|| Library Committee
The Library Committee (LC) serves a number of functions, especially
to advise the president of the University, the director of the General
Libraries, and the Faculty Council about library finances, services,
collections, policies, and procedures. There are eight members of
the General Faculty and seven students (undergraduate and graduate)
on the committee, which is advised by the director of the General
Libraries as well as other senior administrative library staff members.
The LC met seven times in the fall and spring semesters. We also had
many face-to-face subcommittee meetings and substantial online discussions.
Among the major topics discussed were the materials budgets for the
General Libraries, the use of students' library fees, the implications
of raising UT staff salaries for library expenditures, plans for moving
Information Technology Services and their sharing a number of spa
ces with the General Libraries, and the General Libraries' digital
The bulk of the committee's work this year, however, has been related
to the examination of the General Libraries' consortial arrangements.
This topic was given as a formal charge to the committee by the Faculty
Council in the fall 2001 semester and was also recommended to the
committee by last year's com mittee and by the previous chair of the
committee, who has remained a member.
We appointed a subcommittee consisting of two faculty members, a Faculty
Council representative, and a graduate student, advised by senior
library administrators, to take on tasks posed by the Faculty Council:
The subcommittee also examined other facets of the
General Libraries' consortial arrangements as they emerged in our
||to compare UT's consortial arrangements with
those of our peer institutions;
||to provide any salient recommendations for
changes in current UT policies based on our findings;
||to address explicitly how faculty members are
involved in purchasing scholarly material in consortia;
||to determine what effects, if any, consortial
memberships have had on the quality of the General Libraries'
||to report to the March 18, 2002, meeting of
the Faculty Council about our findings.
The LC as a whole unanimously supported the subcommittee's interim
report, and, in the formal report given to the Faculty Council on
March 18, 2002 (see the D 1780-1788),
we summarized our findings by noting that:
The formal report expands on these and other elements
of the subcommittee's study.
||There have been no negative effects from consortial
arrangements on the ability of faculty members to recommend
and secure purchases of library materials.
|| In fact, consortia have allowed the UT System
to secure access to $32M worth of materials for an investment
|| Further, we have been able to renew previously
cancelled serials because of the additional monies made available
through consortial agreements.
||UT's consortial arrangements are regarded as
exemplars by our peer and other institutions around the country.
||The Library Committee recommends that, like
our peer institutions, the UT System should develop a centralized
funding mechanism for consortial materials.
Another subcommittee, with faculty and student members and advised
by senior library administrators, made two major recommendations.
The LC unanimously supported these recommendations and notified the
library administration of this support:
In the course of our discussions this year, we identified
topics that next year's LC should consider, and we ask that the Faculty
Council charge the LC with doing so:
|| Undergraduates should be allowed to circulate
all "regular" General Libraries materials for 28 days,
rather than the current 14.
||The libraries must also work with the Office
of the Dean of Students to help improve publicity about the
new loan periods and recall and hold services.
||Long-term archiving of digital dissertations.
This year's committee expressed the clear consensus that the
LC, perhaps in conjunction with the graduate school, the Faculty
Council, and the General Libraries senior and technical staff,
must play an active role in considering the training of faculty
supervisors and doctoral candidates in the creation of digital
dissertations. Such dissertations must adhere to evolving standards
for digital assets and must be accessible in the long term.
Without such training, the value of digital dissertations and
the contribution of scholarship to UT Austin will be severely
||Circulating bound journals. Graduate students,
in particular, as well as other constituents at UT Austin, want
this question examined systematically.
This document was posted on the Faculty Council Web site, www.utexas.edu/faculty/council/
on July 29, 2002. Paper copies are available on request from the Office
of the General Faculty, FAC 22, F9500.