8
Report of Library Task Force
Black Hills State University
March 3 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Background Page 2
Acknowledgements Page 3
“Observations and Suggestions” Page 3
Staffing: Observations and Suggestions Page 4
Facilities: Observations and Suggestions Page 5
Resource Acquisition: Observations and Suggestions Page 6
Outreach & Services: Observations and Suggestions Page 7
Subcommittee Recommendations for Staffing Page 8
Subcommittee Recommendations for Facilities Page 10
Subcommittee Recommendations for Resource Acquisitions Page 22
Subcommittee Recommendations for Outreach & Services Page 26
BACKGROUND
University libraries have undergone dramatic changes since the early 1990s. Where they once stored information and individual work spaces were the norm, libraries today provide access to information from around the world and they encourage engagement, creativity, and sharing. While BHSU’s library staff has adapted to these changes by providing access to numerous electronic resources and by providing collaborative learning areas, they and BHSU’s administration wish to make certain that the library stays relevant and that it meets the changing demands of its clientele. In part, Dr. Rodney Custer, Provost, established the Library Task Force for these reasons.
In January, seventeen people were identified, representing constituent groups from across the campus, including students, the library staff, faculty from each college, and faculty senate. This group was charged with identifying relevant issues, exploring those issues, and ultimately writing reports, which would serve as the basis for this document and for making future decisions about the library.
The task force identified six areas to be explored, with subcommittees assigned to explore each one:
1) Vision and role of the library at BHSU
2) Leadership and staffing
3) Resource acquisition, budget, and development
4) Facilities recommendations
5) Electronic library resources, directions and policies
6) Community and public outreach
During the 2013 spring semester the subcommittees met, and brought their findings to the task force. To obtain a broader understanding, seven of the committee members went on library tours during the summer, visiting ten regional libraries.
During the 2013 fall semester the task force reviewed all of its findings, from prior research and the tours, and decided to narrow down its areas of exploration and reporting to four areas:
1) Staffing
2) Facilities
3) Resource Acquisition
4) Outreach & Services
Subcommittee memberships were reassigned into these areas. The new committees met, drafted preliminary reports, and made presentations to the committee of the whole. After receiving the committee of the whole’s feedback, the subcommittees developed the final reports included within this document.
The Task Force’s Final Report can be broken into two parts. The first section includes four “Observations and Suggestions,” which Task Force Co-Chair David Wolff wrote in response to each of the subcommittee’s reports. These statements offer suggestions on how the University should proceed. The subcommittees’ final reports then follow the “Observations and Suggestions.”
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Dr. Custer and Dr. Wolff wish to thank the thirteen people who actively contributed to the research and writing of the individual committee reports. Their assistance and insights contributed much to our understanding of the E.Y. Berry Library Learning Center library and its needs.
Eric Clapham College of Education and Behavioral Sciences
Faye LaDuke-Pelster College of Education and Behavioral Sciences
Ben van Ee College of Business and Natural Sciences
Avi Jain College of Business and Natural Sciences
Tim Martinez College of Liberal Arts
Tim Steckline College of Liberal Arts
Warren Wilson Library Leadership
Scott Ahola Library Leadership
Bobbi Sago Library Leadership
Rich Loose Library Leadership
Chase Vogel Student
John Alsup Faculty Senate
OBSERVATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
BASED ON THE FOUR SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
Observations and Suggestions ...... David A. Wolff
What follows are “Observations and Suggestions” developed in response to each of the Library Task Force’s Committee reports. The “Observations and Suggestions” generally provide a brief summary of what was recommended by the committee, a comment on the feasibility of accomplishing those recommendations, and in some cases, suggestions on what else could be done to gather more information prior to implementation of recommendations. As part of the observations, it is important to note that few new resources are available to make many of the changes recommended by the committees. While the committees were asked to develop short-term and long-term recommendations (which in part meant separating them by expenses), in some instances even the short-term recommendations would require expenditures beyond what is available. Certainly, some money may be requested through one-time budget requests, but until more reliable funding can be identified, many of the recommendations will have to be considered long-term.
Observations and Suggestions on the Library Task Force Staffing Report
The Task Force Staffing Report makes three short-term staffing recommendations: 1) library director, 2) reference librarian and 3) systems librarian.” It also offers the long-term recommendation of a “technology services librarian.” The report, however, is not exactly clear if the first three recommendations are for fulltime positions or not, but assuming that is the case, it then does not thoroughly address how these expanded positions would change the operations of the library. For instance, the library director information states that the person would have operational control of the library, including reviewing the budget and overseeing the employees. The director would also be responsible for planning, outreach and communication. The report, however, does not specify whether these are new activities, or if the current library director, in a part-time role, is accomplishing any of these tasks. In essence, it is not clear what would change if the position moved from part-time to fulltime. The same holds true for the information on a Reference Librarian. The report states that “a Reference Librarian is needed for the library,” but it is unclear if this is a new position on top of the current reference position, or if this is a recommendation to restore the current Reference Librarian position to fulltime, removing the non-reference activities. The report is more explicit about moving the Systems Librarian from a half-time position to a fulltime position. And while a few new tasks are listed for this position as a fulltime person, just how much time those activities would actually take is unclear.
Certainly, library staffing has suffered in recent years, as the fulltime director became part-time, the systems librarian took on non-library responsibilities, and the reference librarian had to take on extra library assignments. The Staffing Committee’s report is essentially about restoring former staffing levels, which certainly has merit. Yet, several realities need to be considered. One is that this University and all universities have met the contingencies of uncertain funding by reassigning responsibilities, developing new partnerships between various campus entities, and shrinking staffs. It is also true that the technology the library more and more relies on is oftentimes the same technology used elsewhere on campus. In other words, there are opportunities to share expertise and positions across the institution.
It seems evident that neither the Library Task Force nor BHSU has a good handle on what is the proper level of library staffing. To make a more authoritative, data driven decision, two studies should be conducted. One should investigate the job assignments of BHSU’s current library positions. Some of these positions were established before the era of technology, and a better understanding of current activities and workload might be revealing. The second study should look at libraries of BHSU’s peer institutions and at publications that speak to library staffing to determine how BHSU is aligned. From these investigations, potential changes may become evident. Of course, any shifting of job assignments can only be done with retraining opportunities for the affected staff.
Until more information is developed and in light of current budget constraints, it would seem to make sense to keep the current staff positions in place, with consideration given to reassigning some of the duties. For instance, the current Interim Director would become the director, while still serving as the University’s Chief Information Officer, but with extra responsibilities. As director, it would fall to this person to institute the staffing studies mentioned above, realign some of the other library duties, and undertake the recommendations the committee developed for the director position. While these few changes would have to suffice as the short-term results from the report, the committee’s recommendations for more significant staffing changes and the long-term recommendation of another staff person can all be considered as worthwhile long-term goals.
Observations and Suggestions on the Library Task Force Facilities Report
The Facilities Committee report gives what it calls: “five essential elements that must be included in a new or renovated facility. They are: installation of group study/collaborative learning rooms; installation of a library instruction classroom; additional space for housing collections and providing study space; and more natural light.”
From this list, it appears that only the installation of study rooms can be seen as a realistic short-term possibility. The others would require either some significant space-use adjustments or modifications to the building and should be more appropriately considered long-term recommendations.
The recommendation of study/collaborative learning rooms certainly falls in line with current educational trends of group work, is one that many other libraries have already adopted, and has strong Task Force support. The report recommends five such rooms, with two or three having computer stations, large screens, and white boards. To make these possible in the short-term, the report recommends tall cubicle dividers with glass dividers on the front of the room. The location of the study rooms will, however, take some consideration. The report mentions a location “where they are visible and easily accessible to the students,” meaning on the first floor, close to the front.
There are many demands on the space within the library, with the first floor housing Jacket Java, the Graphics and Media Center, the Writing Assistance Center, the Math Assistance Center, along with library offices and service spaces. The study rooms would take more space from the library’s main floor. Perhaps it is time to think of reconfiguring the entire library layout. The Facilities report offers some “intermediate steps” for library renovation, which includes replacing some shelving and installing new furniture on the second floor. Such changes could easily be incorporated into a reconfiguration of the library. It is possible that a reconfiguration would also free up space for a library instructional classroom, one of the identified “essential elements.” If not, it would remain a long-term recommendation.
Most of the long-term “essential elements” would require remodeling the library, with suggestions including finishing the unused portion of the basement, adding on to the building, and cutting new windows through the walls. Over the years, finishing the basement has been periodically mentioned as a way to gain more space, especially on the second floor if the Special Collections and Archives moved to that newly opened area. As the report makes clear, however, there are some concerns about campus utilities running through the location, and these would have to be relocated. Bringing in more natural light is an excellent suggestion, but an architectural study needs to determine the possibility and expense of such an undertaking.
Overall, it seems appropriate to move forward with study rooms, but as part of the process a study should be done on how the first and second floors might be reconfigured, with everything up for consideration, such as moving shelving, repositioning the current study tables, relocating library service areas and offices, and finding better homes for the auxiliary functions (the Writing Assistance Center and the Graphics and Media Center). Once a location for the study rooms is identified and a way to reconfigure the library has been determined, new shelving and furniture could be purchased to facilitate the process and enhance the library as a whole, another of the committee’s recommendations. After these changes are made, plans can be developed to bring about expansion and remodeling, the long-term goals.
Observations and Suggestions on the Library Task Force Resource Acquisition Report
The Resource Acquisition Committee presented four recommendations: the establishment of a library liaison program, the development of a strategic plan, the regular assessment of library resources, and the hiring of a Collection Development Librarian. By the nature of the requests, only the library liaison program can be viewed as a short-term recommendation, two of the recommendations could be developed over a period of one or two years, while the new position would be a long-term goal.
The library liaison program involves assigning a librarian to each school where this person would attend school meetings, become aware of the school’s programmatic needs, and ensure collection policies meet school demands. The end result would be to foster better communications between the library and each of the schools. Such a relationship seems to have substantial merit. It would, however, be up to the library director to institute and monitor the program, making sure it accomplishes what is hoped. It is also important to note the ongoing advisement role of the library committee, particularly in vetting the library’s policies, procedures and directions and communicating these to the broader faculty.
The recommendations of a strategic plan and the assessment of library resources would take a little longer to implement. The strategic plan is meant to give formal direction to the collections policy. This recommendation calls for the library director to develop “a five-year plan for evaluating future patron needs regarding format utilization,” which would then point the way to developing the library’s collection, including establishing a balance between traditional and electronic formats.p[ The assessment of library resources is meant to analyze usage patterns, which would further inform the purchase of library resources. The idea of a library resource assessment seems to go hand-in-hand with the development of a strategic plan. The library director would again set the course in these activities, which seem to have merit for setting a direction in collection development.
The Collection Development Librarian mentioned as a long-term recommendation would be a new hire, and this person in essence would be tasked to undertake the duties mentioned above. The need of such a position would certainly have to be determined, in part by evaluating the success of the previously started resource acquisition programs.