University Library Council
December 12, 2008
12:30 – 2:00 p.m.
Dean’s Conference Room
MINUTES
Present: Martha Nell Smith (chair), Trudi Hahn, Oliver Kim, Doug McElrath, Phyllis Peres, Ioanna Stoica, Jane Williams, Kurt Finsterbusch, Elise Miller-Hooks, Ray Weil, James Baeder
Absent: Avis Cohen, Heather Nathans, John Newhagen, Bernard Cooperman (Fall sabbatical)
Meeting with Council: Interim Dean Desider Vikor
Guest: Sue Baughman
Informal meeting called to order at 12:40 p.m. Quorum was not established until Finsterbusch and Miller-Hooks arrived.
Topic: Update on Dean’s Search
Baughman said that the committee has had regular meetings to work on the job announcement for publication in the Chronicle and other suitable forums. Chair James F. Harris (Dean of the College of Arts and Humanities) has made many phone calls to solicit applications. Peres added that the Provost’s office has sent out over 200 letters and made many phone calls to drum up interest in the position. Shortly after the print ad appeared, the announcement was sent to listservs in the library community. Applications are trickling in; nevertheless, the committee hopes to have a short list soon and start bringing candidates to campus in early spring. Smith said she will remind Harris to give Council some face-to-face time with candidates.
Topic: Update on Blue Ribbon Report
Smith said the report has been submitted to the Provost but has not been made public. The Provost is seeking outside reviewers to examine it, then pieces of the report may be released. McElrath asked if outside reviewers would be able to meet with Council. Peres said it was too early to say yet. Hahn reminded that Council had recommended task force members make field visits to other libraries. Peres said that the task force had not done so.
Topic: Serials Review – Elsevier’s Freedom List
- Cohen had submitted concerns that many major journals were not included in the list, but Council determined that the journals are in fact included.
- Several councilors then made assessments and an in-depth discussion ensued. The Elsevier agreement is close to being signed, so Baughman debriefed the Council on the two sessions held with faculty (dept. heads and liaisons) and on the new plans for serial review procedures. The first session was sparsely attended, the second attracted nearly 30 faculty. Others who could not make the meeting requested information be made available afterwards. In both sessions, faculty members made good suggestions that will be considered, including how to communicate more effectively with the Libraries, especially regarding serials acquisition. In the second session, there was a lively dialogue among faculty present. Though already aware that the Libraries are in crisis, faculty were nevertheless shocked (as Hahn noted), especially some scientists, to discover the magnitude of the problem and what a small proportion of DRIF funds, not pegged to inflation, the Libraries receive. This was an opportunity to share the process of serial review, get feedback, and send faculty back to their departments with the message that the Libraries are in crisis.
Peres offered to ask the VP for Research about DRIF allocations, specifically what and how much is apportioned to the Libraries.
Vikor said the Provost was supportive of the revised model for serials but wanted to see how the number and recissions play out by department. The Provost also made a commitment not to cut the acquisitions budget this fiscal year, but did not make an absolute commitment for next year.
- Finsterbusch wondered about the possibility of collective bargaining and inquired whether we are holding publishers to account, asking them to justify the huge increases they demand each year. He asserted that if universities acted together to bargain, rather than just accepting increases as the way things have to be, serials cost might be significantly reduced.
Vikor said it is hard to get intelligible data from publishers. Some journals have a standard subscription fee, others depend on the FTE count at an institution. One can ask publishers a simple question but what comes back as a response sometimes defies comprehension.
Peres said this issue has not received the attention in higher education and government circles that others have, such as the high cost of textbooks for undergraduates. Libraries need to educate their customers that the publishers are not transparent in their transactions. Finsterbusch suggested working out the increases as a per student increase in cost.
- A more general discussion of the crisis situation between university libraries and journal publishers was deferred to a future meeting. An announcement of the UM Libraries’ multi-year agreement with Elsevier will soon be forthcoming.
Topic: Spring Meetings
Smith will aim for the first meeting of the spring semester in late January, hoping that Council will have been informed about the Blue Ribbon task force by then.
New business will stress that a topnotch university needs a first-rate library. Council must advocate for excellence that is supported by the institution, continuing the work from last year’s Council.
McElrath asked Council to investigate the effect of cuts on the non-acquisitions side of the Libraries and whether that will affect the ability of the Libraries to function at all. Smith asked for recommendations on how to advocate for the Libraries, as staff are all-important for library services.
Topic: Minutes of Meeting 11/11/08
The minutes were approved without amendment, and the meeting adjourned at 1:58 p.m.
