Library and Media Directors Council Meeting
DRAFT Winter Meeting, Feb 7, 2014
via Collaborate
Online Participants: Eric Palo, Tim Fuhrman, Monica Luce, Stan Horton, Mindy Coslor, Linda
Lambert, Jane Blume, Sharon Winters, Jennifer Dysart, Melissa McBurney, Connie Broughton, Sue
Kennedy, Beth Hill, Michelle Bagley, Leslie Potter-Henderson, Christie Flynn, Wai-Fong Lee, Andrew
Hersh-Tudor, Paula Doherty, Tim Aman (Spokane), Doug Ammons, Sarah Leadley, Stacy Prest,
Jeanne Leader, Lauri Kram, Sharon Simes, Myra Van Vactor, Michelle Bagley, Leslie PotterHenderson, Tim Fuhrman, Maggie Stuart, Joan Weber, Ruth Saucier. Participants joined at various
points in the morning agenda.
Elizabeth Iaukea, Rand Simmons, and Jeff Martin from the WA State Library joined the meeting at
1pm. Barbara Oldham (Wenatchee/CLAMS) joined the session at 2:10pm.
Chair Dysart called the meeting to order at 9am.
Dysart noted that draft fall 2013 LMDC meeting minutes were posted to the wiki; LMDC members
had no changes; minutes were approved.
Support for Applied Baccalaureates
Van Vactor acknowledged the contributions of committee members Kennedy, Lee, McBurney
and Doherty. She provided background on the program, noting that 4 colleges were identified as
part of a pilot; the program is expanding; 11 colleges now offer degrees, awarding 23 types of
degrees. The Legislature set a 2019 target of awarding 42,200 applied baccalaureate degrees in
degree areas not offered by 4-year institutions. Van Vactor demonstrated a LibGuide which
summarizes the role of libraries and librarians in this effort, see “Library Support for Baccalaureate
Programs” at http://bellevuecollege.libguides.com/bacc.
Horton noted that the NWCCU accreditation association has taken great interest in this
development. Dysart noted that a baccalaureate was added at Green River recently; she is
concerned about the general education aspects of the program. Bagley has concerns noting that
Clark’s new dental hygienist program only added a couple of technology-related courses when they
moved to the baccalaureate program; she suggested that it should also include a research course.
Van Vactor noted that is important to work with lower level courses so student have the
background needed to proceed to a baccalaureate program; she had to work with her current
funding levels to support the baccalaureate position and refocus the work of specific library
positions. Horton noted that there isn’t just a need for more staffing but for staff with a different
skill set. Saucier noted that she is a NWCCU evaluator, and had long conversations with Pam Goad
at NWCCU, who is in charge of substantive changes, last week. If you have an associate's in the area,
Pam is asking for an abbreviated (5 page) substantive change - but most of what they address in the
sub-change is already addressed when application is made to the State Board -- so we'll be copying
much of that for the five pager.
Dysart suggested that some of the information discussed this morning should be added to the
“Library Support” LibGuide. Van Vactor noted that the committee would consider that and report
back. She emphasized that libraries need to get out in front of this. McBurney suggested that
there’s a lot of opportunity to support each other in this effort.
Information Literacy integrated with eLearning/Canvas
Horton noted that the group (Fuhrman, Aman, Hill, Rodoin) has met. Horton apologized for not
calling together the group or reporting out at the recent eLearning Council meeting. General
direction is that there are great opportunities to add a tab on Canvas desktop where info lit
modules could be linked. The next ELC meeting is April 21-22 so there will be an opportunity to
discuss this at the May 1-2 LMDC meeting (or before via the listserv).
Library Leadership Update
Kennedy noted that about 18 people have responded to the survey of what areas directors would
be willing to mentor in and what their involvement level might be. She encouraged more LMDC
members to respond; the subcommittee (Kennedy, McBurney, Luce) will share this information
with LMDC. She asked best method to identify mentees. Winters suggested working with CLAMS
via their spring meeting and/or their active listserv. The committee currently doesn’t know how
many people are interested in finding a mentor but just sharing the resource list with CLAMS would
be helpful for those who need small snippets of information or advice without a formal mentoring
relationship.
LSTA grant proposal: Library as Open Education Leader (Winters)
Winters noted that an executive summary of the 3-year Library as Open Education Leader LSTA
grant proposal, preliminary summary of SBCTC “2013 Faculty Use of Open Educational Resources,”
and proposal activities by year are posted to the agenda page on the wiki. She reviewed the
problem and benefits statement, which was based on fall LMDC meeting discussion and distributed
for comment to LMDC in early December. She then reviewed the scope of the grant project, the
three project goals, and specific activities during the three-year project.
Winters asked for suggestions on ways to enhance the proposal. Fuhrman noted “great job” and
that the project fits really well with what ELC is doing; he suspects that they’d also be happy to
endorse the project and will work on producing a letter of support. Lee asked that the grant
planning committee send out a survey to measure interest; she noted that we’re all at different
stages of OER adoption and need a reality check. Winters noted that the CLAMS listserv was
surveyed in early December; 19 respondents noted that they wanted to participate for the full 3
years; 2 noted that they would be interested in a 2 year or less commitment. Winters will survey
LMDC on commitment interest and possible involvement on a LSTA advisory committee.
Hill, Bagley, Broughton (for SBCTC), and Fuhrman volunteered to serve as members of a LSTA
Advisory Committee along with representatives from SPARC and CLAMS. Winters asked LMDC to
endorse the grant proposal, which will also be endorsed by CLAMS, SPARC, SBCTC and now ELC.
Fuhrman moved that LMDC support the grant proposal as summarized in attachments posted to
the wiki; Hill seconded. There were 18 aye; Dysart noted support for the proposal. Winters asked
that letters of endorsement from ELC and LMDC get to Sharon by Feb. 14th. Winters thanked the
group for their interest and support, noting the stellar work done by Quill West and a team of
librarians in preparing the proposal.
Information Literacy Month Proclamation
Bagley noted that they’ve checked in with the governor’s office about doing a proclamation. The
team (Bagley, Hill) is compiling a list of partner organizations and agencies. She expects to have a
draft proclamation in May, will send it out to partner organizations and agencies in June, and will
have it completed and at the governor’s office by the Sept. 1st deadline. Dysart will add this to the
May LMDC agenda.
Pacific NW Academic Library Symposium
Bagley noted that the team (Bagley, Hill) is working on a feasibility study and plan for another NW
Academic Library Symposium. The team is developing a list of previous participants who’ll be
polled for scheduling and topics. Dysart asked if additional help was needed; Bagley noted that
they may need to add another LMDC team member when solid plans take shape.
Library Platform Work
Hersh-Tudor expects the Primo implementation process to be complete by April. He hears that
the process is going more smoothly and that there’s also a post-implementation process. The team
is focused on Primo implementation and has not turned their attention to Alma yet. An ORCA
planning meeting identified the need to put together some “thoughtful working groups” that would
reframe the organization toward users, develop capacity to facilitate relationships, identify
purposes for growth, and analyze growth strategies.
The team agrees that the next step in the process needs to focus on alignment. The big questions
that need to be answered are 1) what are the concrete outcomes the group could expect from a
common library services platform and 2) how do they translate into needs for a new back end. The
process might be to review goals and focus on benefits to the system AND what a common platform
needs to do for us to achieve these goals. Hersh-Tudor noted that the Primo implementation
process has allowed participants to learn more about Ex Libris. He believes that LMDC needs to
drive this with minimal vendor involvement.
Hersh-Tudor asked for comments. Coslor believes that this is the right course, a different one
from the leap of faith that inspired the Primo move. There was angst because participants didn’t
necessarily know what they were getting in to. Dysart reviewed the process that brought the Primo
decision; the initial thought was to next move forward with the back-end piece, Alma. The Primo
move was more difficult and more work than was anticipated; it appeared disorganized from her
perspective as library director. Kennedy noted that implementation is going smoothly at SPSCC, a
later implementation site. Dysart noted that ORCA is going back and asking the important question
of what’s best for our students and our users. There doesn’t seem to be enough money for all
institutions to move forward with Alma. We’re taking a pause to make sure that we’re on the right
track. Hersh-Tudor said that this doesn’t need to be a lengthy process; there’s good alignment with
completion of Primo implementation. Palo noted that he doesn’t see compelling evidence that
would compel a move to a new back-end, much less Alma. Bagley (Clark College, an Orbis-Cascade
member) noted that a common back-end is essential to the kind of collaboration and resourcesharing that Orbis-Cascade is committed to (e.g. requests are placed in Primo, fulfillment is done in
Alma; shared e-book collection and one load of records).
Hersh-Tudor suggested that the task force meet in early April to address the questions identified
above. The specific charge to the task force is to identify goals and outcomes (perhaps in
conversation with ORCA); take the outcomes (e.g. resource sharing) to identify what a new system
needs to do/how it needs to function; and identify beginning requirements for a new system. The
task force could frame the questions and host a meeting that includes all participants who work
toward answering these questions. Bagley noted that Orbis-Cascade had a work group study next
generation library systems; another group then developed a proposal to investigate solutions to
meet goals (one being seamless resource sharing). She noted that LMDC doesn’t have clarity or
agreement around goals.
Horton is irritated by Ex Libris competence in designing a training program but it isn’t the same
thing as deciding if Alma is a good choice; he asked if we needed to do a whole new process. But he
really agrees with Palo’s point (do I need Alma?); Bagley gave him a very good reason; the userfocus is a good move (we tend to focus too much on the back-end functionality). Dysart thinks we
really need to move forward, especially to accommodate the need to support the applied
baccalaureate degrees.
At the end of the discussion, Dysart distributed to the open LMDC listserve (via Kram) the
following documents: LMDC Common Platform Proposal and LMDC Report to IC, Spring 2012.
Jennifer then conducted a straw poll to identify preferred direction: 5 voted to pause and reconfirm
outcomes & requirements; 13 supported talking about outcomes and then moving ahead with
confirmation; 6 supported moving confirmation process forward. Dysart suggested that a one-hour
online meeting be convened to discuss outcomes and move forward with confirmation. The team
will follow this direction. The working team will examine outcomes and requirements and
distribute a draft to the group. Before the Spring meeting, LMDC will convene for a 1-hour
Blackboard Collaborate meeting to discuss the draft and confirm next steps.
The group took a lunch break from 11:35am to 1pm. Dysart reconvened the meeting at 1pm.
WA State Library
Martin mentioned WSL’s involvement in IMLS’ state programs reporting and their desire to tell a
national story; this means a little less detail on the reporting end but that WSL needs to gather more
information on a fiscal level (e.g. personnel and benefits cost and how it was used in the course of
delivering outcomes). He mentioned the “Gathering Ideas” grant cycle which will be announced on
Feb. 10th with proposals due on March 7th. Approximately $300,000 of LSTA funds will be available
to fund this. Ideas will be prioritized at the May Library Council meeting and will then go to WSL
staff to study feasibility, etc.
Simmons joined the meeting and noted that a bill introduced to the legislature would have
removed WSL funding and moved it to Parks; the bill is not going anywhere. He is concerned about
whether Heritage Center revenues (from licenses at state auditor level and through corporations
division) will be enough to fund WSL operations. This will be an issue for the next legislative
session. WSL is working on pre-design for a new Library & Archives building (no longer a heritage
center) to be built near the capitol campus; this is a budget proviso. Simmons noted that the
following legislators might be contacted about this issue: Dunshee and DeBolt in the House;
Honeyford & Keiser in the Senate. Simmons will send talking points out to LMDC members via the
listserv.
In the course of MS IT Academy implementation it became apparent that they needed a project
manager; WSL recently hired a former employee Elizabeth Iaukea to fill the position. Simmons
introduced her to the group.
Accessible Technology Task Force
McBurney reported on this statewide effort; its purpose is to study current and best practices.
Mission, vision, and standards came out of a meeting attended by McBurney and Stuart; the work
was primarily done by the Disabilities Support Services Council. She noted that documents are
posted to the wiki winter agenda page. They are asking for feedback from our council. McBurney
asked how LMDC wants to proceed; she’ll post information and ask for feedback via the listserv.
There was a suggestion that we involve staff on our campuses who are engaged on this topic.
Treasurer’s Report
Hersh-Tudor noted that the report is posted to the wiki. Current balance is $7460. Hersh-Tudor
noted that a handful of libraries have not yet paid dues; he’ll be sending a reminder to those
libraries in the next few days.
Instruction Commission
Garguile was unable to attend the meeting; Dysart has nothing to report.
Library Council
Weber noted that her report is posted to the wiki; most topics will be covered by Simmons or
Martin. She noted that it is important to be attentive to LSTA grant criteria. Jane Blume will start
representing LMDC at Library Council and will serve for the next three years. Weber noted that
Council recently had a great continuing education presentation on a new public forum for voting
issues. Dysart thanked Weber for representing LMDC on Council.
SBCTC
Broughton noted that she attached a report on the wiki meeting agenda page. The legislative
session is underway with the cut-off today, Feb. 7th. On the SBCTC website there’s a link to news & a
Twitter feed re: the legislative session.
With the ctcLink project there’s a discussion about impact of big data & data mining and how it
might be used; she’s posted a google doc at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f4O9sFrM6c0zimXuoWF5IU6VGsD75R7eBzF_pbKTfcY/edit?usp=
sharing
Boyoung developed an online course on how to make best use of OER resources; 200 faculty and
staff from across the country have completed the course since it was posted in November. They’ve
learned that one of the barriers to effective use of OER is how to find information, get appropriate
clearances, etc. The course offers one-on-one training to address these barriers. Registration is
available at http://www.waol.org/info/training/instTrainingRegV2.aspx.
The two-year implementation of Canvas continues to go well; the Angel server and services will
come down in June 2014.
Broughton reviewed eLearning system contracts: lecture capture (currently Tegrity; new RFP in
process; SBCTC pays for this); web conferencing (currently Collaborate; SBCTC pays for this and
will be renewing contract for 2014-15); Quality Matters (for evaluating online resources);
eTutoring consortium (SBCTC pays technology fees and for consortium manager; 29 WA
community colleges are currently members); 24/7 research librarian (SBCTC pays part of the
QuestionPoint invoice; librarians provide the staffing). In order for SBCTC to do any system-wide
optional use contracts, they need at least 20 colleges to indicate participation. They’re exploring
plagiarism protection; SBCTC would need to do a RFP on this though there’s interest in TurnItIn
(four 4-year universities currently have TurnItIn contracts).
There was some discussion about impact of ctcLink and the need to arrange with the ctcLink
project and possibly Info Systems staff at each campus to make sure that patron loads via SMS can
be done. Winters noted that TCC’s ctcLink project manager has advised that there won’t be work at
the system level to write APIs to do this until implementation is complete in 2017; the TCC library
will need to work with campus information systems to make this work in the meantime. (TCC is a
Sirsi-Dynix site.) The TCC library is also interested in moving financial data in both directions.
Horton has been told that the ctcLink project is going to work with Voyager libraries to write the
necessary scripting. There are mixed messages so Broughton will get some additional information
from ctcLink staff and pass it along. Hersh-Tudor will also ask for clarification at next week’s IT
Council meeting.
Broughton reported that the National Association of College Bookstores just released a study on
the use of OER materials; she noted that they failed to understand the premise of the OCL project.
Marty Brown, SBCTC exec director, wrote a letter, clarifying the work of OCL and efforts to expand
use of OER, that was recently published in the Chronicle of Higher Education. Broughton noted that
$5.5M in textbook costs have been saved with an investment of less than $2M. She’ll send more info
out on the listserv.
eLearning Council
Fuhrman noted that they’re nervous about the lecture capture RFP; there are four candidates
being considered at this point. He sent a link to the ELC’s OER page to the listserv. Boyoung hopes
to have a site up by the end of March that allows people to assess quality of OER content. He noted
the March 27-28 Canvas conference at Tacoma Community College; Fuhrman encouraged librarians
to submit presentation proposals.
IT Commission
Hersh-Tudor noted that ITC will be meeting on Monday, Feb. 10th, at Clark College. They’ll be
talking about ctcLink, bring your own device policies, etc. He’ll send a quick summary of the
meeting to the listserv.
MS IT Academy
WSL would like to receive copies of press releases that we sent out at introduction of the IT
Academy. Weber reported on their experiences; they don’t expect usage from the broader
community but has arranged ways to accommodate WA residents. Blume reported that in
Bellingham the public libraries included the colleges in their press release. Hill noted that their CIS
faculty has been using the certification materials successfully. Due to SPSCC’s Office365 student
email roll-out, and something on Microsoft's end, the students who have tried to use the access
codes the library distributed were not able to get in. Iaukea noted that she can help with this.
Flynn noted that they’ve had substantive issues with implementation, especially on the Steilacoom
campus. Iaukea noted that there are still some platform issues; IT Academy seems to work better
from home computers where the network issues don’t exist. There shouldn’t be any problems with
access codes and getting people connected; most are using the “invite user” method of handling
enrollment. People have had problems with the “add user” function; she wants to hear specifics so
she can work with Microsoft.
CLAMS
Barbara Oldham, president of CLAMS, reported that the OER/copyright task force is moving
forward and has a website where they’re posting information (e.g. how to get started finding and
using OER. (The full CLAMS report is posted to the wiki agenda.) The CLAMS directory is being
updated; they’re waiting for information to come in from some libraries. When finished it’ll be
searchable in a number of ways (see link on CLAMS report). Fuhrman noted that the annual spring
CLAMS conference will be at Big Bend.
Dysart noted that over 30 participated in today’s meeting and congratulated the group on this high
participation level. She noted that the next LMDC meeting is May 1-2 at South Puget Sound’s new
library.
Dysart adjourned the meeting at 2:40pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Winters, LMDC Secretary