. Student Employees
L&ET also hires student assistants. Over the past five years, it has employed
approximately 370 students who have worked or work in Carrier Library, the CISAT
Library, the Music Library, Media Resources, and the CIT. Two-hundred and sixteen
(216) students worked or work in institutional employment positions, and 152 worked or
work in federal work study positions.
The number of student assistants has decreased each academic year. Specifically, in
the FY 2002, the Library employed 84 student assistants while only 75 student
assistants were employed in FY 2006. The decrease in the number of student workers
may have been influenced by the elimination of the service desk for closed periodicals.
More students work during the academic year than during the summer months, primarily
because fewer students are available during the summer. In some departments, a fewer
number of student employees during the summer means that regular staff must perform
the work normally performed by those students. Some suggest that summer wage
positions, more hours in institutional employment positions, and pay increases for
performance would attract a larger pool of student applicants and resolve this issue. For
example, the CIT offers 40 hour/week institutional employment positions during the
summer for students who are not attending a class; in addition, the CIT regularly raises a
student’s hourly rate (usually per semester) if the student’s work performance warrants
it. This department has successfully filled summer positions for at least the past three
years.
Students perform a variety of tasks in L&ET such as sorting mail, checking in journals,
processing interlibrary loan requests, and reshelving books in the stack areas. Some
students serve at service points which require good customer service, knowledge of
policies and procedures, and a sense of responsibility. Some positions (e.g., positions in
Special Collections, Reference, and the CIT) require specialized skills and, in some
cases, extensive training; these positions can lead to employment opportunities in a
related field or advanced education (e.g., a Masters degree in library science).
47
L&ET is highly dependent on student labor to provide high-quality service and to keep
the building open for approximately 105 hours per week (and extended hours during final
exams). L&ET should do what is necessary to attract and retain a skilled and
conscientious labor pool.
6. Faculty and Staff Credentials
a) Faculty
Faculty vitae were reviewed to identify credentials (educational level attained,
certifications), years of employment with L&ET, service contributions (committee work),
and contributions to research and scholarship (conference attendance, formal
presentations, publications).
All 29 faculty members submitted a copy of their curriculum vitae (Appendix I). These
documents reflect an accomplished and diverse group. All have achieved a minimum of
a Bachelors of Art or Bachelors of Science degree and one achieved both. Twenty-two
have earned a Master of Library Science or equivalent degree, 15 have earned a Master
or Arts or Master of Science degree, and two are currently enrolled in a Masters level
program. One faculty member has earned a Ph.D. Nine have at least a working
knowledge of one or more non-English languages. All of those in Librarian positions
have earned terminal degrees; of those in other faculty positions, three have earned a
terminal degree.
All full-time faculty members are assigned a faculty rank. Of the 29 L&ET faculty, ten
are assistant professors; ten are associate professors; three are professors; and five are
instructors. The part-time faculty member is considered adjunct faculty and is not
ranked. At this time, only those in full-time Librarian positions have the opportunity to
earn a higher rank.
A large majority of L&ET faculty have contributed to research and scholarship on a local
(i.e., L&ET), university, community, state, regional, national, and/or international level.
Of the 26 faculty who submitted vitae, all (100%) have participated or are participating
on various committees, published articles, delivered professional presentations, or
received or participated in grant-funded projects.
Seventeen of the professional faculty members are liaison librarians. A liaison librarian
is assigned to an academic program to ensure that library services and collections meet
the needs of students and faculty.
b) Staff
The Review Team asked all staff to complete an online survey of their educational
background, work experience, and committee work. Forty-eight of 53 staff completed
the online survey.
Survey results indicate that overall the years of experience are fairly diverse. The
largest number of staff who responded to the survey (29%) has worked in L&ET for less
than 2 years. The second largest number (25%) has worked in L&ET for more than 20
48
years. Media Resources has the highest number of staff (3) who have worked at JMU
for more than 20 years. Cataloging and Serials have the next highest number (2).
Circulation has the highest number of staff (3) who have worked less than 2 years. The
next highest numbers of staff employed for less than 2 years are in Administration (2),
CIT (2), and Digital Services (2). See Figure 3 for all categories of years experience.
Figure 3: Years of Staff in L&ET
Source: 2006 Staff Survey, L&ET Program Review
11 to 15 16 to 20
2%
4%
More than 20
26%
6 to 10
19%
2 to 5
19%
Less than 2
30%
The staff’s educational and professional development experience is somewhat
dispersed. Forty percent selected “bachelor’s degree” as their highest educational level,
while others indicated they had earned an associate’s degree (9%) or a master’s degree
(15%). Some have earned additional field-specific certifications, and 18 (38%) have
attended one or more professional conferences. Nine (19%) have delivered professional
presentations.
49
Figure 4: Highest Educational Level Attained by L&ET Staff
Source: 2006 Staff Survey, L&ET Program Review
Masters Degree
15%
High School
or Equivalent
4%
Some College
13%
Associates Degree
9%
Some Graduate Work
19%
Bachelors Degree
40%
Almost half (46%) of the staff who responded to the survey have been or are involved in
L&ET committees (Hospitality, Preservation, Staff Development, Travel, search
committees, etc.). Very few are involved in university, state, or national committees.
7. Professional Development and Training
JMU’s Human Resource Department records indicate that from FY 2001 through April 6,
2006, 117 L&ET faculty and staff completed 3,680 hours of training provided through
various university departments (HR, Computing Support, CIT, etc.). Thirty different
faculty and 87 different staff participated in 1,166 training events. Training topics include
various computer applications, library databases, general computing, supervisory skills
and procedures, professional certification, and personal finance.
Faculty and staff also participated in professional development activities offered outside
of the University. According to travel records, L&ET spent more than $186,000 for travel
to conferences and training in the last five years. Travel expenditures increased 29%
from almost $41,000 in FY 2001 to almost $53,000 in FY 2006 (L&ET Annual Reports).
Some professional development opportunities are coordinated by the L&ET Staff
Development Committee. The goals of this committee are to:
 coordinate and supplement staff development activities;
 enhance library faculty and staff members’ skills, knowledge, and personal
effectiveness in contributing to the goals of the organization and in accommodating
technological and organizational change; and
 foster an atmosphere of sharing and collegiality (StaffWeb).
50
To this end the Staff Development Committee
sponsors a number of training opportunities for L&ET
staff. From 2002 to the present, the Committee has
organized 43 workshops and training sessions (see
Table 3).3 These workshops and training sessions
covered diverse topics such as Gaming in the
Classroom, DiSC Team Building Workshop, Google at
the Reference Desk, and Understanding the JMU
Student Population. They also included database
training sessions for resources such as Factiva,
eHRAF, and Lexis Nexis. Some sessions are
opportunities for librarians to disseminate the results
of their summer leave activities. Most workshops are
facilitated through a face-to-face format by members
of the JMU community or outside speakers while
others are offered through a teleconference format.
Table 3: Number of Staff
Development Workshops
Source: Staff Development
Annual Reports
Workshops/
Academic
Training
Year
Sessions
2001-2002
NA
2002-2003
11
2003-2004
9
2004-2005
10
2005-2006 *
13
Total
43
* 8 of the 13 sessions in AY 05-06
were database training sessions
done in collaboration with the
Digital Services Unit.
8. LibQual+ Survey Data
The Library has participated in three LibQUAL+ surveys in 2002, 2004, and 2006
(Appendix J). The goal of LibQUAL+ is to define and measure service quality across
institutions and to create useful quality assessment tools for libraries. LibQUAL+
measures library user perceptions and expectations of service quality in three
dimensions: affect of service, information control, and library as place. It identifies gaps
between desired, perceived, and minimum expectations of service in these dimensions.
Users are asked to identify the desired level of service they want to receive, the
minimum level they are willing to accept, and the actual level they are receiving from the
Library. In addition to the standardized survey, users can provide comments that cover
a wide range of topics, including collections, facilities, staff, copiers, hours, the web, and
miscellaneous concerns. The LibQUAL+ data will be discussed later in the report,
particularly “Library as Place” and “Information Control.”
“Affect of service” is the human dimension of library service quality. Questions relate to
the extent to which library employees are caring, courteous, knowledgeable, helpful, and
reliable to users. Library service received the most positive scores in this dimension in
the 2002, 2004, and 2006 surveys compared to Information Control and Library as
Place. Employees often exceed user expectation. The overall desired level of service
for the nine questions in this dimension has dropped from 7.90 in 2002 to 7.84 in 2004 to
7.51 in 2006. The statements “employees who instill confidence in users” and “giving
users individual attention” are among three of the lowest desired expectations on the
2006 survey.
Comments indicated that users are satisfied with library staff. One faculty member
commented that “the quality of service and faculty at JMU's Libraries is unsurpassed”;
another observed that “the staff of the JMU library provides exemplary support for every
aspect of my professional and personal needs for information management.” A
3
No data was available for workshops & training sessions offered in FY 2002.
51
humanities user commented, “Your people are your greatest strength.” A social
sciences user wrote, ”…library employees are ALWAYS so helpful and nice—you guys
are awesome!” In addition, users applaud L&ET’s commitment to improving technology
and collections but suggest that L&ET could improve communications to the JMU
community to increase awareness of advancements and improvements.
C. L&ET Budget
The L&ET total budget has increased to $8,496,539 in FY 2006 from $5,968,093 in FY
2001. In FY 2006 the L&ET budget was 2.87% of the JMU total operating budget, which
includes Educational and General, Auxiliary Enterprises, Financial Aid, and Sponsored
Programs; that is a drop from 3.11% in FY 2001. The data is based on original budget
allocations. The largest increase (110%) is in the materials budget. The library
materials line includes expenditures for books, newspapers, journals, reference
materials, music scores, maps, microforms, media, and other items. Personnel and nonpersonnel allocations have increased 20% and 19%, respectively. Personnel costs
include salaries and wages of full-time and wage staff and student assistants, while nonpersonnel costs are for organizational support for telecommunications, travel,
equipment, furniture, supplies, postal services, etc. The FY 2006 breakdown using this
original budget data was 56% personnel, 34% library materials, and 10% non-personnel.
Figure 4 shows the increases in these three areas from FY 2001 to FY 2006.
Figure 4: Libraries & Educational Technologies Budget Overview
Source: PeopleSoft Reports
$5,000,000
$4,500,000
$4,000,000
$3,500,000
$3,000,000
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
FY 2001
FY 2002
Personnel
FY 2003
FY 2004
Library Materials
FY 2005
FY 2006
Non-Personnel
In addition to the original budget allocations, L&ET receives year-end monies from the
University. Thus, the revised year-end total budget is bigger than the original budget.
Funds are expended within L&ET and returned to budget lines in the next fiscal year. In
FY 2006 L&ET expended $8,914,794 for an increase of $558,016. While budget
52
increases are always welcome, receiving such a large increase at the close of the fiscal
year has its own challenges.
Summer online courses provide revenues to L&ET. For summer 2004 the University
approved a tuition rate for these courses that was $20 per credit hour higher than regular
summer courses. For summer 2005 the University approved making the tuition rate $40
per credit hour higher than regular summer courses. The $40 differential remained in
effect for summer 2006. The revenue from the additional tuition is allocated to IT and
CIT for support of online learning with one third going to IT and two-thirds going to CIT.
L&ET received $20,293 in FY 2005 and $69,274 in FY 2006. The FY 2007 funding from
the budget office has not yet been received, but is expected to be at least $70,000.
Funding provides partial support for online learning systems, such as Blackboard.
L&ET receives additional equipment funding from the
Equipment Trust Fund (ETF) Program administered by
SCHEV. L&ET allocations for the past fiscal years are
listed in Table 4. Specific guidelines restrict the type and
use of equipment purchases and govern the
maintenance and disposal of ETF equipment.
Equipment must support programs of instruction,
research, and academic support. ETF allocations have
been used to purchase technology classroom projection
systems in classrooms, computer hardware, etc.
Table 4: ETF Monies
Received FY 2001-2006
Source: ETF Administrator
FY 2001
$235,000
FY 2002
$185,000
FY 2003
$206,400
FY 2004
$370,000
FY 2005
$486,000
FY 2006
$250,000
From the sale of the Information Literacy Test (ILT), L&ET receives a small amount of
revenue. In 2002, CARS and the Library collaborated to develop a test that other
institutions could use. The ILT measures ACRL Information Literacy Standards for
Higher Education 1, 2, 3, and 5. Several institutions have used the new ILT to assess
their students. Funds generated by the ILT are split between CARS and the Library.
The current balance is over $2,000.
L&ET manages one auxiliary account for fee-based printing, which accumulates
revenues generated from printing in the public areas and in microforms. The revenue in
FY 2006 totaled $58,174. Revenues are used to support direct costs related to printing,
such as toner and paper, a wage position in Loan Services (beginning in FY 2006), and
other costs, such as microform reader/printer equipment and computers.
L&ET administers a number of Foundation accounts, both expendable and endowed
accounts. These are usually designated for specific purposes. For example, the
McLaughlin Book account supports the purchase of reference books (Appendix K).
L&ET is also developing a closer relationship with Development to identify funding
opportunities for donors.
In the last five years, L&ET has received several grants. Grants provide support for new
and significant activities; however, funds do not always support the associated labor
costs. Grants awarded to L&ET are:
 2002: Small Business Administration (SBA) - $1,000,000. Projects made possible
by the grant include pioneering a reference linking service, software and hardware
to support online learning, development of the Shenandoah Valley Business Link,
53




an online business gateway, and the acquisition of several major business
information resources.
2003: Mellon Foundation – $50,000. Grant supported development of MDID2
(Madison Digital Image Database, Version 2). The MDID is a free teaching and
learning tool created by the CIT and faculty and staff of the JMU School of Art and
Art History. The MDID is widely recognized for use in higher education.
2004: National Endowment for the Humanities – $3,970. Grant supported the onsite visit of a preservation consultant to assess the risks to the library collections,
particularly Special Collections. Results of the grant included the upgrade to the
HVAC system serving Special Collections storage in room 205 and the
replacement of the original roof on the 1939 wing of Carrier Library.
2005: Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) – $158,593. This National
Leadership Grant is funding the research and development of computer games that
will teach health information literacy and general information literacy. The project is
being developed in partnership with the Library, the CIT, and CARS.
2006: Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) – $225,476. This grant is
supporting development of MDID API (application program interface) for connecting
to other image systems and tools. The project’s results will allow users to access
more image collections and will serve as an image systems interoperability model.
D. Key Findings





L&ET is understaffed, which limits opportunities to preserve successful existing
services while developing new services.
Data reporting across the departments and divisions within L&ET is inconsistent. In
keeping with the move toward accountability, L&ET needs a more unified way of
gathering, analyzing, and using data.
Central coordination of communications to L&ET’s external community is critical to
inform our users about our services.
New and emerging technologies mandate a more planned approach to staff
development in order to keep skills current.
The identity of the Educational Technologies division within the L&ET organization
and the relationships among the Ed Tech units are ambiguous and require
clarification.
54
VIII. Physical Spaces
JMU L&ET departments are dispersed in several buildings across campus (Appendix L).
Carrier Library, the Classroom Technology main office, and the CIT are housed in the
Carrier Library building. The CISAT Library is located in the CISAT Health Sciences
building; the Music Library is located in the Music building; Media Resources Equipment
Loans was, until very recently, located in Spotswood Hall; and College of Education
services are located in Memorial Hall. The total square footage allocated to L&ET is
currently 105,257 ft.
A. Carrier Library
Carrier Library is the flagship building of L&ET. The building must meet the needs of
competing interests and functions: user space, collection space, and staff office/work
space. User space includes individual, group, and formal and informal spaces. Service
points include the circulation desk, the reference desk, a service desk and closed media
collection in Media Resources, Interlibrary Loan, and Special Collections. The CIT is a
service point for faculty and staff. Many of these spaces provide Internet access to all
users; except for the CIT, none provide access to integrated technologies.
Carrier Library houses most of L&ET’s physical collections, including books, journals,
magazines, newspapers, films and sound recordings, maps, government documents,
images, and special collections. Pre-1975 journals are housed in remote storage with
compact shelving. Print abstracts and indexes are stored in the caged area of the
original building. Loan Services staff retrieves materials for users from these locations.
Most of the L&ET staff offices are in Carrier Library. Exceptions are staff in the CISAT
Library in the Health Sciences building, East Campus Classroom Technology in the
Health Sciences building, the Music Library in Music, and the College of Education in
Memorial Hall.
The number of physical (versus virtual) visits to Carrier Library has fluctuated over the
last few years (see Figure 5). Counts include visits of both users and staff. Overall, the
number increased by nearly 100,000 between FY 2000 and FY 2005. While there was a
slight decline in FY 2006, anecdotal evidence indicates that gate counts will be higher in
FY 2007.
55
Figure 5: Carrier Library Gate Counts
Source: Loan Services
700,000
650,000
600,000
Count
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
A number of improvements have been made to Carrier Library over the past five years
(Appendix M):
 IT installed a wireless access network;
 Room 203 was added as a second instruction room;
 the space formerly occupied by the Law Library was converted into the
Periodicals Room, and space once allocated to periodicals was given over to
the microform collection;
 the tile roof over the original portion of the library was replaced and drainage
was corrected to prevent water from leaking into Special Collections and
certain areas of the basement;
 the CIT renovated Room 7 for expanded office space and Room 22 to include
a recording studio and video production facility;
 two new offices were created on the first floor to provide space for the new
digital services staff;
 workspaces on the first floor were reconfigured to allow for growth and improve
workflow;
 unused space in microforms was transferred to Technical Services to allow for
more space;
 Room 203A was made accessible for the Center for Faculty Innovation as a
meeting and study room for faculty;
 Room 203B was reserved as a study room for students in the Honors Program;
 the juvenile book collection was moved to the newly acquired Memorial Hall.
A special L&ET space planning task force is currently developing a plan for additional
improvements to Carrier Library. The task force has solicited input from all L&ET work
groups and department heads. Data collected to date suggest a need for more study
spaces, more flexible user workspaces, and significantly more space for staff offices,
56
staff workspace, and instruction space. A number of recommendations for reconfiguring
and renovating the current space have been collected as well.
B. CISAT Library—Health Sciences Building
The CISAT Library, a library service point akin to a branch library, is located in Room
2021 of the Health Sciences Building. The CISAT Library Director, two Liaison
Librarians, and two library assistants are its core staff. Two Classroom Technology staff
members from TS-EC provide technical support for various systems and software.
The facility includes 24 networked computers, video viewing stations, and a service
desk. The collection contains reference books, equipment, reserves, a collection of
tests, a small browsing collection, and two daily newspapers provided at the request of
CISAT faculty. In addition to circulating local materials, the CISAT Library provides a
document delivery service for materials from other libraries on campus as well as
materials from other institutions through Interlibrary Loan. Electronic resources are
available for the programs that the library supports.
Renovations to the public and staff areas in the CISAT Library were completed within the
last year. Plans for the new East Campus library building are underway.
C. Music Library—Music Building
The Music Library is located in the lower level of the Music Building on the main campus
of James Madison University. The staff includes the Music Librarian and two library
assistants. The library boasts state of the art technology including 12 midi computer
stations and 8 music commons stations. Materials include all AV formats, reference
books, music scores, periodicals, reserves, software, and equipment. The Music Library
also houses print and media special collections, provides electronic resources as well as
digitization and recording services, and contains a music preservation and binding unit.
Over the past five years improvements to the Music Library space include:








Closet converted to office space
Improvement to preservation area
IT installed a wireless access network
Media room (group study room) converted into office space
Improved circulation area to comply with ADA regulations
Digital video signage installed
Research stations implemented
Implemented wireless remote audio system
Improvements and additional space are needed. The L&ET space planning task force is
working with the music library to address needs and develop a plan. Data collected to
date shows a need for significantly more staff space, both office and work space, user
listening area, and additional collection space.
57
D. Equipment Loans—Spotswood and Carrier Library
Until recently, the Media Resources Equipment Loans service was housed on the lower
level of Spotswood Hall on the main campus. Water-related problems forced them to
relocate to Carrier Library. The Media Resources Director is searching for another
suitable location which can house the main campus Classroom Technology staff as well.
E. College of Education Services—Memorial Hall
The Educational Technology Media Center (ETMC) located within Memorial Hall houses
the juvenile collection, a small reference collection supported by the library materials
budget and the K-12 curriculum materials that support the College of Education. The
Liaison Librarian for the College of Education holds regular office hours there.
F. New Library on East Campus
Construction has started on the new 106,000 square foot library building on East
Campus which is scheduled for completion on March 20, 2008. The library building
project is funded through the bond referendum for capital improvements in higher
education approved by Virginia voters in 2002. News on the building is available at
http://www.lib.jmu.edu/newlibrary/.
With the addition of the new building, the space allocated to L&ET will double; however,
the new library will supplement rather than replace the existing Carrier Library.
Designed following the information commons model, the new facility will include an
integrated service desk for circulation, reference, reserves, and media. It will include
study and production space that is flexible, technology-enhanced, and adaptable. The
new library will offer space for library instruction, reading rooms, and group studies. A
secured section of the building will offer a 24-hour study and computer lab with a coffee
bar. The library will house the science and technology collections, but it will be open to
students and faculty from all academic programs as well as to community members.
The fifth floor of the new building will house the Center for Instructional Technology and
the Center for Faculty Innovation, a department in Academic Affairs. A faculty seminar
room will be available for programs related to faculty development, teaching, and
scholarship.
The new library will help to inform what renovations take place in Carrier Library. For
example, if the information commons area is successful in the new library building, the
administration may consider renovating Carrier Library to include one as well.
58
G. LibQUAL+ Survey Data
The dimension “Library as Place” refers to how the environment of the library meets
study and research needs. It includes questions covering issues such as the usefulness
of space, the symbolic value of the library, and the library as a refuge for work or study.
Overall the scores in this area were positive with users. One Science/Math
undergraduate student stated, “I mostly use the library to study, and it's perfect.” A
Communications undergraduate student commented, “I love the learning environment of
the carrier library [sic] because it allows me to focus on my studies and be motivated by
the people around me who are also hard at work.”
Three main areas of complaint concerning library facilities were cited in the 2006
LibQUAL+ survey comments: the high noise level, lack of group study space, and lack of
sufficient computers for student use. Users express dissatisfaction with the noise level.
An education undergraduate student said, “I know it is probably hard to regulate, but
talking in the study areas is very disruptive! It might be helpful to make the third floor
completely quiet or something. It's so distracting!” A humanities undergraduate stated,
“We need more comfortable and quiet places to study that are more secluded and less
out in the open where it's noisy.”
The lack of group study space is particularly apparent when reviewing user response for
the question on “community space for group learning and group study.” Business,
education, and communications and journalism users expressed a high desired level for
community space. The responses were still within the zone of tolerance; however, the
adequacy gap is quite narrow, meaning the library could do more to provide this type of
space. A graduate student in education (2004) commented, “I find the library very
uncomfortable and non-conducive to academic study and learning. More group study
spaces that are more comfortable would help, as would longer hours.” A business
student (2006) said, “[there is]…widespread agreement that more quiet study space [is]
needed and more importantly areas for group work.” A Health Sciences student
commented, “I think it [the library] could be improved by adding more space for students
to study especially in groups because often group study areas are full so groups move to
areas that are supposed to be quiet.”
There was no specific LibQUAL+ question on computers, but there were many
comments in 2006 related to the number of computers in the library. An
engineering/computer science undergraduate wrote, “One of my only criticisms of the
library is that there always seems to be a shortage of computers available for use.” This
view was reinforced by the focus groups with undergraduate students. Students go to
Carrier Library between classes and use computers for a variety of reasons, including
checking Blackboard, accessing databases, checking e-mail, and checking periodicals
online. However, it is difficult to find a seat due to overcrowding. Students also
commented that the lack of Macintosh computers is an issue. LibQUAL+ results and
discussions with JMU faculty also revealed that patrons still value the physical space of
the library. Faculty described a welcoming, comfortable place that highlights and
celebrates books (similar to a bookstore). One faculty member requested a program in
which each department’s representative work with liaisons to display book jackets within
departments, an idea that enforces the importance of physical collections to the faculty
user population. Collaborative learning areas and computers throughout the library
(including in the stacks) were also deemed important.
59
H. Key Findings



Users cite lack of group study space and lack of computers as major problems. The
new east campus library in early 2008 promises increased study spaces and
services, but Carrier Library and the Music Library must also be redesigned to
recreate a functional user space.
Media Resources Equipment Loans needs a suitable new location to provide optimal
service.
More staff spaces are needed as new positions are created.
60
IX. Systems and Applications
Five L&ET departments across the organization manage, maintain, and support almost
500 computing systems for L&ET staff and users (Table 4). These systems include
servers, desktop systems, technology classroom systems, and laptops, and are used for
communication, instruction, research, content development, content delivery, and
storage. JMU’s IT department manages an additional 40 PC computing systems in the
public labs.
A. Hardware
Five L&ET departments across the organization manage, maintain, and support more
than 500 computing devices for L&ET staff and users (Table 5). These systems include
servers, desktop computers, laptops, and technology classroom systems, and are used
for communication, instruction, research, content development, content delivery, and
storage. With few exceptions, L&ET provides technology support with internal staff
rather than relying on the central JMU IT Department. IT manages 40 desktop
computers in the L&ET public labs.
System administrators estimate that the number of computers they manage has
increased by 50% over the last 5 years. However, due to limited physical space and
increased availability of wireless network access to students, computer hardware growth
has leveled off. The need for constant maintenance and replacement of existing
computers continues to require significant investment of staff time and funds.
The number of Mac workstations in L&ET has grown and will continue to grow due to an
increasing need for high-performing digital video and other multimedia editing stations.
For example, Digital Services will soon be co-managing a Mac research lab in the Music
Library and the department just purchased three Mac PowerBooks.
61
Table 5: Number of L&ET Computing Systems (all locations)+
By Managing Department
Source: Systems Managers, November 2006
Servers
Digital
Services
Digital
Services
and IT
10
CIT
CIT and IT
IT
Desktop (Public)
PC
Mac
PC
105
1
74
Laptops
(Checkout)
Mac
Instruction
(including
instructor
consoles)
PC
Mac
Production
PC
Classroom
Technology
Systems
18
3
23
3
[will be
4 soon]
216
8
20
3
52
(+ 3 to be
added soon)
150
4
12
TOTALS
Mac
8 (Music)
Media
Resources
Classroom
Technology
Technical
Services
Desktop and
Laptops (Staff)*
150
4
22
8
5
3
11
10
6
3
5
75
10
(Blackboard)
40
40
TOTAL
555
+does not include peripherals (printers, scanners, cameras, etc.)
*includes staff, student assistant workstations, service desks
62
Replacement Plan
Computer hardware replacement plans vary across departments and types of systems.
Generally, staff and public computers, technology classroom systems, and classroom
workstations are replaced every three years, shortly before or after the three-year
warranty expires. Other machines used by student assistants and for more generic
functions have longer replacement cycles, often stretching to 5 years or more. Servers are
under a four-to-five year warranty and therefore also have a longer replacement cycle.
In the past five to seven years, over 80% of workstations and servers have been
purchased by ETF monies. Grant funds are also used. L&ET rarely participates in JMUsponsored bulk-order programs because the large quantities ordered by L&ET usually
mean better prices than the bulk order can provide.
Price quotes for Dell hardware are gathered from Dell’s premier site for JMU. Price
quotes for Apple hardware are taken from Apple’s online store for JMU. L&ET purchases
mostly Dell and Hewlett Packard printers.
Software Applications
L&ET staff uses a variety of software applications to perform the work of the organization.
Common software applications on workstations across the organization include:
 Microsoft Office
 Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox
 WS-FTP file transfer program
 Quicktime, Real Player, Windows Media
 DVD/CD burning software
 Symantec Anti-Virus
 Oracle Calendar client
 Adobe Reader
Many departments and units use software or programming languages specific to the work
they do or the method by which they want to perform certain administrative tasks (Table
6). For example, web publishers within the library use Macromedia Contribute to
contribute to the L&ET website. Both Digital Services and the CIT use various
programming languages and software applications to manage their websites.
63
Table 6: Specialized Software Applications and
Programming Languages by L&ET Area
Source: System Administrators, November 2006
Library
Workstations
CIT Staff and Public
Workstations
Technical
Services
Thunderbird
Adobe Acrobat 7.0
XML Spy 5.4
Macromedia
Contribute
Adobe Photoshop CS
Print Wizard 2.6
Millennium client
Adobe Image Ready
CS
Adobe Photoshop
Elements*
Adobe Premiere*
Wert Bindery
OCLC's
Connexion
Library of
Congress
Cataloger's
Desktop and
Classification
Plus
Macromedia Studio 8*
Other SpecializedLibrary
Visual Studio 2003 and
2005
Microsoft Assistant
(Remote Desktop)
Adobe PhotoShop and
Creative Suite
CIT Web Apps
HTML
ASP
ASP.NET
Macromedia MX Suite
Adobe Dreamweaver
ILLiad client (ILL only) –
allows Interlibrary loan
staff operations.
Microsoft FrontPage
NET Framework 1.1 and
2.0 – programming /
runtime environment
Microsoft Visual Studio
Respondus
Study Mate
Captivate
SPSS 14.0
Norton Antivirus 10.0
DotNetNuke
MediaWiki
*applications that are metered with a software license manager
B. Costs for Systems and Applications
Technology has become a major budget item for L&ET. In FY 2006 alone, according to
PeopleSoft reports, nearly $280,000 was allocated for desktop computers, maintenance
contracts, servers, storage devices, and mobile devices. From FY 2001 to FY 2006,
$1,732,400 of ETF money has been used to purchase equipment (Table 4).
Routine purchases include workstations ($1,100 - $1,600 per workstation), servers
($5,000 - $8,000 per server) and storage devices ($10,000 - $12,000). Equipping each
technology classroom costs approximately $10,000 for hardware and $600 for labor.
In the past five years, special purchases have included three Tegrity multimedia systems
($87,370), two IP-based video teleconferencing desktop units ($13,000), a Polycom
videoconferencing unit ($8,000) and a Tandberg videoconferencing unit ($5,000).
64
C. Key Findings



The need for data storage will continue to grow as content requires more space.
Larger content will also require greater bandwidth.
The use of open source applications and operating systems within the organization is
growing. L&ET must stay informed of this emerging approach to integrating software
systems into the organization’s computing infrastructure.
There is a growing demand for Mac machines and therefore Mac technical support.
65
X. Content
L&ET has benefited from significant increases to its materials budget over the past five
years. The number and quality of research resources, electronic journals, and print and
media collections have surged. While faculty and students are increasingly satisfied with
the overall collections, specific areas still need attention. The increase in digital content
and our users’ expectations of online access must be accompanied by a continued shift in
library staffing resources and expertise, as well as additional staffing in order to deal with
the sheer quantity of resources. Non-textual formats, such as images, audio, and video,
will need specialized attention. Traditional categories of library materials, such as books,
government documents, microformats, and archival materials, will need to be re-evaluated
in order to determine their future place within collections and to maximize the usefulness
of their content to our users. In addition to these challenges, L&ET is grappling with
changes in the information marketplace. Traditionally, libraries have purchased and
owned content. In recent years, more materials are acquired through licensing
arrangements. L&ET seeks to pursue emerging alternatives to the for-profit model
whenever possible, acquiring open access publications and favoring more open
architecture for the content-delivery software. In sum, L&ET’s focus for the next five years
will need to be on balancing our physical and digital content, grappling with the
implications of changing formats, and maximizing the accessibility of all content, thus
connecting the ideas in content with our users.
A. Library Materials Budget
Based on its April 2002 visit, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS)
Visiting Team found JMU to be an excellent institution and only had 22 recommendations
for improvement. Recommendation 20 stated, “The Committee recommends that JMU
provide access to library collections sufficient to support the educational, research, and
public services program of the institution.” This recommendation came as a result of
steady-state materials budget of $1,373,000 for each year from FY 1996 until FY 2001.
During this period the Library was forced to cancel journals and limit book purchases. In
addition, a state budget crisis required two years of budget reversions in FY 2001 and FY
2002. The lack of resources hindered the library’s ability to support the student
educational programs and faculty research.
In response to the SACS recommendation, the Library developed a five-year action plan
(Appendix N). The goals were to improve library collections, in particular to strengthen
book and primary source collections and to sustain progress made on journal and
electronic resource collections. In preparing a response, the Library compiled Academic
Library Survey (ALS) data from for Virginia and selected peer institutions to compare total
library operating expenditures and library materials expenditures. Compared to the other
state institutions FY 2002, JMU had the lowest per student expenditures for library
materials at $82 (Appendix O).
66
The JMU University Administration accepted the plan and has increased the library
materials base budget each year since FY 2002. The budget was $1,388,885 in FY 2003
rising to $2,888,885 in FY 2006, a 108% increase, which resulted in a per student
expenditure for materials of $187. After FY 2008, the final year of the plan, the library will
need, at a minimum, inflationary increases to sustain the growth in collections. In 2006,
academic libraries saw price increases for serials just under 8% overall; in 2007,
predictions are for increases in the range of 7 to 9% (Van Orsdel & Born, 2006). Inflation
for books was 9.62% in 2006 (Loughran, 2006). In addition, increases based on higher
enrollment and new programs will be critical.
Figure 6 shows the breakdown of library materials expenditures for FY 2001 through FY
2006. Book expenditures include purchases of all print materials, including books,
musical scores, maps, and manuscripts. Serials include print journal subscriptions,
electronic journals (both individual titles and packages), standing orders, and microform
subscriptions. Media includes videotapes, DVDs, CDs, and similar formats.
Figure 6: Library Materials Expenditures
Source: Millennium Reports
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$0
FY 2001
FY 2002
Books
FY 2003
Journals
FY 2004
Databases
FY 2005
FY 2006
Media
Most purchased electronic collections represent a service time commitment for librarians
and technical services staff. The acquisition of electronic journals, research databases,
and streaming video collections requires license negotiation, and adds an additional layer
to the purchase process. ERM (Electronic Resources Management module in Millennium)
now serves as a vehicle whereby to track licensing terms, renewal dates, key vendor
contacts, and other critical information.
The use of the Small Purchase Charge Card (SPCC) and eVA, two new state mandates in
procurement, required a major change in procedures for library staff. Both mandates
have increased the amount of time required by staff to process orders in multiple systems,
maintain paperwork and documentation, and work with vendors. In addition, the dollar
67
outlay from the library materials to support the eVA system will increase to 2% per
transaction in FY 2008.
1. Collection Development
Collection development is “the process of planning and building a useful and balanced
collection of library materials over a period of years, based on an ongoing assessment of
the information needs of the library's clientele, analysis of usage statistics, and
demographic projections, normally constrained by budgetary limitations” (ODLIS).
Collection development is a major component of each liaison librarian’s job description
and includes selection of books, journals, databases, videos, and other needed materials
for their department(s). One measure of collection development activity is the size of
subject allocations liaisons must expend for books, scores, maps, and non-print materials.
Most allocations have increased over 30 percent, with several exceptions (Appendix P).
While it is unknown how much time is spent on collection development activities, liaisons
have expressed stress about the workload related to collection development. Because of
library instruction and other responsibilities, many librarians do not have adequate time to
devote to selection throughout the year. Furthermore, the University’s somewhat erratic
budget cycle also has an impact on time management. In addition to selecting new
materials, liaison librarians have made a concerted effort to weed the collection to reduce
overcrowding in Carrier Library stacks and to prepare for moving a portion of the collection
to the new Library facility planned for East Campus.
An approval plan is a
Table 7: Approval Plan—Percent of Total Monograph Purchases
time-saving collection
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
development method
Total Titles
whereby books are sent
Purchased*
10,051 9,693 8,086 12,530 15,699 16,301
systematically to the
Approval Plan,
library from a book jobber
net
3,948 3,639 2,868
3,698
3,798
5,775
upon publication
% Approval Plan
39%
38%
36%
30%
24%
35%
according to preestablished collection development profiles. Most departments are using approval plans
to receive books on a timely basis. Table 7 shows that the Library’s approval plan
generally accounts for 35 to 39% percent of all titles purchased. Except for two fiscal
years, the percentage of books received on approval relative to total titles purchased
increased as the materials budget has increased. Liaison librarians are adjusting
approval profiles to increase the number of titles appropriate for the curriculum.
The Collection Development Committee (CDC), a standing committee, provides oversight
and is responsible for planning, organizing, and monitoring activities related to collection
development, evaluation, and maintenance for all types of information resources.
2. LibQUAL+ Survey Data
The additional library materials funding has increased user satisfaction with the
collections. In 2002, when the library was responding to the SACS recommendation, the
library participated in its first LibQUAL+ survey. A major section of the LibQUAL+ survey
contains findings on Information Control (in 2002 this section was labeled Access to
Information). Information Control is defined as “scope, timeliness, convenience, ease of
68
navigation, and modern equipment.” Faculty, undergraduate students, and graduate
students perceived the “comprehensive print collections” and “complete runs of journal
titles” as below minimum service expectations. Faculty, in particular, thought library
collections were deficient. One faculty member commented, “The library staff are
remarkable and help to make up for the appallingly poor condition of our collections for a
university of our size. The library is woefully underfunded, particularly with regard to
journals and databases.” One undergraduate stated succinctly, “more journals!! more
books!!”
The 2004 LibQUAL+ survey results showed improvements in this area as the University
Administration continued to increase funds devoted to the materials budget; however, the
lowest marks continued to be in Information Control, specifically for the statements “the
printed materials I need for my work” and “printed and/or electronic journals collections I
require for my work.” Users perceived the library meeting the minimum expectation for
the first statement, which was a marked improvement over 2002. Users, however, still
indicated that the perceived performance for the second statement was below minimum
expectations but less so than in 2002.
In the 2006 LibQUAL+ survey, undergraduate and graduate students perceived the library
meeting above the minimum expectations in response to both statements. Faculty still
perceived below minimum levels on both questions, but the gap was smaller than in 2004.
Analysis of the 2006 LibQUAL+ faculty data indicates that faculty in the humanities and
performing and fine arts are less satisfied with the library collection than faculty in other
disciplines. The Faculty Senate’s 2003 Faculty Morale Survey also supports this finding
reporting faculty in Arts and Letters are shown to be less satisfied with library resources
than faculty in Business, Science and Mathematics, and Integrated Sciences and
Technology (Appendix Q).
B. Content Types
Table 8 summarizes the item counts of various types of resources available in the library
collection from FY 2001 to FY 2006. It also includes the expenditures for purchased
materials by type, such as books, print periodical subscriptions, electronic journals, and
research databases. The number of book withdrawals is included in the total book volume
count, but the second row of the table states the number of book withdrawals by year,
showing the activity of the weeding project particularly in FY 2002.
The rapid increase in the number of digital titles acquired and the total expenditures for
digital materials by the Library is evident. Counts for the electronic journals and research
databases purchased by the VIVA state consortium are also included. VIVA provides
significant collections for JMU users.
69
Table 8 : Total Item Count and Expenditures per Fiscal Year
FY 2001
Books (volumes)
428,380
Expend.
$349,843
FY 2002
416,547
Expend.
$358,560
FY 2003
423,320
Expend.
$469,627
FY 2004
433,222
Expend.
$469,689
FY 2005
443,247
Expend.
$563,524
FY 2006
450,724
Book Withdrawals (volumes)
(1,646)
(23,824)
(2,917)
(3,898)
(5,137)
(9,264)
E-books (expenditures for ebook collections included
with Research Databases)
8,249
8,287
8,294
11,561
13,650
30,663
80,069
82,450
83,593
83,126
83,991
79,887
Bound Journals (volumes)
Expend.
$650,319
$10,402
Print Current Journal
Subscriptions (titles)
2,168
$502,057
1,899
$399,778
1,733
$318,166
1,616
$392,957
1,525
$287,471
1,402
$270,258
Electronic Journals (titles) excluding VIVA
1,832
$30,115
2,222
$30,995
2,354
$32,095
3,615
$333,480
5,648
$621,474
8,515
$758,160
VIVA Electronic Journals
748
Research Databases
102
VIVA Research Databases
141
Microforms (pieces)
CD-ROMs
1,045,511
1,022
$154,412
106
1,107
$210,568
113
141
$53,008
n/a
1,063,806
1,091
$428,053
128
$57,619
1,036,552
283
176
1,361
$428,859
125
$45,365
287
1,050,336
204
1,517
$759,355
126
$49,616
296
1,053,570
243
$847,029
140
$44,620
317
1,050,660
$57,241
334
Scores
18,875
$5,468
19,279
$7,849
19,460
$45,581
19,743
$45,581
19,715
$14,969
20,071
$10,184
Sound Recordings
18,720
$7,876
19,292
$6,786
19,502
$5,081
19,719
$5,081
20,142
$7,808
20,736
$10,580
Video
10,812
$39,664
11,519
$38,810
11,845
$67,723
12,440
$68,323
15,050
$99,144
16,177
$77,327
Manuscripts
134
135
138
140
140
161
Maps
515
514
546
533
533
539
37
40
307
455
501
n/a
142
147
147
149
189
559,780
552,573
564,616
578,703
583,712
584,043
Theses added to collection
Oral Histories
Government Documents
70
1. Books
Total book volume count was 450,724 at the end of FY 2006. Total expenditures
increased by 86% from FY 2001 to FY 2006 as per Table 8. As previously noted, books
are housed primarily in Carrier Library, with small reference collections in the Music
Library, CISAT Library, and the ETMC. The ETMC also houses the juvenile collection.
Table 9 compares FY
Table 9: FY 2006 Circulation by JMU User Group
2006 circulation activity
Source: JMU Qwik Facts and Figures and Millennium Reports
% of Total
by JMU user group for
% of
CheckCheckall formats. The
Population
User Group
Population
outs
outs
percentage of
Undergraduate
circulation activity for
79% 108,259
Students
15,287
75%
each user group has
remained relatively
6%
Graduate Students
1,067
7,650
5%
steady from FY 2001 to
2%
Special Students
331
1,004
1%
FY 2006. While the
Instructional
undergraduates
6%
Faculty
1,089
12,369
9%
account for 75% of the
circulation, faculty are
8%
Other JMU Users
1,483
6,327
4%
the most active
borrowers: although they only represented 6% of the community in FY 2006, they
account for 9% of the circulation activity.
Funding for the print reference collection has increased since FY 2001. In FY 2002 inhouse usage of the reference collection decreased 12% from the previous year to
10,093. This internal re-shelving usage data is no longer collected systematically.
Several projects impacting the collection in the past few years include using the OCLC’s
Automated Collection Analysis Services (ACAS) for weeding and collection
development, moving the juvenile collection from Carrier Library to the ETMC in
Memorial Hall, and beginning an ongoing inventory of the collection by Loan Services in
FY 2006. The number of book volumes withdrawn from FY 2001 to FY 2006 total
46,686 as per Table 8. Weeding requires significant time from liaison librarians and
Cataloging staff, but hopefully results in a more relevant collection and provides needed
space for new materials. The inventory by Loan Services could be used to identify littleused items that could be moved to storage.
Electronic books (e-books) and e-book collections are still a small percentage of the
annual materials budget. In FY 2006, a little over $10,000 was expended on
individually-purchased e-books, while about $34,500 was spent on e-book collections
totaled currently with research databases.
The first foray into e-book collections comprised free online collections from the
University of California and National Academies Press. In FY 2003, the library
purchased access to the Early American Imprints, Series I, Evans (1639-1800); in FY
2004, the History E-book collection; in FY 2005, Safari Tech Books; and in FY 2006, two
collections from eBrary, the Eighteenth Century Collections Online, and American
History and Culture Online (Appendix R). Certainly, the Sonny Bono Copyright
Extension Act, incorporated into the Federal Copyright Act, virtually guarantees that
71
most copyrighted works issued after 1920 will only be available online through licensing
agreements if they continue to have market value.
To ensure the fullest possible user access to these e-books and other e-book primary
source material contained within select databases, the Cataloging Unit adds MARC
bibliographic records to the LEO Library Catalog. However, the Cataloging Unit
thoroughly evaluates each collection based specific criteria outlined in its OPAC-Access
Evaluation for E-Monographs form and makes a recommendation to the Collection
Development Committee on the inclusion of records in the catalog.
At the end of FY 2006, 17,014 e-books and 13,629 additional e-books in such collections
as Early American Imprints, Alexander Street Press, and Documenting the American
South were available to users through the LEO Library Catalog. Expansion into e-books
is so new that insufficient data are available to draw definitive conclusions; however,
initial usage statistics appear to indicate that these resources fill a need for users.
These resources represent significant additions to the collection, providing easy access
to timely information in computer science and other rapidly evolving subject areas, as
well as unique materials in history and literature.
The library has an active preservation program for maintaining collections in serviceable
condition for instruction and research, for educating both staff and users on the proper
handling of materials, and for fostering awareness of technological developments in
preservation of existing print, non-print, and other electronic media. Preservation is
promoted by the Preservation Unit and the Preservation Committee. The staff and
trained student assistants in the Preservation Unit perform both complex and simple
repairs on print materials following preservation standards. The current binder was
selected via RFP and follows current binding standards of the Library Binding Institute.
A change in book vendors enabled the library to make use of the interoperability
between the new vendors’ online systems and the library catalog. In FY 2006, the
library transferred its firm order monographs and approvals contract to Coutts Library
Services and Yankee Book Peddlar (YBP) Library Services, with Coutts primarily
handling approvals and standing orders and YBP fulfilling firm orders. The transition
was not an easy one, requiring modification of procedures, the creation of load profiles
and other system adaptations, and the need for staff training on both the vendor
systems. Despite the challenges in adapting to two new book vendors, the turnaround
time for firm orders improved from 60% received within 8 weeks in FY 2005 to 88%
received within 8 weeks in FY 2006.
The Cataloging Unit evaluated vendor-supplied records from the two new book jobbers
in FY 2006. After reviewing samples of the records, error rates were in the acceptable
range and new books were processed more quickly for the collection.
Liaison librarians, who previously received paper notification slips, now received them
electronically. In addition, they had to establish new approval profiles and learn to
navigate and order materials on two new and very different interfaces.
72
2. Journals
Journal, magazine, and newspaper subscriptions total 11,434 in FY 2006. Of that
number, 10,032 are available electronically. Of these electronic subscriptions, VIVA
provides 1,517 titles. When combined with the aggregator and free e-journals, almost
35,000 unique journal, magazine, and newspapers titles are available to users.
Expenditures for print current subscriptions dropped 46% from FY 2001 to FY 2002,
while expenditures for electronic journals increased from $30,115 in FY 2001 to
$758,160 in FY 2006.
Figure 7 illustrates the dramatic growth in the electronic journal subscriptions over the
last six years. The Collection Development Policy states, “In most cases, the preferred
format for serials will be an electronic version accessible via the Internet.” The number
of print current journal subscriptions decreased 35% from FY 2001 to FY 2006. Some
print subscriptions are bundled with an online subscription at no additional charge.
There are specific disciplines in which the liaison librarian and academic department
favor a specific title be acquired in print format. Microform subscriptions are for titles
originally received in print and acquired in microform in order to save shelving space.
Figure 7: Journal Subscriptions
Source: Millennium Reports
12,000
Subscriptions
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
FY 2001
FY 2002
Electronic
FY 2003
Print
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
Microform
Usage of electronic journals continues to increase exponentially as print and microform
usage drastically decline (see Figures 8 and 9). The steady increase of overall e-journal
usage continues despite the continued adjustment of statistics by vendors implementing
COUNTER. In FY 2006, 652,655 total article downloads were recorded. Since FY
2001, microform and print (both current and bound) usage has declined from 78,226 to
11,305 in FY 2006 based on daily re-shelving counts and captured in item records in the
LEO Library Catalog. There were only 2,041 total uses of journal and newspapers in
73
microform in FY 2006. Providing a scanning service could be a useful alternative for
users and would promote usage of collections only available in the microform.
Figure 8: Use for Selected Electronic Journals
Article Downloads
Source: Vendor COUNTER-Compliant Usage Reports
800,000
750,000
700,000
650,000
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
Figure 9: In-House Journal Usage Statistics
Source: Millennium Reports
35,000
Number of Uses
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
FY 2001
FY 2002
Current
FY 2003
FY 2004
Microform
74
FY 2005
Bound
FY 2006
FY 2006
The Library has also made significant additions of electronic backfiles of journals
previously available only in physical bound volumes in Carrier Library. The usage data
reported above also includes that of electronic backfiles. Preservation of digital content
is a major concern. The library uses the LOCKSS system to store and serve electronic
journal articles and other digital material for which perpetual archival rights have been
acquired.
Over the past few years, archival collections have been purchased from JSTOR and
from selected publishers. Decisions were based on curricular need and demand by
users. As additions are made to the electronic journal archival collection, liaison
librarians, in consultation with academic departments, approved the withdrawal of bound
volumes. For example, serials staff withdrew 5,731 print volumes and 9,406 microform
pieces as part of the JSTOR withdrawal project in FY 2006.
Many e-journal subscriptions are the result of so called “big deals” or cooperative
agreements which JMU has negotiated with publishers in conjunction with other Virginia
institutions. Concerns about these agreements include their sustainability over time; the
implications of mergers in the industry, which minimizes competition; and the challenge
of selecting the most appropriate titles in a context where many titles are only sold in
“bundles.” JMU’s cooperative agreements with Elsevier ScienceDirect, Wiley
Interscience, Blackwell Publishing, and Springer/Kluwer have enabled the library to
obtain access to thousands of journals simply by maintaining current subscriptions and
paying a minimal additional annual fee. The Library would be unable to afford the
number of journals which it currently offers without partnering with other institutions to
obtain discounted pricing and shared access; while the library’s individual agreements
with publishers result in a cost of several dollars per use, cooperative agreements often
result in a cost per use less than a dollar (Appendix S).
Print journals are stored in three locations within Carrier Library. Pre-1975 bound
volumes are located in storage or compact shelving in a secured location in the
basement, and Loan Services staff retrieves volumes upon user request. Bound
volumes dating from 1975 to present are located on the second floor. The current or
unbound journals are located on the first floor within a reading room. The current
periodical collection was moved to its current location in summer 2002. Until that time,
current periodical issues were located in a closed stack area on the second floor. Figure
9 shows the usage of these journal titles.
3. Research Databases and Resources
In FY 2006, the library subscribed to or owned 243 research databases with access to
another 140 through VIVA. Research databases include online resources other than
journals, magazines, and newspapers: resources such as abstract/indexes, online audio
collections, e-book collections, or statistical sources. Figure 10 shows the steady
increase in electronic research databases available to JMU users since FY 2001
purchased by JMU and VIVA.
75
Figure 10: Databases Accessible to JMU
Source: Millennium Reports
300
250
200
150
JMU
VIVA
100
50
0
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
While the number of databases to which JMU subscribes increased by 16% from FY
2005 to FY 2006, the expenditure for databases rose by 12% from $759,355 in FY 2005
to $847,029 in FY 2006. These expenses include one-time costs associated with some
databases for archival purchases and additional user licenses. Research databases
now comprise approximately 32% of the total materials budget. The amount of money
spent on databases has steadily increased since FY 2003, when the amount became
significant enough to track separately within the serials budget, as shown in Figure 11.
Figure 11: Growth in Research Database Expenditures
Source: Millennium Reports
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
76
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
Database usage continues to grow rapidly. The rise in both database and journal usage
is due to increases in both user activity and in the number of available resources. More
databases are instituting COUNTER guidelines or other standards for usage statistics,
which will increase the reliability of reporting. Figure 12 shows the dramatic increase of
searches within research databases using vendor usage statistical reports (all data is not
COUNTER-compliant). It provides a snapshot illustrating the widespread usage of
research databases.
Figure 12: Research Database Usage
Source: Vendor Usage Statistical Reports
3,750,000
3,250,000
Searches
2,750,000
2,250,000
1,750,000
1,250,000
750,000
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
The increase in the number of databases presents a challenge for staff members who
support them; liaison librarians who need to be familiar with them; and for users who are
baffled as to what is available or relevant to their needs.
4. Government Documents
The Federal Government documents collection has been a separate collection since
Carrier Library became a selective federal depository in 1973. However, the
bibliographic records for the collection are included in LEO Library Catalog. The
collection has grown to encompass 578,703 pieces. Well over half of the collection is in
microformat.
The transition to a more electronic collection that began in 1996 has accelerated in the
last five years to the point where most documents are received are electronic (see
Table10). Growth of the physical collection has slowed considerably, with only selected
titles being added in print. A continuous program has been in place to weed the
collection. Usage of the print government document collection over the last three years
has increased from 934 in FY 2004 to 1,702 in FY 2006; however, as a percentage of
77
the tangible collection, usage is a negligible 0.08%. Usage is based on the number of
check-outs and does not include circulation of titles classified by Library of Congress
classification and placed in the general collection. In-depth planning for government
documents is needed to examine local access, collection, and technical issues.
Table 10: Inventory of Federal Government Documents
Source: Millennium Reports
Print
Volumes
Electronic
CD Rom
Microform
(pieces)
Journals
FY 2006
%
change
226,113
225,123
-0.8%
24,844
29,630
34,062
375.9%
487
1,335
1,437
1,524
212.9%
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
226,898
228,370
224,972
228,197
7,157
10,444
15,079
FY 2005
329,484
314,681
318,259
319,439
319,399
318,099
-3.5%
1,292
1,371
1,429
1,413
1,263
943
-27.0%
1,239
2,135
2,799
2,931
136.6%
E-Journals
5. Video
Video counts in Table 8 include videotapes, laserdiscs, and DVDs. The preferred hard
media format is DVD though some titles are still only available in videotape. The video
collection has grown 50% since FY 2002. Circulation has increased 70% since FY 2003
for a total of 14,730. The market is in transition as technology continues to evolve.
Download purchases and licensing arrangements will grow and likely dominate within
the next decade.
As of June 2006, 1,000 streaming video titles were available to users, with
approximately 1,700 under license. In FY 2006, VIVA licensed access to over 500 hours
of video PBS. Digital licenses have been purchased enabling streaming access to
selected titles from Films Media Group (FMG, which includes Films for the Humanities
and Sciences), Annenberg Media, and other publishers. New digital licenses are
acquired for titles from FMG on a routine basis throughout the year, and group licenses
with other vendors are being investigated. Two systems feature records describing each
online digital video: LEO Library Catalog, using MARC format, and MDID, using its own
proprietary field structure. Individual fields in the MDID record were mapped to the
appropriate Dublin Core fields where possible.
Streaming video collection files available through MDID and the LEO Library Catalog are
selected and licensed by the Media Resources Director and processed by acquisitions
and cataloging staff in Technical Services. The Media Resources Director estimates
that 15 percent of his time is spent in acquiring and negotiating streaming licenses since
the streaming media program was launched over two years ago. Most purchased digital
collections represent a service time commitment for librarians and technical services
staff similar to that for acquiring other databases.
78
6. Sound Recordings and Streaming Audio
The number of sound recordings has grown 11% from FY 2001 to FY 2006 (Table 8).
JMU’s doctoral program in music requires a continued investment in all aspects of the
music collection. The library continues to increase its online resources for music,
ensuring that the standard literature is available to patrons online, and purchased
streaming audio subscriptions from Classical Music Library, Naxos Music Library, and
the Smithsonian Global Sound. However, the unique and unusual of classical music will
be less available online, so the library will continue to rely on CD purchases for these.
Shorter in-print runs mean the library will need to react quickly to obtain this material
before it goes out of print. For music recordings, the library will be required to deal with
increasingly larger numbers of very small vendors
7. Scores
The score collection has grown 6% from FY 2001 to FY 2006 (Table 8); however, the
per unit cost has risen 47%. Circulation has increased 106% from FY 2003 to FY 2006
to a total of 6,922. It is unlikely that scores will become popular in electronic format, and
printed scores will be purchased in the foreseeable future to support undergraduate and
graduate education in music.
8. Images
A sizeable collection of images is available to JMU users through the MDID and through
research databases and resources. Images stored in the MDID are accessible primarily
through JMU network authentication although three collections are available via guest
login.
The MDID is an Internet-based content delivery and collection management system for
teaching with digital images. Images within MDID are grouped into collections. Current
collections include several art and art history collections, an art and architecture
collection, a histology collection, the JMU Photography Collection, the Otis Library’s
Artists’ Books collection, and several smaller collections. Not all collections are shared
with other MDID users within JMU; each owner can determine access rights.
Figure 13 demonstrates the rapid acquisition of images within the MDID between June
2004 and May 2006. The number of images in MDID (currently 27,237 files) almost
tripled between June 2004 and May 2006, a trend that is likely to continue. Remote
collections, such as the NASA Image eXchange (NIX), are also available through MDID,
and in the case of NIX, provide access to several million images. MDID usage is tied to
the academic calendar. It gets more use in the fall and spring semesters, especially
during mid-term and final exams. Summer use is low.
79
Figure 13: Image Growth in MDID between June 2004 and May 2006
Source: CIT
30,000
Number of Images
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
Ju
n04
Ju
l-0
A 4
ug
-0
Se 4
p0
O 4
ct
-0
N 4
ov
-0
D 4
ec
-0
4
Ja
n05
Fe
b0
M 5
ar
-0
A 5
pr
M 05
ay
-0
5
Ju
n05
Ju
l-0
A 5
ug
-0
Se 5
p0
O 5
ct
-0
N 5
ov
-0
D 5
ec
-0
Ja 5
n06
Fe
bM 06
ar
-0
A 6
pr
-0
M 6
ay
-0
6
0
Images from purchased collections, along with images from JMU’s Madison Art
Collection, from personal collections, and from freely shared collections at other
institutions can be stored in MDID.
JMU users also have access to over 20 image collections through research databases
and resources. ARTstor is by far the largest image provider containing nearly 500,000
images covering architecture, painting, sculpture, photography, decorative arts, and
design. Searching for images and other non-text formats is a major unmet challenge.
9. Special Collections Resources
The number of manuscript collections has grown from 82 in FY 2002 to 111 in FY 2006.
Nearly half of the collections are gifts, and 25% are on deposit with the remaining
number purchased. Collections pertain to the central Shenandoah Valley, VA, especially
Shenandoah, Page, Rockingham, and Augusta Counties. These unpublished materials
include personal letters and diaries; legal forms such as deeds, wills, surveys, patents,
indentures, road agreements, tax receipts, licenses, and military discharges; business
ledgers and daybooks; political correspondences; and minutes and scrapbooks of
organizations. Each collection has a finding aid, which serves as an inventory. All
finding aids are accessible online by collection title or by subject. All manuscripts are
housed in Special Collections.
Important additions have been made to oral history collections housed in Special
Collections. A majority of the interviews are fully transcribed, cataloged, and available
for use. The process of acquiring legal releases, obtaining transcriptions, and cataloging
the tapes and transcripts has been inconsistent and requires follow-ups. Topics in the
oral history collections include various aspects of JMU history (including two interviews
with the previous JMU President, Dr. Ronald Carrier), as well as a broad range of local
80
history, such as school integration in Waynesboro, the Shenandoah National Park, and
fading rural ways of life.
Currently, scanning three major collections are underway: the JMU Founding
Documents collection, the Acker Family Diaries collection, and the Varner Family Papers
collection. Of particular note, the JMU Founding Documents collection consists of
various historical documents from the early 1900s. It includes faculty and Board of
Trustee minutes, student handbooks and yearbooks, letters from early JMU presidents,
budget reports, and architectural drawings of building plans. Paper documents from
these collections are scanned and converted to large TIFF images. The library derives
smaller JPEG images from these large, archival images for future distribution via the
Library web site.
A team of people from Special Collections and Media Resources have digitized
approximately 1,600 photos in the JMU Historic Photo Collection in Special Collections
to reduce the handling of the originals. Staff uses them to add historical resonance to
university publications and for celebratory displays. High-resolution images are
available online, and both preservation and circulating copies are available through
Special Collections.
10.Software and Datasets
L&ET purchases and distributes centrally licensed data sets and software tools for data
manipulation, such as SPSS, SAS for Windows and MacIntosh, MicroCase, and Maple
for the JMU community. A site license, concurrent user license, or other license
configuration is purchased depending on the need. In addition to these programs,
ICPSR, Gartner Group, and other datasets are purchased. Datasets are increasingly
important to members of the JMU community.
Media Resources provides access to the software throughout the year, by providing
copies to individuals or to JMU Computing Lab Services. Media Resources has been
investigating the feasibility of becoming the centralized purchaser of lab software across
the university. However, in order to successfully meet the software needs of the
University, designated funding for the purchase of required software must be allocated
on a continuing basis and the funding with periodic adjustments for price increases and
licensing changes. Current expenditures total up to $60,000. Some datasets are being
purchased from the library materials budget.
81
C. Key Findings










L&ET needs to make a commitment to open access. Recognizing that open access
does not mean “free,” L&ET must secure funding for open access publishing.
Users have increasing expectations for online content. The desire for online content,
however, is highly discipline specific. While the sciences want predominantly online
content, the humanities still desire ready access to print materials. The shift in user
expectations will continue to challenge library budgets, staff, and services.
An awareness program must educate faculty on scholarly communication issues and
provide assistance to faculty in publishing their research, perhaps in partnership with
the Center of Faculty Innovation.
The increase in electronic resources puts an increased demand on the network
infrastructure and on staff to negotiate licenses, design more intuitive web interfaces,
and assist users in accessing library resources.
L&ET must provide support for emerging forms of content, such as blogs, podcasts,
and wikis, and consider the implications of new devices for viewing content.
The Library needs a strategy for supporting a digital reference collection and
promoting its usage.
The Library should use optimal methods for collection analysis and assessment.
By partnering with larger institutions in the state, L&ET is able to subscribe to
packages of journals and databases that would otherwise be unaffordable. It is
important to sustain current collections through cooperative licenses and look for
future opportunities.
In order to successfully meet the special software and dataset needs of the
University, designated funding must be allocated on a continuing basis with periodic
adjustments for price increases and licensing changes.
Preservation of digital content, including purchased content and unique content held
in Special Collections, is a major concern.
82
XI. Services
L&ET offers a variety of services to the faculty, students, and staff of JMU. These
services facilitate access to collections and technology and help to educate JMU users
about available resources in physical as well as virtual realms. L&ET is, at its core, a
service organization, so it readily follows that the divisions and units within the
organization work cooperatively to provide the best possible service to the JMU
community. The following section outlines the services offered by L&ET. These
services function together to provide the users with the information and technology they
seek and the skills with which they need to use that information and technology
effectively.
A. Liaison Program
Developed in 1985, the Liaison Program is the cornerstone service for connecting
librarians to each of the academic departments on campus. A liaison librarian is
assigned to each academic department. In turn, each academic department designates
one faculty member as the departmental representative, with the exception of the foreign
languages and literatures department, which has 3 departmental representatives for the
various major languages. The role of the departmental representative varies greatly
across the program, but most assist to some degree with communication and with
selecting materials. Both departmental and library liaisons are encouraged to work with
all faculty members and familiarize themselves with research and coursework in their
departments. The success of the Liaison Program depends on the establishment of a
personal relationship between a librarian with subject expertise and an academic
department. Currently, 17 liaisons serve 35 departments.
Each liaison librarian is responsible for providing services in four main areas (Appendix
T):
 Collections: Develop and manage library collections in all formats that meet the
needs of faculty and students in liaison disciplines.
 Instruction: Collaborate with departmental faculty to teach basic and discipline
specific information literacy skills to students.
 Reference: Provide reference and research consultation to faculty and
students and develop research guides for liaison disciplines. This reference
activity is in addition to reference provided at the Reference Desk in Carrier
Library; however, referrals are made from the Reference Desk to liaison
librarians to provide in-depth consultation.
 Communication: Inform liaison departments about developments in the library
and stay informed of changing information needs in liaison areas. Each liaison
librarian is responsible for marketing the library services and resources,
particularly to faculty.
83
Each liaison librarian is a participant in the department’s Academic Program Review
(APR). As part of the APR evaluation of the quality and quantity of academic support,
the liaison librarian assesses library resources, including the levels and quality of access
to information. In select majors, assessment data on Library and Technology Skills is
also used to evaluate the level to which students are able to locate and use information.
The liaison workload relates to the number of assigned departments, the amount of
allocation funds, and the numbers of students, faculty, individual consultations, and
instructional sessions. The largest number of students for which one liaison has been
responsible is over 3,600, and the smallest number is 95. Additional liaison librarians
are needed to enhance and improve services and to prevent liaison burn-out. As the
Madison Commission aptly stated, “there is a critical point where the operation and
personnel…can no longer keep pace…before ‘lean and mean’ translates to ‘haggard
and burned-out.’”
In the internal focus groups, the Liaison Program in general and the relationships that it
encompasses emerged as the service about which L&ET personnel are most proud.
Many people cited their relationships with faculty and students as the most rewarding
parts of their jobs, and phrases such as “faculty treat us as peers” and “the relationship
liaisons have with departments is quite impressive” were dispersed throughout the focus
groups. Corollary services such as instruction and collection development also earned
many compliments from staff. Though each liaison handles outreach individually, the
existing relationships between librarians and departments are viewed as powerful means
of organizational communication. Liaisons have expressed a need for assistance with
more coordinated outreach materials and information.
B. LibQUAL+ Survey Data
The LibQUAL+ surveys include questions about the frequency with which users access
library and non-library information resources, such as Yahoo or Google. In the 2006
survey, JMU users access non-library gateways on a daily basis 70% of the time, library
web pages 16%, and resources on library premises 9%. Weekly and monthly use of
resources on library premises increased as did accessing library web pages. Students
in the internal focus groups corroborated this data by indicating the first stop for finding
information is Google. One student also cited Wikipedia as “foundation to get started.”
Another said, “it would be hard for the library to outdo a general internet online search.”
LibQUAL+ comments as well as conversations with faculty indicate this desire for ease
in searching and accessing materials online, which includes providing point-of-need
assistance in both physical and virtual forums. These findings indicate a continuing
need to provide web pages that delineate clear paths to information. Many librarians
see non-library sources as complementary rather than competitive to the libraries’
collections. However, the Library should use the knowledge of users’ preference for
services like Google and Yahoo to create intuitive search paths and consistent pages
that provide point-of-need assistance.
Questions on information control can be divided between personal control and access to
information. Access to information was discussed previously under content. Personal
control relates to the users’ ability to find information easily, independently, and
84
remotely. In the 2004 and 2006 surveys, the 2 statements with the highest desired
scores relate to personal control: “a library Web site enabling me to locate information on
my own” and “making electronic resources accessible from my home or office.” The
statement “ability to navigate library web pages easily” rose from sixth overall in 2004 as
a desired score to third overall in 2006.
The library web site and remote access to electronic resources are important to our
users, and it is critical for L&ET to explore ways to improve services. Comments in both
student focus groups and the LibQUAL+ survey address the frustration of searching for
information. Several students want a search engine “to look through databases rather
than having to search each database individually.” An undergraduate in the humanities
commented in the 2006 LibQUAL+ survey, “… finding the right database to use when
researching is intimidating.”
LibQUAL+ results, as well as discussions with faculty, indicate a desire for greater
electronic access to materials. One faculty member stated that the ideal is “access to
any item, from anywhere, at any time.” L&ET has greatly increased the amount of
materials available electronically; however, the organization continues to strive for ease
of searching and ubiquitous access to all types of materials.
C. Web Services
Web services offered through L&ET facilitate access to both print and electronic
collections through the Library website, which serves as a portal to the collections and
services offered at Carrier Library, CISAT Library, Music Library, Media Resources, and
CIT. Providing online service to our primary users whenever possible, augmenting, and
at times replacing service offered within the libraries’ physical walls, the website provides
information and guidance in the use of the various services found in the traditional library
spaces. It serves as the primary finding aid for physical collections and as the primary
means of delivery for digital collections. The website also provides instruction to users
regarding the procedures and policies for using the L&ET services and collections.
The number of visits per semester has steadily increased since the spring 2004 in a
comparison between like semesters (i.e. spring to spring, summer to summer, etc.)
(Appendix U). In the same comparison, the average visit duration remains fairly static.
There was a significant increase in page views for fall 2005 (135% increase from fall
2004) and an even greater increase in spring 2006 (207% increase from spring 2005).
To aid electronic access, L&ET provides around 60 public work stations in the reference
area. In FY 2004, security on the workstations was changed to allow users to access
Microsoft Word, Excel, FrontPage and PowerPoint more easily. Students can now also
download any program they need for their work. A program called Deep Freeze restores
each workstation to a clean state on each reboot. Students regularly stand in line for
access to a workstation. The line typically moves quickly, but can get as long as seven
people during the busiest hours. Attempts to address this problem have included
reserving two workstations for quick, five-minute use, and moving sit-down workstations
to stand-up furniture.
85
In FY 2004, the University completed wireless network access throughout Carrier
Library. Until recently, Reference staff aided students in configuring their computers to
use JMU’s wireless network. This service has shifted to checkouts of the VPN client at
the Media Resources, CISAT and Music Library service desks. Media Resources in
Carrier Library added five laptop computers, all configured for the wireless network, to
the circulating collections, which circulated 2,059 times in FY 2004. The next year an
additional five laptops were added, with 2,273 circulations. Also, in June 2004 the
CISAT library added 4 laptop computers for check-out. FY 2005 shows 415 circulations
of these computers.
A pay-for-print service was implemented campus-wide, including in Carrier Library, in
Fall 2001. Before that time, printing was free in Carrier Library. Patrons routinely printed
and never picked up large print jobs. The switch to paying for printing was heralded
campus-wide as an environmental boon and was met with little complaint. In most
cases, students print without trouble. That said, the printing software requires fairly
consistent troubleshooting within Carrier Library. As existing issues are resolved, new
issues tend to appear. This maintenance taxes both the Reference staff as well as
Digital Services.
D. Access to Collections
Access services are broadly defined as the “provision of access to a library’s resources
and collections, which includes the circulation of materials (general circulation, reserves,
interlibrary loan, document delivery), reshelving, stack maintenance, security, and
signage” (ODLIS). Essentially, access is the pipeline that carries content to the users.
While much of the work done in L&ET involves selecting and evaluating resources, a
significant amount of time and effort goes into enabling users to access selected
materials. The book collection, for example, would be worthless without the catalog
through which users find the material they need. Likewise our journal collection, replete
with the full text of thousands of titles, would be far less useful absent the indexing
databases to which the library subscribes.
All L&ET services, including access services, are designed with the JMU faculty,
graduate students, and undergraduate students in mind. According to the JMU
Institutional Research Qwik Enrollment Summaries, all three user group populations
have increased from FY 2001 to FY 2006. The largest percentage increase is in the
graduate student population, which increased form 609 to 1,067, a 75% increase. The
faculty population increased by 55% from 934 to 1,448 faculty members. Although the
undergraduate population had the largest increase in terms of raw numbers, the
undergraduate student body has only increased 10.6% from 13,824 to 15,287. L&ET
must continue to facilitate access to the collections and provide high-levels of service
while serving ever-increasing user populations.
1. LEO Library Catalog
LEO Library Catalog is the most widely searched database provided by the Libraries and
is a key entryway for users into the collections. LEO serves as a tool for locating
tangible and some intangible items held by the Library, including books, journals, scores,
audiovisual materials, microforms, and some e-books. Serials and Digital Services, with
86
input from the entire library staff and from users through usability testing, completed a
multi-month overhaul of the look and feel, and some functionality, of LEO in April 2005.
A new LEO Task Force has recently been formed to plan and implement the next phase
of improvements to the catalog.
The most frequent LEO search performed is a Word search, which became the default
search on the front page of the web site in August 2005 as well as on the LEO
homepage in April 2005. Although the Word search has consistently been the most
popular type of search, having the Word search as the default in these two key locations
may account for the increased number of searches of this type. Title and Subject
searches follow the Word search as the most common (Figure 14).
Figure 14: LEO Library Catalog Searches
Source: Millennium Reports
600,000
Total Searches
500,000
400,000
WORDS
300,000
AUTHORS
SUBJECTS
200,000
TITLES
100,000
0
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
2. Research Databases and Resources
The area of the Library’s web site that lists research databases was recently upgraded to
a robust web application that will hopefully improve access to research databases.
Liaison librarians can now maintain their subject's research database listings through an
administrative interface. Research databases can be classified not only by subject but
also by the type of information they contain. Research databases can be classified and
described differently by liaisons on their subject pages, so that a database like Lexis
Nexis Academic can be presented different ways by different liaisons. Custom lists of
research databases will be able to be distributed through RSS feeds and similar
technologies, so that they can be included on course web pages or online research
guides. The Library is planning usability testing of this application in spring 2007.
87
3. Reserves
Academic libraries have traditionally provided a reserve service to their user
communities as a means for temporarily storing articles, books, and multimedia items so
that students in specific classes may have guaranteed, if limited, access. At the request
of the teaching faculty, library staff members scan journal articles to be stored on the
library server and accessed through LEO.
L&ET offers reserves through Carrier Library, CISAT Library, and Music Library. Use of
physical reserves at all three service points has significantly dropped since the
implementation of electronic reserves and Digital Orpheus, a reserves module for
streaming audio reserves.
4. Periodical Locator and LinkFinderPlus
Two major tools that facilitate electronic access to materials, specifically journal
holdings, are Periodical Locator and LinkFinderPlus. Periodical Locator is considered the
authoritative source for local newspaper, magazine, and journal holdings information. In
FY 2006, there were 106,327 click-thrus for 62,117 periodical titles and 167 databases
from the Periodical Locator. There is currently no comparative data for other fiscal years
for Periodical Locator usage as the service began in January 2005. In addition to
Periodical Locator, LinkFinderPlus guides users from citations in databases to the fulltext of an article in either print or electronic format. Since implementing LinkFinderPlus
in December 2002, the number of articles retrieved using the service has steadily
increased from 26,669 articles in FY 2004 to 65,602 articles in FY 2006.
5. Proxy Server
The Library provides instructions for users to configure their browser to use a proxy
server for off-campus access to subscription resources. Starting in 2006, the campus
also supports a VPN client for remote access which can be used as an alternative to the
proxy server. In the last two years, Digital Services has increased promotion of the
proxy server through bulk e-mails and improved instructions on the website on how to
configure browsers (and an encouragement to use the VPN client instead).
In the LibQual+ survey, a graduate student in business commented, “Proxy server
makes library unaccessable [sic] from work.” A Psychology faculty member stated,
“Biggest issue I'm facing is the ability to consistently retrieve info from research
databases while traveling (not a [sic] office or home computer).” A graduate student in
the Health Sciences wrote, “I have been unable to access the libraries from home
throughout. I have asked for assistance several times, but receive canned responses
that do not address the problem. Very frustrating! I use an online library from a prior
university that I attended.”
6. Special Collections
Special Collections offers educational and historical preservation education opportunities
through student internships, collaboration with faculty, and cooperation with community
members to produce library materials (e.g., oral histories, research papers, etc.) of
significant historical value. College deans and faculty involved in the July focus group
88
mentioned the value of the historical and unique collections, and believe that these
collections help to define a university.
In FY 2006, two new computers—one for patron use in the reading room and one for the
processing room—were purchased and installed in Special Collections. A book scanner
was also installed in the reading room, making it possible for patrons to scan and print to
the public printers in the downstairs reference area. Patrons are also able to download
scans onto CD, DVD, and portable memory devices at their convenience.
The number of reference contacts made with special collections doubled in FY 2006
following a two-year decline. The fall semester saw heavy use of materials, with three
separate research classes requesting the use of primary materials in Special Collections
(Appendix V).
7. Interlibrary Loan
Interlibrary Loan (ILL) provides access to materials not owned by the Library. ILL
provides electronic and print copies from journals, book chapters, and reports, and also
borrows books, microforms, audiovisual items, theses & dissertations, and other
materials from lending libraries. LibQUAL+ results and usage statistics indicate that this
service is widely used and greatly appreciated. One faculty member commented that
“The ILL department is an invaluable resource, and their service is fabulous.” By
providing timely access to resources, ILL plays a crucial role in meeting the information
needs of JMU users.
From FY 2001 to FY 2006, the number of loan fills for all user groups (faculty, staff,
doctoral, graduate, and undergraduate) has increased by 50% from 4,358 to 6,543. In
contrast, the number of article fills for all user groups has decreased by 39% from 7,851
in FY 2001 to 4,783 in FY 2006 (Figure 15). In the past two years, filled requests for
loans exceeded requests for articles, indicating that the electronic journal collection is
better meeting user needs. As one faculty member stated in the LibQUAL+ comments,
“ILL is amazingly fast, though I need it less every year as electronic journal collections
have grown.” In FY 2006, the Library was classified as a net lender for articles within
VIVA rather than a net borrower for the first time, meaning that the Library loaned article
copies to other libraries than they borrowed for their own users.
89
Figure 15: Borrowing Photocopies & Loans
Source: ILLiad Management Reports
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
Photocopies
FY 2005
FY 2006
Loans
By combining services in ILL and the CISAT Library, a document delivery service is
available to patrons on east campus. Whether owned by the Library or not, electronic
and physical items may be requested, borrowed, and delivered to users. This is a
heavily used service by patrons on east campus. The 2005 CISAT Library Annual
Report stated, “There is a recent overall trend downward in article delivery to the east
campus. This can likely be attributed to the rapid adoption of major online journal and
research collections. Book and media deliveries appear to have remained static.”
8. Physical Delivery Service
Beginning in summer 2006, the Library began implementation of a campus-wide
physical delivery service with service to CISAT, Music, and ETMC. Previously physical
delivery was only available to CISAT Library users. According to the Library Delivery
Task Force Report from July 11, 2006, the delivery service will be implemented in the
following 4 phases:
Phase One Recommendation: Implement a library transportation system
centralized in Carrier Library. Key resources needed are a delivery vehicle and
additional wage hours in Carrier circulation.
Phase Two Recommendation: Implement a book/media delivery service between
all library locations for all library users. That is, any user may request any item
that circulates be delivered to another library location for check out. Library
materials may also be returned to any location for check in.
Phase Three Recommendation: Implement a campus-wide article delivery
service for faculty, staff, and graduate students only. Key resource needed is
additional wage hours in ILL.
Phase Four Recommendation: The task force recommends further exploring the
possibility of implementing a book/media delivery service to departmental
mailboxes for faculty and staff. This is a service that could be relatively
90
inexpensive to implement and would be very much appreciated. However, there
are logistical questions that could be better answered after we have experience
with a basic library-to-library delivery system.
To date, Phase One has been successfully implemented.
9. Madison Digital Image Database
The Madison Digital Image Database (MDID) system includes three components—
searchable database, slideshow builder and an image viewer. The searchable database
provides access to still images and video encoded for streaming. The slideshow builder
and image viewer allow instructors to create and show Internet-based lectures using
digitized still images. Instructors use the slideshow builder to remotely generate
"slideshows" that can be annotated, placed online for student study, or archived for
testing or future use. They use the image viewer to present high-resolution images in
class. L&ET received an IMLS grant to develop an application programming interface
(API) for interoperability with other image systems.
Though many image databases provide flexible faculty and student access to online
images, those systems generally do not provide a tool via which faculty can teach and
student can learn. MDID brings the digital image and data library into the teaching and
learning process, in and outside the classroom.
10. Streaming Service
Media Resources has implemented an online video collection. Films for the Humanities
and Sciences titles are purchased for the online streaming collection when available.
Decisions are based on the spectrum of programming, quality of programming and
faculty requests of such programming. The Media Resources director and staff identify
high-use video programming for which vendors offer digital rights at reasonable market
rates and licensing terms.
E. Virtual Collaborative Space
L&ET offers several virtual collaborative spaces in which JMU users can collaborate to
enhance their teaching, learning, research, and scholarship experience at the University.
These spaces enable students and faculty to work with one another through virtual
forums. These spaces often supplement and sometimes replace face-to-face
interactions. The spaces L&ET offers for this type of collaboration include Blackboard,
Centra Symposium, Video Conferencing, and Media Equipment Services.
There are currently several approaches to the provision of distance education. These
vary from programs that require no physical attendance at JMU to “hybrid” programs that
combine on campus with web based instruction, and include the use of online instruction
to augment traditional face-to-face instruction.
91
1. Blackboard
Blackboard is an enterprise-level learning system that offers course management
capabilities. It is actively used as a course management system (CMS) for
approximately 40% of all courses offered at JMU and is used for online class
discussions, the submission and grading of assignments, a document and file repository,
and for managing group projects. In addition to its use as a CMS, approximately four
hundred organizations and student, faculty, and staff committees use Blackboard for
document sharing, communication, and collaboration.
Since 2000, the number of active Blackboard course sites has increased from 240 in FY
2001 to 2,639 in FY 2005 and to 3,754 in FY 2006 (Figure 16). It has been used
primarily to supplement traditional face-to-face class activities and distribution of class
materials.
Figure 16: Active Blackboard Courses
Source: Blackboard Administrative System
4,000
3754
3,500
3,000
2,639
2,500
FY 2001
FY 2002
1,927
2,000
FY 2003
FY 2004
1,517
FY 2005
1,500
1,111
FY 2006
1,000
500
240
-
The number of true distance courses using Blackboard almost doubled from 50 in FY
2002 to 99 in FY 2004. There were 126 distance courses in FY 2005 (Figure 17).
According to various sources, including the Provost, distance education is expected to
continue growing at JMU for the foreseeable future. This will require instruction and
support for faculty as well as easily accessed information resources and technology for
students.
92
Figure 17: Online Courses
Source: JMU Registrar's Office
94
100
90
80
74
70
57
60
Fall
Spring
50
40
30
20
Summer
34
23
23 21
11
16
30
23
19
22
27
23
10
0
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
The 2006 Technology Surveys reports eight out of ten faculty respondents who teach
indicate very satisfied/satisfied in overall satisfaction with Blackboard as a teaching and
learning tool while 96% of student respondents reported very satisfied/satisfied in overall
satisfaction (Appendix W1 and Appendix W2).
2. Centra Symposium
Centra Symposium provides a synchronous meeting space with VOIP (voice over
internet protocol) capability. Since 2001, Centra has been used for 226 courses and 280
course sections. Its primary users are faculty and students from the MBA Information
Security online distance program. Course offerings and sections vary each semester
with no noticeable trend. Highest offerings were in spring 2003 and summer 2005 with a
major increase every year in summer institute enrollment. More than 500 students have
been enrolled in Centra course sites just in the 2006 spring and summer sessions.4
The CIT provides workshops for faculty and staff in managing and using these and all of
their programs. Deans and faculty say that they prefer brief workshops for learning the
basics of new technologies rather than detailed, comprehensive workshops. Another
suggestion is that workshops include syllabi so that faculty can determine whether or not
the workshop is a suitable fit before enrolling.
3. Video Conferencing
L&ET currently offers two units for video conferencing: Polycom FX and Tandberg 880
MXP. The Polycom FX unit is both IP and ISDN capable, and it has been used
approximately 75 times for a variety of classes, conferences, and meetings. The
4
This number does not reflect unique users.
93
Tandberg 880 MXP unit is IP capable and has been used approximately 25 times for a
variety of conferences and meetings. These video conferencing technologies should be
considered in terms of the new library building as a means of enhancing internal L&ET
communications.
4. Technology Classrooms
Technology Classrooms (TCs) or “mediated classrooms” are teaching facilities in which
advanced computing and multimedia hardware and software have been installed.
Technology Classroom staff members are available Monday through Thursday 7 a.m. to
8 p.m. and Friday 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Formal training sessions occur at the start of each
semester, and more informal individual training may be arranged upon request. Faculty
in a faculty focus group stated the need for quick assistance in those rooms even to the
point of suggesting staffing in mediated classrooms.
The 2006 Technology Surveys reports 85% of faculty respondents who teach indicate
very satisfied/satisfied in overall satisfaction with technology in the classroom,
specifically the instructor computer and classroom projector (Appendix W1 and Appendix
W2). Expectations for technology in classrooms are also changing. For example, one
faculty member commented, “Add tablets to the classroom where you can write on the
screen and it projects.”
5. Media Equipment Services
The Media Resources Center provides audio visual equipment for use of items from the
collection. Such equipment includes DVD players, VCRs, laser disc players, and a
multi-standard video for international video use. A screening room is provided for group
use. Media Resource staff is responsible for maintaining and replacing the equipment
as necessary.
Media Equipment Loans, a branch of Media Resources located in Spotswood Hall,
circulates A/V equipment for faculty, staff and student use. Video equipment includes
digital & VHS camcorders, DVD & VHS players, televisions, slide projectors, and P.A.
equipment (amplifiers and microphones). They also circulate 2 high-end oral history
recorders. Computing loans include data projectors, laptops (for faculty and staff use
only), and digital still cameras. Pick-up & delivery services are provided for classroom
use and individual training when requested. CIT also circulates digital cameras for
faculty and staff use.
The Music Library provides and maintains an A/V area for use of all types of media
formats held in the collection. This equipment includes ‘research stations’ that replace
traditional CD players, DVD monitors by allowing simultaneous access to the multiple
formats required for music research. This includes online research (streaming audio,
digital scores), use of tangible items locally and access to all audio formats distributed
via FM transmission.
94
F. Educational Services
Educational services provide training and instructional opportunities for JMU students
and faculty so that they know how to access L&ET resources. These services are
provided by members of the L&ET faculty and staff, and are used by many members of
the JMU community as well as members of the larger academic community.
Interpretation services are those that are provided in order to help our users understand
and use the physical, virtual, and intellectual resources managed by L&ET. The user
group (i.e., students and faculty) in most cases determines how and what educational
services are provided. Educational services include information literacy training,
reference and individual consultation, technology training and support, online tutorials,
guides, and reference.
1. Information Literacy & Library Instruction
Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to “recognize when
information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the
needed information” (American Library Association). In addition, information literacy
skills have been identified for many disciplines (Association of Research and College
Libraries. Instruction Section. Teaching Methods Committee).
The library instruction/information literacy program supports the mission of the University
“to prepare students to be educated and enlightened citizens who will lead productive
and meaningful lives.” The mission of the instruction program is to collaborate with
faculty to develop information literate students. The goal is to integrate information
literacy into the curricula of General Education and every major at the University to
provide students with skills that are foundational to higher education, effective job
performance, active citizenship, and lifelong learning. Teaching information literacy to
students is a shared responsibility of faculty and librarians.
The program has two tiers: basic information-seeking skills and discipline-specific skills
in the major. The Tier One skills (basic information-seeking skills) are fully integrated
into Cluster One of the General Education program. At this basic level, the program
consists of specific learning objectives for information literacy, Go for the Gold, the
Information-Seeking Skills Test (ISST), and course-related assignments. The library
supports this tier by maintaining Go for the Gold and the ISST, teaching workshops for
Cluster One faculty each summer, and working with faculty on developing assignments.
To address the learning objectives of Cluster One, eight instructional modules with
online exercises and a score report database comprise Go for the Gold. All first-year
students are required to complete this tutorial in a Cluster One communication course.
Go for the Gold not only teaches basic information literacy skills but also helps prepare
students for the ISST. The ISST is an online 53-item test that measures the information
literacy learning objectives. Since 1999, all first-year students are required to pass ISST
by the end of their first year. Those who do not pass have a registration hold placed on
their record until they pass.
Tier II—discipline-specific skills in the major—occurs through collaboration between the
teaching faculty and the library liaisons. The goal is to collaborate with faculty to
integrate information literacy in a required research-oriented course in at least one point
95
in the curriculum. Some librarians have worked with their departments to write
information literacy objectives specific to the major that serve as a basis for planning
instruction and assessing learning.
There has been a fluctuation in the number of students taught and the number of
instruction sessions offered (see Table 11); however, the reasons for that fluctuation are
unclear. Possible contributing factors include changes in the way that librarian-taught
courses (for credit) are counted, changes in the way faculty construct assignments
obviating some need for instruction, and changes in new faculty orientation may cause
newer faculty not to know as much about the instructional offerings.
Table 11: Library Instruction: FY 2000 - FY 2006
Source: Room Scheduler
Students instructed
Instruction sessions
Librarians delivering
instruction
Departments receiving
instruction
FY
2001
6,795
269
13
FY
2002
7,104
306
15
FY
2003
6,543
252
14
FY
2004
7,394
261
14
FY
2005
6,228
241
17
FY
2006
6,984
256
20
27
33
32
34
34
34
In addition to instruction in the major, several liaison librarians have developed
information literacy tests specific to the major (psychology, geography, social work, and
integrated science & technology). These are performance-based tests that require
students to find and evaluate information as well as answer knowledge-based questions.
Results from these tests are used to improve instruction.
Per faculty request, liaison librarians also collaborate with departmental faculty to design
information literacy assignments related to the content of a course. The amount of
assignment-design collaboration varies greatly from liaison to liaison.
In May 2006, the Library and the CFI offered a 3-day workshop, “Information Literacy for
Teaching and Learning: A Workshop for Faculty and Librarians,” in which instructional
faculty and librarians worked in pairs to integrate information literacy into the coursework
of majors. Faculty and liaison librarians modified a course to include information literacy
objectives, design effective active learning assignments, and plan accompanying
instruction. The goal was to promote resource-based learning outside the classroom and
to equip students with skills that will enable them to continue to learn in their discipline.
The workshop experience and outcomes will set the stage for further collaboration
between liaison librarians and departmental faculty toward integrating information
literacy into the curricula of majors. The Library will offer information literacy
development opportunities for faculty annually.
See Appendix X for awards received for the library instruction program and Appendix Y
for additional information on assessing information literacy at JMU.
96
2. Instructional Technology Workshops
The CIT is responsible for helping faculty members integrate technology and
technological innovations into their instruction. This service is provided by offering
workshops, providing “house calls,” where a CIT staff member will work with a faculty
member in his or her office, and by maintaining a collection of resource guides for the
various software applications. Finally, the CIT maintains a walk-in work area where
faculty members can receive support and use various pieces of specialized hardware
and software. The CIT is the focal point of support for Blackboard, JMU’s course
management software.
CIT workshops come in a variety of formats, including standard application specific
workshops, custom workshops designed for a specific department or project, and current
awareness workshops designed to inform the faculty of emerging trends or technology.
Based on the numbers of workshops offered and house calls made, the CIT is reaching
a substantial number of faculty and staff in the JMU community. Until July, 2005,
attendance numbers reflected the number of individuals attending each event, thus
attendance of 100 could have been 100 individuals attending one event each, or 50
individuals attending two events each. Regardless, the maximum attendance was 1,602
in FY 2002 and the minimum was 946 in FY 2004. University records indicate that In FY
2006, the CIT provided nearly 2400 hours of instruction to 450 unique individuals. The
CIT collaborates with the CFI, a JMU center that provides training in pedagogy and other
kinds of instructional support to teaching faculty, to reach an even wider audience.
The CIT also sponsors intensive multi-day institutes for faculty looking for assistance
and guidance in undertaking a large project like putting an entire class online. The
summer institute is a competitive opportunity, which faculty members are paid to attend.
The CIT also offers department specific institutes to support department wide initiatives.
To date a total of 62 faculty have participated in summer institutes through the CIT.
3. Reference Desk Service
The reference desk service is provided by professional librarians, library assistants, and
student workers. The individuals who staff the desk report to various supervisors across
the organization. Reference desk service is provided face-to face, over the telephone,
and via e-mail. Though it is a core function of the library, there is no overarching mission
to guide the provision of this vital service; however, a reference strategic planning
process is currently underway.
The reference service page on the L&ET web site currently defines reference desk
service with the following sentences: “Reference staff are available to assist students,
faculty, staff and community members with the resources available in JMU libraries. We
can assist you with identifying and using electronic and print reference tools, creating
search strategies, and answering specific informational questions”
(http://www.lib.jmu.edu/reference/carrierref.aspx). The central Reference Desk is located
on the first floor of Carrier Library, with both the CISAT Library and Music Library
providing reference services as well.
Measuring reference services is difficult and has been done inconsistently over the past
five years. The library counts all reference transactions during a “typical week” (usually
in mid-October)—as suggested by the Academic Library Survey (formerly IPEDS
97
survey). Reference transactions include in-person, e-mail, and telephone reference
questions answered by all librarians and staff. For the ACRL survey (Appendix Z), which
asks for an estimated annual total, this weekly total is multiplied by 40, the estimated
number of weeks the library is open, minus holidays, summer weekends, etc. (Figure
18).
Figure 18: Reference Transactions Reported to ACRL
Source: ACRL Survey 1999 - 2006
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
In 2003, the Carrier Reference Desk began keeping a running tally of both reference and
informational questions asked. Because this practice is quite different from the one used
to report numbers to ACRL and because the time period during which it was done is not
the same, a direct comparison of the two methods is not possible. However, for the
single common year for which both sets of data are available, FY 2006, the actual
number of questions tallied at the desk was 8,084. For comparison, the ACRL number
for the same period was 38,880. The 8,084 questions includes only those questions
posed in-person at the Reference Desk and excludes the CISAT and the Music libraries
as well as any reference delivered via e-mail and by librarians in their offices. Whether
this accounts for the 30,000+ discrepancy is unknown.
The Library has provided an e-mail reference service since 1999, and the numbers of email reference transactions are represented in Figure 19. E-mail reference is
coordinated by Digital Services and, as of 2005, is now part of reference desk duty
rather than a daily assignment. Twice during the year, the archive of already-answered
questions was accidentally deleted, which may explain some of the decrease for FY
2006.
98
Figure 19: Number of E-Mail Reference Transactions
Source: Digital Services Annual Report
500
400
300
200
100
0
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
While librarians and library assistants staff the desk between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
professional librarians staff the desk in the evening and on the weekends exclusively.
These shifts are four hours each, meaning that for each four hour evening or weekend
shift that a librarian covers, that represents four hours of “comp. time” during the week
when he or she is not available for instruction, faculty support, student support, etc.
Moreover, the quantity of reference questions posed during these hours can be quite
different from what happens during the day. While the reference statistics do not
indicate whether a professional librarian’s skills are necessary to handle the questions
posed during the evening and weekend hours, the practice of staffing the desk on
weekends and evenings with librarians bears further consideration.
Unlike the Liaison Program, Reference was one area that garnered a significant number
of negative comments from library staff during focus group conversations. Some
comments noted that the lack of a unified marketing strategy from public services was
most detrimental to Reference since it has no mission statement, thus no message. A
number of comments mentioned the poor state of the reference area, noting that the
furnishings are “shabby” and the lack of equipment is “embarrassing.” Many participants
lamented the lack of virtual reference, noting that the Reference does not participate in
online chat or instant message services, and fails to understand or connect to our core
users, the 18- to 22-year-old “digital natives.”
4. Reference Consultation
For more in-depth research questions, students and faculty members may meet with a
liaison librarian for assistance in learning new sources and skills. These consultations
are available on a per request basis only. The number of reference consultations
99
provided varies according to the subject area and liaison librarian. Some liaisons
regularly meet with individual students and faculty members while other liaisons rarely
provide reference consultation services. This service operates independently from the
Reference Desk Service and is considered more a part of the liaison program.
5. Instructional Technology House Calls
House calls provide faculty and staff with one-on-one instruction for many of the
instructional technologies supported by the CIT. On average the CIT has provided 160
house calls each year for the past five years. The Faculty Development staff and the
Blackboard Support staff conduct house calls for the CIT. Currently, there are seven
staff members who fulfill this function.
6. DDLS Support
DDLS support is provided for all Blackboard users. One full-time staff member and one
part-time staff member are responsible for providing e-mail and phone support for
Blackboard questions. DDLS support receives approximately 50 to 100 e-mails and 45
to 75 phone calls each month. The Faculty Development Staff and Blackboard Support
Staff conduct house calls for the CIT. Currently there are 7 staff members responsible
for house calls.
DDLS also serves as point of contact and communication for individual faculty and
academic units that are either interested in developing or planning implementations of
technology-assisted instruction. Faculty Forums serve as catalysts for faculty discussion
and collaboration on teaching and research. Incentive programs like the Summer
Institute and the Departmental Online Course Development Initiative serve a key role as
the only programs that provide campus-wide online course development services for
faculty.
7. Guides & Tutorials
The liaison librarians have prepared guides to important free and licensed sources for
each major. These are available through the Carrier Library home page under Research
Guides. Currently on the library website there are 37 top-level research guides and 166
sub-guides developed for specific programs, courses, or areas of enquiry. Concern has
been expressed about the similarity of Research Guides and Research Resources
functions on the web site. Liaisons have also developed videos, Tegrity presentations,
tutorials, games, class exercises, and other materials to enhance learning. The Health
Sciences Librarian is currently working on an instructional game that focuses on health
and information literacy funded by IMLS grant.
Tutorials differ from guides in that they are designed to be somewhat interactive and
may use multimedia formats. Applications like Tegrity and Captivate are used to capture
video and audio. Studymate is a Blackboard plug-in that is used to develop Flash based
games and study support materials. Generally, tutorials are designed to help users
learn a specific task like using RefWorks to format a bibliography. CheckCite, created
in-house, offers help to students citing sources. The most significant tutorial is Go for
the Gold, the modular web-based tutorial that is used in conjunction with the General
Education program. This tutorial serves two purposes: to orient new students to the
library and to prepare them to take the Information Seeking Skills Test. There are ten
100
additional brief task-specific tutorials. Currently the library only has 11 tutorials online in
a designated place; however, others may be “buried” in the various subject-specific
research guides.
In addition to the Library’s guides, the CIT has 22 top-level guides and tutorials and a
total of 124 sub-guides. These guides are developed to support the applications that are
taught in the workshops and are posted on the CIT’s web page.
G. Key Findings







Students prefer to use virtual services and spaces for finding information. They also
want easily navigable systems that delineate clear paths to information. L&ET must
use the knowledge of users’ preference for services like Google and Yahoo to create
intuitive search paths and consistent pages that provide point-of-need assistance.
Use of the Library’s virtual resources continues to increase. Staffing and
maintenance of the virtual services must be adequately addressed.
The Library Liaison program faces some challenges: unified library communication,
support for instruction and collection development, and assignment to academic
departments. Librarians expressed a need for more coordination for this program in
order to explore how to best serve the campus and the many ways students study
and faculty teach.
With improvements in database technology and searching technologies, the
functionality of the integrated library system (ILS) as a discovery tool must improve.
The complexity of library instruction competes with the scarcity of time each liaison
has with students.
The Library will increase efforts to collaborate with faculty on developing information
literacy assignments into coursework of majors.
Reference as a service must serve a growing non-traditional student population. Not
only have user expectations and behaviors changed, but the information they need
to access has also changed. The simplicity of the traditionally defined library
reference service belies its complexity today.
101
XII. Glossary to Terms and Acronyms
|A|B|C|D|E|F|G|H|I|J|K|L|M|N|O|P|Q|R|S|T|U|V|W|X|Y|Z|
|A|
ACAS – see Automated Collection Analysis Services
ACRL – see Association of College and Research Libraries
Access Services
The provision of access to a library's resources and collections, which includes
the circulation of materials (general circulation, reserves, interlibrary loan,
document delivery), reshelving, stack maintenance, security, and signage
(ODLIS).
Aggregator
A bibliographic service that provides online access to the digital full-text of
periodicals published by different publishers (ODLIS).
ALA – see American Library Association
American Library Association (ALA)
The leading professional association of public and academic libraries and
librarians in the United States (ODLIS).
Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL)
A division of the American Library Association since 1889, ACRL has a
membership of academic and research librarians committed to improving the
quality of service in academic libraries, promoting the career and professional
development of academic and research librarians, and supporting the programs
of academic and research libraries (ODLIS).
Automated Collection Analysis Services (ACAS)
A service offered by OCLC that enables libraries to “analyze the age and subject
content of their own collections, compare their collections with those of peer
libraries, and compare, as a group, the level of overlap or uniqueness of their
collections” (http://www.oclc.org/news/releases/20054.htm).
|B|
Back files
All the issues of a periodical that precede the current issue, usually bound in
annual volumes or converted to microfilm or microfiche to conserve space
(ODLIS).
102
Bibliographic Control
A broad term encompassing all the activities involved in creating, organizing,
managing, and maintaining the file of bibliographic records representing the
items held in a library or archival collection, or the sources listed in an index or
database, to facilitate access to the information contained in them. Bibliographic
control includes the standardization of bibliographic description and subject
access by means of uniform catalog code, classification systems, name
authorities, and preferred headings; the creation and maintenance of catalogs,
union lists, and finding aids; and the provision of physical access to the items in
the collection (ODLIS).
Bibliographic Record
An entry representing a specific item in a library catalog or bibliographic
database, containing all the data elements necessary for a full description,
presented in a specific bibliographic format. In modern cataloging, the standard
format is machine-readable (example: the MARC record), but prior to the use of
computers, the traditional format was the catalog card. Compare with catalog
record, check-in record, item record, and order record (ODLIS).
|C|
CDC – see Collection Development Committee
CFI – see Center for Faculty Innovation
CIT – see Center for Instructional Technology
Center for Faculty Innovation (CFI)
A faculty-driven endeavor that resides within Academic Affairs that purposes to
provide “support for faculty in their multidimensional roles”
(http://www.jmu.edu/cfi/).
Center for Instructional Technology (CIT)
A center that “provides direction, focus, visibility and proactive support for
technological innovation in instruction” in order to support “the use of technology
for teaching and learning” and to develop “innovative courseware (from coursespecific items to instructional systems) for use in synchronous, asynchronous
and distributed learning environments” (http://cit.jmu.edu/cit/).
Circulation Services
The library department that manages the physical control of the collection,
including checking material in and out, collecting fines, and maintaining the
shelves.
CLIR – see Collaborative Library Instruction Repository
Collaborative Library Instruction Repository (CLIR)
103
An online storage system through which all liaisons can voluntarily store and
share materials of any format in order to share with colleagues, spark creativity,
mentor new liaisons, increase collaboration, reduce duplication of effort, and help
colleagues answer class-specific reference questions.
Collection Development
The process of planning and building a useful and balanced collection of library
materials over a period of years, based on an ongoing assessment of the
information needs of the library's clientele, analysis of usage statistics, and
demographic projections, normally constrained by budgetary limitations.
Collection development includes the formulation of selection criteria, planning for
resource sharing, and replacement of lost and damaged items, as well as routine
selection and deselection decisions (ODLIS).
Collection Development Committee (CDC)
A standing committee charged with planning, organizing, and monitoring
“activities related to collection development, evaluation, and maintenance for all
types of information resources”
(http://staffweb.lib.jmu.edu/administration/collection).
Content
The essential matter or substance of a written work or discourse, as opposed to
its form or style. In a more general sense, all the ideas, topics, facts, or
statements contained in a book or other written work (ODLIS).
Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources (COUNTER)
An international initiative launched in March 2002 to serve librarians, publishers,
and intermediaries by developing more consistent, reliable, and meaningful
measures of online resource usage to facilitate the recording and exchange of eusage statistics. The project initially focused on journals and bibliographic
databases but will include other types of networked resources, such as e-books.
Librarians can encourage the adoption of this new code of practice by requiring
vendors to be COUNTER-compliant in licensing agreements (ODLIS).
|D|
DLC – see Depository Library Council
Database
A large, regularly updated file of digitized information (bibliographic records,
abstracts, full-text documents, directory entries, images, statistics, etc.) related to
a specific subject or field, consisting of records of uniform format organized for
ease and speed of search and retrieval and managed with the aid of database
management system (DBMS) software (ODLIS)
DDLS – see Distributed and Distance Learning Services
Depository Library Council (DLC)
104
A council of depository libraries whose mission is to assist the Government
Printing Office in identifying and evaluating alternatives for improving public
access to government information through the Depository Library Program (DLP)
and for optimizing resources available for operating the Program (GPO Access)
Distributed and Distance Learning Services (DDLS)
Services provided through L&ET to connect JMU learners with quality academic
experiences that bridge time and distance.
Dublin Core
A standard set of 15 interoperable metadata elements designed to facilitate the
description and recovery of document-like resources in a networked environment
(ODLIS). Dublin Core is used to guide the creation of MDID records.
|E|
ECVA – see Electronic Campus of Virginia
Educational Technology and Media Center (ETMC)
Electronic Campus of Virginia (ECVA)
A cooperative instructional technology initiative among the Commonwealth’s
public and private colleges and universities
Electronic Resource Management (ERM)
A tool provided by Innovative Interfaces designed “to develop local control
mechanisms for managing licensed resources such as e-journals, Abstracting
and Indexing (A&I) databases, and full-text databases”
(http://www.iii.com/mill/digital.shtml).
Equipment Trust Fund (ETF)
A program administered by SCHEV as “an additional funding source that allows
higher education institutions to purchase equipment. Equipment purchased with
Trust Fund monies is not owned by the University, but is tied to leasing
agreements with the VCBA” (http://www.jmu.edu/acctgserv/etf.shtml).
E-Reserves
Electronic reserves— Items placed on reserve that an academic library makes
available online to be read on a computer screen, downloaded to diskette, or
printed as needed (ODLIS).
ERM – see Electronic Resource Management
ETF – Equipment Trust Fund
ETMC – see Educational Technology and Media Center
105
|G|
Go for the Gold
A set of instructional modules designed by the Library reference staff to teach
students basic information-seeking skills
(http://www.lib.jmu.edu/gold/default.aspx).
|I|
IC – see Information Commons
IMLS – see Institute of Museum and Library Services
Information Commons (IC)
A new type of technology-enhanced collaborative facility on college and
university campuses that integrates library and computer application services
(information, technology, and learning) in a single floor plan, often equipped with
a wireless network and, in some cases, equipment for multimedia production
(ODLIS).
Information Literacy
The set of skills needed to find, retrieve, analyze, and use information (ACRL).
Information Seeking Skills Test (ISST)
A test that “All students enrolled in General Education Cluster One are required
to pass […] during the freshman year” in order to ensure that they “develop the
necessary knowledge and skills early in their university career”
(http://www.jmu.edu/gened/info_lit_general.html).
Infrastructure
The organizational structure, the people (their skills, experience, and
credentials), the financial systems, the physical spaces, and the virtual spaces
that comprise an organization
Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS)
An independent federal grant-making agency created under the Museum and
Library Services Act of 1996 to foster leadership, innovation, and lifelong learning
by supporting museums, archives, and libraries of all types and by encouraging
partnerships among them (ODLIS).
Institutional Repository (IR)
A set of services offered by a university or group of universities to members of its
community for the management and dissemination of scholarly materials in
digital format created by the institution and its community members, such as eprints, technical reports, theses and dissertations, data sets, and teaching
materials. Stewardship of such materials entails their organization in a
cumulative, openly accessible database and a commitment to long-term
preservation when appropriate. Some IRs are also used as electronic presses to
publish e-journals and e-books. An institutional repository is distinguished from a
106
subject-based repository by its institutionally defined scope. IRs are part of a
growing effort to reform scholarly communication and break the monopoly of
journal publishers by reasserting institutional control over the results of
scholarship. An IR may also serve as an indicator of the scope and extent of the
university's research activities (ODLIS).
Interpretation Services
The means by which library staff members help users decide how to use library
resources.
IR – see Institutional Repository
ISST – see Information Seeking Skills Test
|L|
LC – see Library of Congress
LCC – see Library of Congress Classification
LDAP – see Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
Liaison
In academic libraries, librarians are often assigned one or more academic
departments for which they serve as intermediary between the teaching faculty
and the library. Liaison responsibilities may include bibliographic instruction,
collection development (including reference and electronic resources), current
awareness, and faculty training in the use of library resources. Most liaison
librarians have academic preparation or at least some level of expertise in the
disciplines they serve (ODLIS).
Library of Congress (LC)
Established by Congress in 1800 to function as a research library for the
legislative branch of the federal government, the Library of Congress eventually
became the unofficial national library of the United States. Located in
Washington, D.C., LC houses a collection of over 120 million items and
administers the U.S. copyright system, serving as the nation's copyright
depository. LC is also the primary source of original cataloging in the United
States (ODLIS).
Library of Congress Classification (LCC)
A system of classifying books and other library materials developed and
maintained over the last 200 years by the Library of Congress in Washington,
D.C. In LCC, human knowledge is divided into 20 broad categories indicated by
single letters of the roman alphabet, with major subdivisions indicated by a
second letter, and narrower subdivisions by decimal numbers and further
alphabetic notation (ODLIS).
LibQUAL+
107
A suite of services designed to enable libraries to solicit, track, understand, and
act upon the opinions of library users concerning quality of service. Developed
with grant support from the U.S. Department of Education's Fund for the
Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) and offered by the
Association of Research Libraries (ARL), LibQUAL+ includes a rigorously tested
Web-based survey bundled with training to help libraries assess and improve
library services, change organizational culture, and market the library (ODLIS).
Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)
The server that manages the identity of all JMU users with e-ids.
Link Resolver
Application software that uses the OpenURL standard to provide contextsensitive linking between a citation in a bibliographic database and the electronic
full text of the resource cited (article, essay, conference paper, book, etc.) in an
aggregator database or online from the publisher, taking into account which
materials the user is authorized by subscription or licensing agreement to
access. Some link resolvers provide "all text" linking capability with access
services such as interlibrary loan and automated catalog searching (ODLIS).
LinkFinderPlus
The link resolver software provided by L&ET through Endeavor Information
Systems in order to facilitate access to the libraries’ collections
LOCKSS
An acronym for Lots of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe, an application designed to
create low-cost, persistent digital "caches" of electronic journal articles, housed
locally at institutions that have authorized access to the content and elect to
preserve it. The idea behind LOCKSS is that e-journal content is more likely to be
preserved if there are many distributed copies of the material (ODLIS).
|M|
Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC)
An international standard digital format for the description of bibliographic items
developed by the Library of Congress during the 1960s to facilitate the creation
and dissemination of computerized cataloging from library to library within the
same country and between countries. By 1971, the MARC format had become
the national standard for dissemination of bibliographic data and by 1973, an
international standard (ODLIS).
Madison Digital Image Database (MDID)
A database developed by L&ET to store collections of digital images primarily for
the teaching and study of art and art history.
MARC – see Machine-Readable Cataloging
MDID – see Madison Digital Image Database
108
Microform
A generic term for a highly reduced photographic copy of text and/or images
stored on a translucent medium (microfiche or microfilm) or on an opaque
medium such as card stock (microopaque or aperture card). Microforms can be
original editions or reproductions. Reader-printer machines are required to view
and make hard copies. Digital storage media such as magnetic tape and disk,
CD-ROM, etc., are superseding microforms in information storage and retrieval,
but the transformation is far from complete (ODLIS).
Monograph
A relatively short book or treatise on a single subject, complete in one physical
piece, usually written by a specialist in the field. Monographic treatment is
detailed and scholarly but not extensive in scope (see these examples). The
importance of monographs in scholarly communication depends on the
discipline. In the humanities, monographs remain the format of choice for serious
scholars, but in the sciences and social sciences where currency is essential,
journals are usually the preferred means of publication (ODLIS).
|O|
OA – see Open Access
OCLC – see Online Computer Library Center
Online Computer Library Center (OCLC)
The largest bibliographic utility in the world, providing cataloging and acquisitions
services, serials and circulation control, interlibrary loan support, and access to
online databases (ODLIS).
Open Access (OA)
Information content made freely and universally available via the Internet in easy
to read format, usually because the publisher maintains online archives to which
access is free or has deposited the information in a widely known open access
repository. Open access is a new model of scholarly publishing developed to free
researchers and libraries from the limitations imposed by excessive subscription
price increases for peer-reviewed journals, particularly in the sciences and
medicine (ODLIS).
|P|
Periodical Locator
A Serials Solutions product that is considered the authoritative source for journal
description and holdings information of subscribed as well as aggregator titles,
titles available through full-text databases
Project COUNTER
109
An international initiative designed to serve librarians, publishers and
intermediaries by facilitating the recording and exchange of online usage
statistics (http://www.projectcounter.org/about.html).
Public Services
Activities and operations of a library that bring the staff into regular direct contact
with its users, including circulation, reference, online services, bibliographic
instruction, serials assistance, government documents, and interlibrary
loan/document delivery, as distinct from technical services, which are performed
behind the scenes, out of contact with library users (ODLIS).
|S|
SBA – see Small Business Administration
SCHEV – see State Council of Higher Education for Virginia
Small Business Administration (SBA)
“Created in 1953 as an independent agency of the federal government to aid,
counsel, assist and protect the interests of small business concerns, to preserve
free competitive enterprise and to maintain and strengthen the overall economy
of our nation” (http://www.sba.gov/aboutsba/index.html).
State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV)
An advisory group providing strategic planning for state-wide educational
technologies initiatives
|T|
Technical Services
Library operations concerned with the acquisition, organization (bibliographic
control), physical processing, and maintenance of library collections, as opposed
to the delivery of public services (ODLIS).
Technical Support – East Campus (TS-EC)
The branch of Classroom Technology that provides technical support for various
systems and software on East Campus
TS-EC – see Technical Support – East Campus
|V|
VCBA – see Virginia College Building Authority
Virginia College Building Authority (VCBA)
110
A branch of the Virginia Department of the Treasury intended “to facilitate or
provide financing for certain capital projects and educational equipment for stateowned institutions of higher education and to provide a conduit financing
mechanism for private, non-profit institutions in Virginia”
(http://www.trs.virginia.gov/debt/vcba.asp).
Virtual Library of Virginia (VIVA)
A consortium of Virginia libraries that seek “to provide, in an equitable,
cooperative and cost-effective manner, enhanced access to library and
information resources for the Commonwealth of Virginia’s non-profit academic
libraries serving the higher education community” (http://www.vivalib.org/).
VIVA – see Virtual Library of Virginia
111
XIII. References
Allen, I. A., & Seaman, J. (2006). Growing by Degrees: Online Education in the United
States, 2005 (Southern Edition). Sloan Consortium. Retrieved September 6, 2006,
from http://www.sloanc.org/publications/survey/pdf/growing_by_degrees_southern.pdf
American Council of Learned Societies. (2006). Our Cultural Commonwealth: The
Report of the American Council of Learned Societies’ Commission on
Cyberinfrastructure for Humanities and Social Sciences. American Council of
Learned Societies. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from
http://www.acls.org/cyberinfrastructure/acls.ci.report.pdf
American Library Association. Presidential Committee on Information Literary: Final
Report.. Retrieved 10/16, 2006, from
http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/whitepapers/presidential.htm
Association of Research and College Libraries. Instruction Section. Teaching Methods
Committee. Information literarcy in the disciplines. Retrieved October 16, 2006, from
http://www.ala.org/ala/acrlbucket/is/projectsacrl/infolitdisciplines/index.htm
Atkins, D. E., & etc. (2003). Revolutionizing Science and Engineering through
Cyberinfrastructure. National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory, Panel on
Cyberinfrastructure. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from
http://www.nsf.gov/cise/sci/reports/atkins.pdf
Beckett, C. (2006). The New World Order in Collection Development: The Commercial
Perspective. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from
http://www.scholinfo.com/presentations/2006/8/10/the-new-world-order-in-collectiondevelopment-the-commercial-perspective.htm
Couturier, L. K. (2006). Checks and Balances at Work: The Restructuring of Virginia's
Public Higher Education System. National Center for Public Policy and Higher
Education. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from
http://www.highereducation.org/reports/checks_balances/virginia.pdf
Dempsey, L. (2006, October 13, 2006). Distributing the Catalog Discovery Experience.
Message posted to http://orweblog.oclc.org/archives/001174.html
Downey, M. (2006, August 14, 2006). Assessing Colleges Proves Challenging: Federal
Commission Calls for Ways to Measure Learning versus Cost. [Electronic version].
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Retrieved October 10, 2006, from LexisNexis
Academic database.
Gartner. (2006). Hype Cycle for Higher Education. Gartner. Retrieved August 15, 2006,
from Gartner Advisory IntraWeb database from
http://www.gartner.com/resources/139100/139174/hype_cycle_higher_educat_1391
74.pdf
112
Lamb, G. M. (2006, October 5, 2006). Real learning in a virtual world. [Electronic
version]. Christian Science Monitor, Retrieved October 10, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis
Academic database.
Loughran, T. (2006). Book pricing update--book price inflation highest in years. Against
the Grain, 18(2), 73.
Lynch, C. (2002). Digital collections, digital libraries and the digitization of cultural
heritage information. First Monday, 7(5)
McGeveran, W., & Fisher, W. (2006). Digital learning challenge: Obstacles to
educational uses of copyrighted material in the digital age. Berkman Center for
Internet & Society. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=923465#PaperDownload
Meattle, J. (2006, August 11, 2006). Social networks gaining on top portals. Message
posted to http://blog.compete.com/index.php/2006/08/11/top-social-networksgaining-on-top-portals-yahoo-google/
Needham, G., & Williams, J. F. (2006, August 11, 2006). Perceptions and Realities:
Confronting the New Library Environment (webcast). Message posted to
http://infopeople.org/training/webcasts/list/archived
New Media Consortium. (2006). 2006 Horizon Report. New Media Consortium.
Retrieved September 6, 2006, from
http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2006_Horizon_Report.pdf
Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources: A report to the OCLC
membership.(2005). OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. Retrieved
September 22, 2006.
Talbot, D. (2005). Next-Generation Networks: Today’s internet is like “second-class
mail,” but solutions exist, says doug van houweling, CEO of Internet2. Technology
Review, September 3, 2006 . Retrieved September 3, 2006, from
http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=15937&ch=infotech
Udell, J. (2004). The New Social Enterprise. InfoWorld, 24(13), 47-52.
Van Orsdel, L. C., & Born, K. (2006). Journals In the Time of Google. Library Journal,
131(7), 39-44.
Virginia Information Technologies Agency (VITA). (2005). Virginia Information
Technology Accessibility. Commonwealth of Virginia. Retrieved September 6, 2005,
from http://www.vita.virginia.gov/docs/psg/AccessibilityStandard_GOV10300_Eff_11-04-05.pdf
113