This has been a year of change and learning for the Library Committee
and for the libraries at the University (the General Libraries was
renamed University of Texas Libraries).
||Standing Committee Changes
At the beginning of the 2004-05 academic year, the name of this committee,
its function statement, and its composition statement were as they had been
for many years:
||C-7 Library Committee
FUNCTION: To be so well informed concerning the functions of the Library that
it can assist in developing operational procedures; to assist in development
of both personnel and fiscal policies and procedures; to advise the Faculty Council
and the president concerning the direction and growth of the Library; to advise
the president in the event it becomes necessary to appoint a new librarian.
COMPOSITION: At least eight members of the General Faculty and seven students.
Student members shall be appointed by the president in the fall from panels of
names submitted by the appropriate student committees and shall include two representatives
from Student Government, three from the Cabinet of College Councils, and two
from the Graduate Student Assembly. In addition, every year the chair of the
Faculty Council shall appoint two members of the Faculty Council for one-year
terms as members of the committee. The committee shall elect its own chair and
vice chair, who shall be members of the General Faculty. The director of General
Libraries shall serve as administrative adviser without vote. Heads of other
administrative units on campus that include library programs and services shall
be invited to provide comment and information as the need arises.
At the end of the 2004-05 academic year, upon the recommendation of the Library
Committee chair to the Committee on Committees, the name of this committee, its
function statement, and it composition statement (approved by the Faculty Council,
pending President Larry R. Faulkner's final approval) are:
University of Texas Libraries Committee
FUNCTION: To become well informed concerning the functions of the University
of Texas Libraries. To assist in developing operational procedures; to advise
the librarian, the Faculty Council and the president concerning the direction
and growth of the University of Texas Libraries; to advise the president in the
event it becomes necessary to appoint a new librarian.
COMPOSITION: At least eight members of the General Faculty, three staff members,
and seven students. Staff members shall be appointed by the president from panels
of names submitted by the Staff Council and shall include two research staff
representatives. Student members shall be appointed by the president in the fall
from panels of names submitted by the appropriate student committees and shall
include two representatives from Student Government, three from the Cabinet of
College Councils, and two from the Graduate Student Assembly. In addition, every
year the chair of the Faculty Council shall appoint two members of the Faculty
Council for one-year terms as members of the committee. The committee shall elect
its own chair and vice chair, who shall be members of the General Faculty. The
director of the University of Texas Libraries shall serve as administrative adviser
without vote. Heads of other administrative units on campus that include library
programs and services shall be invited to provide comment and information as
the need arises.
||Committee Meetings and Other Activities
The year of learning for Library Committee members and for University of Texas
Libraries administrators is summarized in the following information about meetings
The following summarizes salient points that were covered in meetings of the
Library Committee during the 2004-2005 academic year. Minutes for each meeting
are posted at the University Library Committee Web site <http://www.lib.utexas.edu/vprovost/meetings/ulc_index.html>,
and some of the minutes contain links to PowerPoint files and other documents
September 7 Meeting (PCL 3.204)
Professor Thomas G. Palaima convened the meeting and Professor Kenneth M. Ralls
was elected chair. The chair distributed various handouts: copies of the FUNCTION
and COMPOSITION of the Library Committee, as given in the Faculty Council Web
page; past committee annual reports and other reports to the Faculty Council;
and a list of items that he would like to see considered at future committee
meetings. (See the minutes posted on the University Library Committee Web site
for a complete list.) Electronic versions were sent to Dr. John M. Slatin, who
subsequently informed the chair that he was able to access the electronic documents.
Additional handouts were distributed at the second meeting .
September 14 Meeting (PCL 3.204)
The chair distributed additional handouts (see the minutes posted on the University
Library Committee Web site for a complete list).
Dr. Fred Heath, vice provost and director, University of Texas Libraries, gave
an overview of University of Texas Libraries—rankings relative to other
members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), expenditures and budget,
and need for an integrated library system (ILS). One goal is to add $5M per year
to University of Texas Libraries base budget for the next four years, in order
to cover the structural deficit, materials inflation, staffing needs, IT lifecycle
(e.g., workstation replacement), program enhancements, and an Integrated Library
System. Dr. Heath's PowerPoint presentation is accessible through the University
Library Committee Web site.
WE ARE THE ONLY MAJOR RESEARCH LIBRARY IN THE USA AND CANADA THAT DOES
NOT HAVE AN INTEGRATED LIBRARY SYSTEM. A new ILS will cost about $4M.
Of this, $3.5M needs to come from the University (and there will be recurring
maintenance costs). Current computer systems used by University of Texas Libraries
are limited in capability, do not "talk" to each other, and are outmoded.
The current computer hardware used consists of several servers.
October 8 Meeting (PCL 3.204)
Mark McFarland, associate director for digital initiatives, University of Texas
Libraries, presented reasons why an integrated library system is needed, the
scope and process for such a purchase, what a prospective ILS does for users,
and how the acquisition of an ILS would affect the library's services and operations.
He repeated the presentation on October 26 for those who missed the October 8
meeting. Selected points in the presentation follow.
| What is an Integrated Library System?
|| An automated information management system in which the functional applications
(modules) share a common database
|| Ideally there is minimal or no duplication of bibliographic information
in a truly integrated system
|Why we need an ILS
||Improve service for faculty, students, staff
||Improve efficiency with respect to process workflow
|| So that we can deploy modern systems that comply with important standards
that facilitate access to library resources
|| ALL of our peers have purchased modern systems and we are unable to
share information/resources as efficiently as we should be
|| Increase our chances of finding staff who have the skills to operate
and maintain our mission critical systems
| With new ILS
|| Modules designed and written to work with common database
|| Software will run on common hardware platform—gain efficiencies
in administration of hardware and software
||Can take advantage of new technology—linking software and federated research
||Better reporting tools for managing money and collections
|Limitations of current systems
||At least 6 separate databases
||At least 4 separate hardware platforms
|| At least 4 Operating Systems
|| Unable to use important technology that has been emerging for the past
| What our current system isn't
|| It is not compliant with dozens of basic and emerging NISO standards
for automated library systems
|| It is not easily interoperable with course management software (e.g.,
||It is not readily interoperable with Institutional Repository technology
||None of our systems currently handle bibliographic information for e-books and
||In many cases we have 4 sets of bibliographic data for the same title – this
level of duplication makes it impossible to efficiently manage our materials
Subsequent to the meeting, Mark McFarland prepared a "Glossary of terms
used in the ILS presentation."
| To sum it up
|| We will get more functionality
|| Be able to take advantage of new technologies
||Need interoperability locally and with our peers
||We believe this will bring down maintenance costs
||This will enable us to achieve efficiencies within the systems themselves that
will result in better service for our users
October 29-November 2
"Behind-the-scenes" tours of Perry-Castañeda Library were
taken by small groups of Library Committee members. These thirty minute tours
gave an overview of cataloging, acquisitions, preservation, and digital library
This must become a required event for University of Texas Libraries Committee
members early in the fall semester each year
November 15 Meeting (PCL 3.204)
Sue Phillips, executive associate director, University of Texas Libraries,
provided a demonstration on the utility of an integrated library system for
She started with a look at the UT Libraries Web site, asking: (1) How
easy is it for an undergraduate to use the site? (2) Does the student know
where to start to find resources? (3) Is there a place to store links to information
that they find?
She then provided a look at the research port at the University of Maryland,
showing: (1) it offers a quick search option (just enter search terms and go);
(2) it will search a set of selected resources (databases, catalogs, etc) with
one click; (3) its search process puts up a status page indicating results
of the search in each database, etc. (successful link, connection failure,
number of results); and (4) its users can save an article to disk, send it
via e-mail, or add it to their personalized research port. Users can create
their own personalized research port that lists sets of databases and e-journals
that they regularly search, and stores citations and links to information that
they find through their Port.
Dennis Dillon, associate director for research services, University of Texas
Libraries, distributed a handout that summarized the benefits of an integrated
library system for University of Texas Libraries and the negative consequences
of not acquiring an ILS. The information is summarized in the following.
An Integrated Library System will allow the library (taken from Dennis Dillon’s
handout): (1) to provide faculty and students with a larger universe of scholarly
information; (2) to provide faculty and students
with more control over that information; (3) to deliver information in more
sophisticated ways; (4) to simplify your life and to save you time; (5) to
work more easily with publishers, universities, and database suppliers; and
(6) to achieve operating efficiencies. (More detail is provided on the actual
handout.) He also noted that a modern integrated library system would help
with new digital library activities as well as traditional library activities.
Moreover it will help library staff in a number of ways.
If the library does not purchase a new Integrated Library System,
faculty and students (continued from Dennis Dillon’s handout): (1)
will not have access to the information tools available to the rest of higher
education; (2) will have access to a smaller universe of information; (3)
will spend more time doing research; (4) will use search technology that
misses research material and is less effective than at peer institutions;
(5) will have access to fewer e-journals; (6) will spend more time tracking
down printed journals; (7) will not be competitive with their peers at other
institutions who have access to modern information systems; (8) will find
an increasing amount of frustrating errors in the existing library system;
and (9) will see a reduction in library services. (As before, more detail
is provided in the actual, attached handout.)
The issue of students using Google searches was discussed.
Prior to Sue Phillips's presentation, Chair Kenneth M. Ralls had distributed
a business card created by the staff of the McKinney Engineering Library. The
reverse of this card reads:
| Reference Librarians can help with
|| Efficient information gathering
|| Industry standards (ASTM, IEEE, etc.)
|| Finding specific information
|| References and citations
| WHEN GOOGLING ISN'T ENOUGH
December 14 Meeting (DFA 4.104)
This meeting was in the Fine Arts Library in Doty Fine Arts Building.
This was the first time ever that a Library Committee meeting was held
at a branch library.
Laura Schwartz, head librarian, Fine Arts Library, gave a PowerPoint presentation
titled "The Future of the Fine Arts Library: a collaborative exploration." The
presentation included extensive data about the Fine Arts Library and culminated
with future plans for the Fine Arts Library integrated learning environment that
is being developed in cooperation with the College of Fine Arts. Selected points
are given below.
The Doty Fine Arts Building will be…
|| The student gathering center on the east side of campus
|| An environment for studying, learning, and teaching
|| Nourishment for the brain and stomach
How do we get there???
||Transformation of the Fine Arts Library space into a learning center environment
|| Gathering data from our constituents
|| Site visits to other libraries and learning spaces
||Transformation of the basement space into a facility with refreshments and a
comfortable and inviting place to gather
Transformation from Library to Learning Center
||Investigating new technologies
|| Writing Center
Ms. Schwartz discussed the present state and future plans for seminar rooms,
media center, investigating new technologies, writing center, and facilities/furniture.
Funding for upgrading the technology in the library’s seminar rooms (LCD
projectors, smart lecterns, etc.) and building a media center (an integration
of the library and the Fines Arts computer lab) comes mainly from the College
of Fine Arts.
Jim Kerkhoff, assistant dean, College of Fine Arts, spoke in strong support of
the collaboration between the College and the Fine Arts Library. Tours of the
Fine Arts Library were given.
January 25 Meeting (MAI 220)
This meeting was held at the Life Science Library in the Main Building.
Nancy Elder, head librarian, Life Science Library, provided an overview of
EndNote software. She regularly gives EndNote tutorials for faculty and students.
EndNote is database software used to create and output bibliographic references
and includes templates for more than forty types of materials. EndNote is the
most heavily used bibliographic program on campus. EndNote can output its information
in 1,200 bibliographic styles, styles can be modified as needed, and a database
may contain 100,000 records.
UT Press director Joanna Hitchcock and Dennis Dillon spoke to the committee regarding
the recent symposium on publishing and the academy, which was held on campus.
A very lively general discussion followed. The Library Committee chair
recommended covering the topics of scholarly publishing and open access again
at a committee meeting next year. A brief tour of the Life Science Library
February 21 Meeting (ECJ 1.300)
This meeting was in the Alec Room of the engineering library in Cockrell Hall.
Chair Kenneth M. Ralls introduced Ben Streetman, dean, College of Engineering,
who noted that research costing in excess of $100 million annually is being done
in the College of Engineering and that the engineering library is at the heart
of research and teaching in the college and is important to undergraduates,
graduate students, faculty and other researchers. He emphasized that students,
faculty and other researchers rely on professional, reference librarians to help
get their work done and to know what their research is all about. He stated
that he is intrigued with the notion of a single science/technology library for
Susan Ardis, head librarian, McKinney Engineering Library (and head, Engineering & Science
Libraries Division) distributed photocopies of a seven page PowerPoint presentation
she prepared for the committee: "What if there were one science library
instead of five"? The Chemistry, Engineering, Geology, Life Science
and Physics-Math-Astronomy (PMA) libraries are generally running out of space
for new books and journals, cramped for work space and student seating, and
serving large clienteles as best they are able given their various limitations,
including service hours. Also, the older building spaces they occupy are not
ADA-compliant, nor easily altered. Advantages and disadvantages of a single
science/technology library were presented.
A single science/technology library would require building space of perhaps
80,000 square feet, and could provide better service to users as well as study,
classroom, and meeting space. Places are available but would require other
buildings to be razed: the Service Building on 24th Street and the Van de Graaff
Tower between Engineering-Science Building on Cockrell Hall are two possible
Professor Charles Radin proposed a topic for an upcoming meeting: “What
is Google doing?” He noted the recent initiative by Google to
scan large libraries. A brief tour of the engineering library was given.
March 31 Meeting (GEB 3.312)
This meeting was in the Gebauer Building 3rd Floor Dean's Conference Room,
College of Liberal Arts, because Welch Hall does not a conference room.
David Flaxbart, head librarian, Mallet Chemistry Library, gave a PowerPoint
presentation on the evolving use of the chemistry library on campus and its
comparative ranking among its national peer libraries. There is decreasing
use of the physical collection and the increasing use of the digital collection.
Other issues include the decreasing number of publishers and the increasing
prices of monographs and serials, new and developing niches within the literature,
and the increasing need for medical literature on campus.
David Flaxbart's presentation included a collaborative project between the chemistry
library and the chemistry department titled the Academic Genealogy of Chemistry
Faculty, located at <http://www.lib.utexas.edu/chem./genealogy/>.
The Google digitizing project vis-à-vis non-English-speaking countries
was discussed briefly.
April 21 Special Meeting (PCL 3.204)
Fred Heath introduced his distinguished colleague, Sarah Thomas, the Carl A.
Kroch University Librarian at Cornell University. Her abridged PowerPoint slide
presentation with running commentary to the committee was titled, The
Library as Intellectual and Social Crossroads. Dr. Thomas talked
about trends affecting library buildings and surveyed various illustrative strategies
on different college and university campuses across the country with regard to
library spaces, their user communities, books, and library staff.
April 21 Meeting (GEO 4.102)
This meeting was in the Barrow Family Conference Room in the geology building.
Dennis Trombatore, head librarian, Walter Geology Library, talked about how
he tries to emphasize the model of "clinical librarianship" to build
both the collection and to market its utility to researchers – grad students,
faculty, and regular community users – by focusing on their research
and topical interests and adding value to the information stream by selecting
and filtering for them based on his knowledge of their teaching, reading, and
research interests. He also discussed the responsibilities of having major
endowment funding and how he views this in terms of regional and national collections.
The endowment income (~$30k to $50k per year) is most helpful in building collections.
Dr. Denise Apperson, associate chairman, Department of Geological Sciences,
commented on how important the geology library is to its many constituents,
including researchers on campus and at the Pickle Research Campus, graduate
students and undergraduates majoring in geological sciences, and undergraduates
who take geology service courses. Brief tours of the geology library were given.
This was the final Library Committee meeting of 2004-05.
Library Committee membership for 2004-05 is at <http://www.utexas.edu/faculty/council/2004-2005/standcom/C-7.html> or
The committee chair thanks Jocelyn S. Duffy, assistant to the vice provost
and director, University of Texas Libraries, for taking minutes at each meeting,
organizing the meeting times, sending meeting notices to committee members,
procuring lunch, and much, much more.
Kenneth M. Ralls, chair