The Agenda - Faculty and Staff Newsletter

Tag: Krisellen Maloney

  • We Are Not Alone – Thoughts on the BTAA Meeting

    We Are Not Alone – Thoughts on the BTAA Meeting

    I know that we spend a lot of time focused on building infrastructure. Our top priorities involve undergraduate success and strengthening information control to ensure that our users have efficient, reliable access to information resources.

    I just got back from a Big10 meeting at Purdue. At the meeting, we reviewed the results of a survey of the BTAA library directors’ top priorities for future collaborative activities. Each director picked three areas of interest. The results:

    • Collection Management 54%
    • Student Success Measures 46%
    • OER 46%
    • Data Management/Curation 38%
    • Analytics/Assessment 38%
    • Open Access 15%

    The remaining four items: Special Collections, Professional Development, Digital Humanities, and Library Publishing all were 8%.

    In another part of the survey, the directors listed the most important BTAA initiatives as Discovery to Delivery, Collections Infrastructure and Management, and Student Success.

    Although these priorities and initiatives do not represent the most important work of the libraries, the selections do say something about initiatives that are most effective when done ‘at scale’ with the broader community. As I listened to my colleagues share their experiences and challenges, it struck me that we are not the only research library that is focusing on basics.

    In a meeting back here at Rutgers, Judy Cohn brought up the NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Library Edition. This report from the New Media Consortium looks at trends in libraries, technology, and education to imagine what is on the five-year horizon for academic and research libraries. It is produced in collaboration with University of Applied Sciences (HTW) Chur, Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB), ETH Library, and the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL). It identifies trends, challenges, and developments in technology that will impact how libraries plan to meet the needs of their users, how we function day to day and year to year, and the services that will be in highest demand. The first of the top 10 highlights listed was:

    Libraries remain the gatekeepers to rich tapestries of information and knowledge. As the volume of we resources increases, libraries are charged with finding new ways to organize and disseminate research to make it easier to discover, digest, and track.

    It was surprised to see that improving ‘information control’ was featured so prominently in the report. It seems that academic and research libraries have a renewed focus on the fundamentals and are redesigning infrastructure so that it better meets the changes in the environment. I know there are times when we feel like we are behind; however, it appears that we are actually in sync with many of our peers.

    Over the next week, we will have meetings with Office of Information Technology and the Office of Research and Economic Development to discuss potential collaboration on research and digital humanities infrastructure. This will move us closer to another one of our priorities: identifying and communicating our role in the broader research environment of Rutgers. We are making progress!

    While we are moving fast, our activities continue to be guided by the expertise and research of our colleagues. There are several examples of this that come to mind, all with librarywide participation. The Discovery Working Group has offered a model of how to harness data and best practices to make impactful changes in how our users discover and access collections via our website. Their work continues to propel us forward, even as the Ex Libris Implementation Team works to create nimble and knowledgeable teams to accommodate the anticipated workload over the next 7 months. And the Website Improvement Team is rolling out an impressive, incremental website refresh derived from extensive user research and analytics. The work that we are doing now will pay off in the coming years with flexible and easy to manage systems. It is my hope that these changes will make it easier for you to do the important work that you do.

    As we move into the holiday season, I would like to thank you for your dedication and patience. It has been a difficult few years of change in response to the new environment, but, thanks to your efforts, these challenges continue to be met with creativity, hard work, and shared purpose. Your dedication to Rutgers, our students, and our faculty is impressive and collectively, we are creating libraries—digital and physical—that encourage learning and exploration and support to the success of our users. I am very grateful to count you all as my colleagues and I wish you and your families the happiest of holidays and all the best for the New Year!

    Save

    Save

  • How Do We Handle New Requests in the Planning Process?

    How Do We Handle New Requests in the Planning Process?

    As busy as we all are, sometimes it can be difficult to see the tremendous progress we’ve made in the last couple of years—particularly with something as diffuse as the priorities planning process. Our most recent cabinet meeting provides a snapshot of how far we’ve come.

    As indicated in cabinet minutes, earlier this year cabinet produced a set of priorities to guide our activities over the next 18 months or so. These priorities have specific projects in mind and reflect the capacity of our central units. This planning document is intended to be the scaffolding for our collective work and, by definition, we must work within its bounds. While this may sound limiting—“We only do what’s on the list!”—when it is working well, the opposite is true. A good plan enables us to take advantage of unexpected opportunities as they arise. And in recent weeks, four such opportunities have been brought to the Libraries.

    These requests are for activities that are not currently part of our plan and must be weighed against our existing commitments. Our recent discussion at Cabinet illustrates the give and take negotiations that must take place when we consider new projects or services.

    Our shared list of priorities forms the foundation of purposeful discussions about tradeoffs and how best to shift priorities to new opportunities. For example, we have been asked to create space for a new OIT Lab in Alexander Library and to provide dedicated health sciences library services at LSM. Both of these requests stem from strategic initiatives within the university. We have also been approached about integrating ORCID into our journal platform and providing ETD support for honors undergraduate theses. Each of these is a reasonable request, but they require time and effort from the same central units that support our existing weeding projects, the implementation of ExLibris, and the development of digital projects templates, among other items identified through the planning process.

    Cabinet considered the source of the requests; the anticipated benefit to local users; staffing and capacity in the central Libraries units; the amount of development vs. coordination required; and more, before deciding which opportunities to pursue. The outcomes, communicated in the minutes, are to move forward with adding ORCID iDs to the Open Journal System workflow and to shift weeding priorities to accommodate the deadlines for the Alexander OIT Lab and the LSM renovations. We also decided to hold off on the development of honors ETDs process.

    This is not because including honors theses in RUCore is a bad idea—we simply don’t have capacity this year and we have other priorities to complete. But this is where the planning process kicks in. A local need has been identified, and while we don’t have capacity to follow through this year, the proposal will be moved forward to next year’s planning process for consideration.

    No doubt, there will be additional requests from the university and additional local needs identified throughout the year. In fact, I would argue that the level of attention we are receiving from the university is an indicator of the important role of the Libraries on campus. We are viewed as strong partners and collaborators, our spaces are appreciated student resources, and our services are recognized as key to student success.

    Thankfully, we now have a planning model that allows us to assess these opportunities in objective, realistic, and equitable ways that balance the needs of Camden, Newark, New Brunswick, and RBHS. We must continue to take on high priority projects for the university, but we must also make sure we have the capacity, technology, and resources to succeed. The only thing worse than saying “not now,” is saying “yes,” and not completing the task. These types of discussions are much easier to have when we have a shared understanding of priorities and capacity.

  • The Budget Process and Library Impact on Student Outcomes

    With the last of the Welcome Days events now completed and the start of the fall semester fully complete, it is time to turn our attention to another annual tradition: the preparation of our annual budget request.

    Each year, we are asked to put together a budget request for the following fiscal year, so this October we are in the process of requesting budgets for 2018–2019. The budget process has changed quite a bit in the last few years. Historically, budgets were distributed through the ‘all funds’ budget process in which the ‘administration’ made decisions about how best to allocate resources. The process was not transparent, and in the last few years of the all funds process, the Libraries did not fare well.

    The shift to the RCM model may have been turbulent, but the result is a much more transparent budget process and a way for us to request needed funds. In fact, anyone can view a lot of detail related to the sources of allocations to cost centers (including the Libraries) at budget.rutgers.edu. In addition to being more transparent, RCM has moved decision-making from ‘administration’ to the chancellors and the chancellors are now in the process of engaging the deans.  This means that more of the budget decisions are being made by people who use our resources and services.

    I have now participated in two budget requests through the RCM process with some success (see reports on FY2017 and FY2018 requests). It is clear that the chancellors face difficult decisions in allocating funds because of competing factors, including other cost centers such as Student Affairs and Facilities and internal needs such as new faculty and startup packages.

    During this process, the Libraries are asked to provide a description of our services. We routinely include figures that demonstrate our impact on students or the use of our resources (such as the estimated savings of the OAT Program, the use of resources, or the cost per use for journal articles), so we know it is helpful to have strong evidence that Libraries make a difference. However, because of the complexity of the educational environment, it has been difficult to measure the impact that libraries have on student success.

    That is what makes this news out of the University of Minnesota so exciting.

    The Impact of Academic Library Resources on Undergraduates’ Degree Completion: https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.6.812

    A large, rigorous study by the University of Minnesota—“The Impact of Academic Library Resources on Undergraduates’ Degree Completion”—assessed whether first-year students who used the library at least once during their first year were more likely to graduate or continue to be enrolled in four years (indicating progress towards degree completion).

    The survey followed the 2011 entering class of 5,368 students, controlling for factors related to differences in students, including first-generation, socioeconomic status, participation in support programs for underrepresented students, on-campus vs. off-campus housing, SAT scores, AP courses taken, and enrolled college.

    They analyzed the students’ records to determine if they had used at least one of five major library services—borrowing books (including interlibrary loan and ebooks), using electronic resources, using a computer workstation, enrolling in library instruction, or asking a reference question—in their first academic year

    The results indicate that, overall, first-year students who used any of the library services at least once during their first year of enrollment were nearly 40% more likely to be enrolled in four years or 44% more likely to have graduated in four years than peers who did not use any library resources.

    Further analysis of the individual services showed that first-year students who used:

    • electronic resources at least once in their first year, were 45% more likely to continue to be enrolled and nearly twice as likely to graduate;
    • books at least once in their first year, were 34% more likely to graduate in four years; or,
    • instruction, either by enrolling for a class or having library instruction embedded in classes, were 40% more likely to continue to be enrolled after four years.

    There was no significant relationship with the use of workstations, reinforcing the fact that workstations are simply a tool. There was also no significant relationship with the use of reference services (including chat), perhaps because a very low number of students—only 5%—used this service.

    This survey is a tremendous accomplishment and is directly relevant to our work, in part because of the parallels between Rutgers and the University of Minnesota.  Like us, UMN is a large public land-grant institution and member of the Big10. I hope you will take time to read the report and think about how its findings might be useful to what we do and how we do it. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.

    These findings couldn’t arrive at a better time! Although I have never been asked to prove the value of the Libraries during the budget request process, evidence of library impact on student outcomes will be very useful in our budget request and I hope to have good news for the Libraries later this year when we receive our budget allocation.