Monday, April 29, 2013

Stealth Librarianship: Ideas from the ACRL webinar

Last week, many of us attended ACRL's e-learning webcast: Stealth Librarianship: Creating Meaningful Connections Through User Experience, Outreach, and Liaising.

Here are links to some resources discussed during the webcast:
I am going to share a few ideas I got from the session here.  Reply to this post with more ideas...

Inreach - Everyone on staff is a liaison and can work to build relationships across campus.

Cards of Support/Congratulation to Faculty & Students - Send personal messages/cards to faculty who get tenure or sabbatical to congratulate them and offer library support.  Or send personal messages to students or student clubs when they publish work or win an award.  I am going to try this as two English department students just won a writing award.  Regina cataloged their short story and poem and I wrote a blog post about it, but a personal card from the library would be nice.

Tuesday, May 22, 2012


Fun article from the Huffington Post on the Twitter trend of replacing one word in a well-known phrase with "librarian." Link.

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Monday, January 23, 2012

Goodbye Statistical Abstract

I just read a post discussing Life After the Statistical Abstract which summarizes of a discussion that took place at ALA Midwinter.  It discusses possible alternatives including commercial products from ProQuest, but points out that currently nothing rivals what was available through Statistical Abstract.  Learning to Live Without the Statistical Abstract offers a discussion of alternatives including a link to the Guide to Sources of Statistics chart which is Appendix I of the Abstract. This is a list of primary sources of statistical information along with the agencies that produce those statistics.

What are we going to do at LCC to guide students to reliable credible statistics now that Statistical Abstract is gone?

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Keeping E-Books Current - Charleston Report Part 5

Most of the sessions I attended were those that I knew we are going to implement or undertake in the next few months. One of them is of course, weeding. This session hit home immediately because of our Netlibrary collection weeding project that was started last summer. This session is meant to be a "dialog" session with heads of collection from Texas A & M University, Ken Breen (Senior Ditector of e-book Products at EBSCO) and Matt Barnes (Vice-President of Marketing at ebrary).

They talk about the problem of ebooks that have outdated or superceded information and what we need to do to make them current. There are a few questions posed to the attendees and was the starting point for our dialogue:

Who is responsible for weeding ebooks?

Removing the titles from the library catalog is a pain (but doable), however, how do you removed those that are part of a shared collection such as consortium?

Who is responsible for weeding a shared collection?

How would libraries like to identify ebooks for weeding?

How can a library control access if it removed a title from the catalog but the item is still available in the vendor's database?

Why would you want to permanently delete an item?

What situation would work best for the library?

I spoke to the group about our dilemma with our Netlibrary records. I told Ken since they now own Netlibrary that it would be good if after we deleted the items in our catalog, they can in turn have a switch that can turn off visibility of these deleted records from our students. He said they have not thought about weeding when they moved the platform but now since there is a need for that, they would work towards that functionality.

We also heard from the research libraries' perspective, since they don't ever weed anything from their collection. They want to be able to identify those ebooks that they want weeded but still make it accessible for their faculty or researchers. They want to move these ebooks to a repository much like an online off-site storage so they can be accessed again. Again, these vendors have no way of doing this yet. Apparently, they were so caught up with producing books in electronic form, marketing them to libraries but neglecting the fact that one day some of them would have to be weeded.

In the end, the dialogue produced some lessons and recommendations, in particular:

Libraries mus evaluate their ebook collections regularly (especially if it is purchased)

Libraries mus work together to create best practices for evaluating and weeding ebook collections.

Librarians and vendors must work together to create workflow that is efficient for both.

Friday, November 4, 2011

Charleston Conference Report Part 4

Today was another busy and jam-packed day full of keynote speeches, sessions, and lively discussions to attend. The morning started with a keynote speech from the legal counsels at U of M, Stanford University and another lawyer specializing in competition and copyright for libraries. The title of their presentation was "The Long Arm of the Law." It's basically a crash course on copyright, fair use especially in this digital age. They also brought us up-to-date with the leading developments in cases such as Skyriver versus OCLC, Google Books settlement, Georgia State University case against their e-reserves, John Wiley's case against first sale and FTC investigation on Google.

I also attended the lively lunch discussion about the results of ebrary's and Cleveland State University's "Global E-book Survey." It basically compares the 2008 and 2011 trends and perceptions on ebooks by students. We got a sneek peak into the results which would be made public on the ALA Midwinter meeting in January 2012. I plan on presenting the results of the survey to the library staff possibly during our Department meeting because I think the results will give us an insight into students' perceptions and attitudes towards ebooks.

I attended the session called "If You Buy It, Will They Read It" which is about the experience of the University of Utah Libraries in evaluating the purchasing patterns of their subject librarians. In particular, they examined the firm orders made by their selectors over 3 years (2009-2011) and compared the use statistics of the books they selected in print and electronic formats. The patterns they discovered provided me with an inspiration to go beyond the review I have started and drill more into the specifics by subjects.

I also attended the session called "Launching and ePreferred Approval Plan" which is a joint presentation by the Head of Collections and Acquisitions at Duke University and YBP. Duke University librarians talked about how they implemented an e-book only approval plan from their print approval plan at YBP. They talked about the challenges and success they achieved from implementing such a plan. I was already thinking of this anyway with my recent meeting with YBP and it just gave me the pus to try and pilot it in the Library.

Lastly, I attended a presentation from Doug Way and Julie Garrison from GVSU and Rick Lugg from Sutainable Collection Services about "Implementing a Disapproval Plan: A Case Study of Rules-Based Weeding." This is so interesting because this company is the first to develop a data driven deselection system for libraries. It is pretty much like an approval plan where you set the parameters for acquiring new books except it is the opposite because they created a set of rules for weeding their collection "scientifically." It is very inspiring and revolutionary, one that I hope to be able to do when we do our weeding next year.

Finally, we capped the day with the Firday night dine arounds. We RSVP'd way in advance for restaurants we want to go to dinner. And then the organizers put all those people who chose the same restaurants so we can have dinner together. Our group was a diverse mix of people and it was fun to just talk to each other and at the same time enjoy the good food that we were served.