Notes from MDLS Discussion Group #9, 10-20-06
Present: Ben Farrell, Ted Smith, Faye Chadwell, Eliz Breakstone (for only a short time),
Mary Grenci, Mark Watson (facilitator)
(mcg: My notes from this group are very sketchy.)
Mark and I were talking about the name of the dept. before the meeting started. He said
he doesn't necessarily think the word "digital" needs to be removed from the name but he
does think we need a different term than "digital library services."
Question #1: What does the digital library program mean to you? Question #2: What
types of services should the digital library program offer? What functions should it serve?
Question #3: Where do you think the library could improve in this area?
BF:
An outgrowth of ideas about the library without walls. Peer institutions
contribute and benefit from one another's resources. Resources are information bound
instead of item/format bound. Patron base is broader: anyone, anytime. Started when
we abandoned the card catalog. Now includes padcasts, downloading music. Facilitates
exchange of information instead of exchange of items.
TS:
Project driven, selecting areas that can benefit from digitization and creating the
plan to do it. Two aspects: the digitization and providing access to the things digitized.
Access is what MDLS has always done, with both the digital and the traditional
materials.
(Discussion about whether Google is "the Internet" or "the" digital library, and about
whether people only case about digital things. Nobody agreed that people only care
about the digital.)
TS:
Would say if there's not a digital pointer to traditional material than people don't
know it exists and don't use it. This is where we need to focus. Collections that aren't
cataloged aren't used.
BF:
Card catalog is no longer used. That doesn't de-legitimize those materials but
they simply aren't found by patrons.
TS:
History faculty are still very much in the print world.
FC:
We've been so project driven: it was a good way to get things going but now we
need more. Asking about the digital library program is short-sighted. Should just be
asking what is the digital library (drop the word program). We're almost at the tipping
point where we spend more on the digital than on the traditionsl (collection developmentwise). When you sa "digital library program" people think "MDLS." But there's more:
more types of access, instruction, etc. MDLS has done a lot but there's a lot more going
on in the library. The digital changes the way we access things, the way we do
instruction, the way do research, the way we take statistics, etc. etc.
EB: When we were doing the web re-design, the issue of having the digital collections
on the homepage came up. We found that students don't think about "digital collections."
They think about getting what they want, preferably online, but not the word "digital."
(Discussion, brought up by Mark, about how "digital" is redundant. It's just the library
program.)
FC:
Access is a big issue
(Discussion about problems with OneSearch and the current web page. Eliz explained
how easy it is to use OneSearch.)
FC:
Have to pay attention to the instructions for digital services.
MRW: But everyone does instruction diggerently. When there's a proliferation of
databases people talk about the need for standardization, but as far as instruction goes
each person teaches different things.
FC:
When things get compartmentalized there's redundancy. A lot of the things
OneSearch does could have been done by ERM but nobody asked or talked to one
another. We can't affort this duplication, or duplication of digitization efforts.
FC:
What does Admin. think of the role of subject specialists and the digital library
program? Also, need to make sure whatever we digitize can work in various systems.
(??)
EB: Really hard for subject specialists to stay up on what's out there, what we have
available. Disconnected from the digital production that happens here: need better
communication.
BF:
Communication problem is compounded when you're in a branch library.
MCG: In an earlier meeting someone mentioned a wiki filled with information about
what's going on in the library, terms to know, etc.
(Discussion about how this wouldn't help because people wouldn't have time to keep up
with reading it, and wouldn't necessarily know to look something up.)
TS:
Searching library web site works if you know something has been done but can't
remember the details. Have to already have an inkling of it, though.
BF:
Quarterly meetings to disseminate information.
(Discussion about the difficulty of having time to go to the meetings, read the email or
the wiki, take in all the new stuff. EB mentioned time-management workshops would
help.)
(Long discussion about the problems with OneSearch.)
FC:
"The digital library is not our friend."
TS:
Issue of outsourcing things we've traditionally done in-house. Have to make
compromises but need to think about whether the compromises are worth it, need to
make that decision for each product and each thing we outsource.
FC:
The digital library includes the tools we use to do our work.
Question #4: What areas of MDLS service and outreach to your unit or department do
you value most? Question #5:
What MDLS services would you like to see more or
less of? Question #6: What areas of collaboration would you like to see emerge in the
relationship between your department and MDLS?
MRW: We need a manager/overseer for some of these systems, like ContentDM (digital
collections software) and DSpace (Scholars' Bank software). Maybe that's a core MDLS
mission.
FC:
CDA plays a role in acquiring and putting some records in the catalog, but what
happens when we more to shelf-ready books? What's the effect of that on CDA and
MDLS? What about e-books that aren't hosted here (talking about a plan to "purchase" ebrary e-books). E-brary hosts the books but we own them. E-brary provides catalog
records, too.
(Discussion about how ERM has changed the standards in the catalog and changed the
nature of electronic journal work in both CDA and MDLS.)
FC:
One role for MDLS is to evaluate the quality of the records we load.
TS:
Sometimes what we think is a good new thing to do turns out to be not so good.
MRW: Participation in programs like the Program for Cooperative Cataloging is
wonderful but really difficult to participate in it with all the new things we're doing.
FC:
Worry that some of what has been deemed too labor intensive for traditional
materials is being done for digital materials. Talked about subject analysis of pictures in
ContentDM collections being too rich as compared to what we've decided to provide for
traditional materials.
FC:
One area of collaboration is digital acquisitions (licensing, purchasing, etc.)
Access and preservation issues must be worked out before purchasing, and this is another
area for collaboration between CDA and MDLS. Looking at shelf-ready books could
help. There's also digital "shelf-ready."
Question #7: Final thoughts and comments
BF:
It's our job to manage the changing technologies. Even if we made some errors in
the past we can't let that cloud our ability to keep moving. We don't know what's going
to happen with future technologies but can't let that stop us.
(mcg: Didn't take notes on any other final thoughts and I don't remember what they
were. Sorry.)