Reorganization, Collection/Summary Statistics, webmastering, and NASIG…
LLC (Library Leadership Council) continued to brainstorm reorganization at its meeting this week. We discussed functions – the things we do to meet our users’ need — and used the sticky note method to describe all the processes that go into acquiring and disseminating information. We will meet again next week to carry the discussion forward. Like most members of this body, I don’t want to be talking about this 6 months from now! Let’s get on with it!
I completed my work compiling the collection/summary statistics for FY08 and responded to the first request for that information this year from Planning & Analysis for the University Fact Book. I convinced the folks in that office that their reporting categories were a bit dated–there was no reflection of e-resources–and wouldn’t it be nice if someone looked at the Fact Book and the Libraries’ website that the information would be presented consistently? woo-hoo! They agreed! Those numbers should be available on the Libraries’ website in the not-too-distant future.
I think I mentioned the work that went into the stats gathering this year in previous posts. We reviewed all the access queries again and two of my tech-smart catalogers also experimented with VRS (Voyager Reporting System) from U of GA to determine if we could pull the numbers we needed. Alas, only a few of the very general categories of information are retrievable via VRS.
We made a decision to stop reporting old manual counts dating back 9-10 years (or more) of non-print materials because many of those numbers are unreliable. We have been retroconning those items but system limitations and/or our own lack of technical resources, i.e., people, prevented us from separating new items from those being retrocon’d. So… effective with our FY08 stats, we have chosen to report only items (or pieces for you cataloging types) linked in the catalog. That makes it appear that our microforms and government publications took a big dip and we’ve left previous fiscal years’ numbers marked u/a (unavailable) or n/a (not available). One positive result has been that the collection numbers we display to the public are much more ‘people friendly’. We hope that the average reader will have a better understanding of what we report out! We’ll have to assess that assumption now, won’t we?
I worked on new web pages for KLA’s Technical Services Round Table. There are some display issues with Firefox so the pages aren’t quite ready for primetime. My KLA contact is talking to the vendor about that, and in the meantime, I’d like to do some more work on the navigation menu. I’ve made some suggestions to the RT members about content. Hopefully they will provide feedback on the webpages and I’ll have time for more tinkering next week.
NASIG is hopping. The Board had a conference call this week. We reviewed our strategic objectives and decided we were right on target for the goals we’ve set ourselves. We talked about a number of initiatives that are underway, including revision of the membership brochure, the needs-based award we are setting up for 2009, collaborative opportunities, site selection for 2010, and more. Watch the Newsletter for the minutes of that meeting!
Nominations & Elections contacted individuals nominated for offices and divvied up the last batch of names to talk to. (As past prez, I am the liaison to the committee.) Profiles of those who have already accepted the opportunity to move forward are due in the next couple of weeks. N&E will contact references then winnow down the list. Several months ago the Board asked the committee to determine if we could move to a more open election process, i.e., less committee vetting, for member-at-large positions. As an article in the Newsletter reports, the committee and the Board both had concerns about the number of candidate statements & resumes members would have to review on the ballot. (Have you seen ALA’s ballot?! agh!) Granted NASIG is no where near the size of ALA, but is that extra burden worth it? Would members take the extra time to review qualifications? Or are elections just a popularity contest?
Mary B. and I worked on the NASIG Unconference website this week, too, soliciting feedback from the CEC (Continuing Education Committee). We also set up the registration page. The Unconference committee & CEC will be testing registration in December. Watch for e-mails, articles, blog posts, and more about this first regional NASIG Unconference.The NASIG Board is determined to find more ways to provide continuing education for its members beyond the annual conference. Given today’s economic climate, we are exploring regional events and webinars. Keep your eyes on us!
Communication about NASIG org sponsorships are steady. I sent out reminders to potential sponsors, responded to a number of queries to provide more information and updated the wiki that my two conference planning sponsors liaisons have set up to ensure that we keep track of all the paperwork! I submitted a short ‘thank-you’ article in the Newsletter, too.
Oh… I ended the work week by leaving my mentee stranded at a coffee shop in Aggieville. I’d been on the phone encouraging a NASIG member to put her name forward for VP consideration, and lost track of the time. Fortunately, D. called me about 20 minutes after our meeting was supposed to begin and I closed down the computer and rushed out the door, arriving about 35 minutes late. I’m bad…