21:4 (2006:12) Committee Updates: ECC
November 28, 2006 at 5:54 pm | In Electronic Communications | Leave a Comment[Ed. note: Highlights from a report submitted for the fall Executive Board meeting.]
ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
Anna Creech and Dalene Hawthorne, Co-Chairs
List manager Dalene Hawthorne is revising the policy for postings to NASIG-L. The revision comes in response to the Executive Board’s request to broaden the scope of the list, which has historically included only information directly related to NASIG. The board wants to allow postings of potential interest to members, such as announcements of serials-related events outside of NASIG.
In response to a question from ECC on non-committee members and committee lists, the board confirmed that only committee members should be included on committee listservs. Non-committee members who need to communicate with a committee should do so through committee chairs.
The committee worked with NASIG’s ISP Bee.net to provide access to online conference handouts posted in the members-only area of NASIGWeb to non-members who attended the conference. The board will decide on a policy for next year’s conference handouts.
At the request of President Denise Novak and Vice President Char Simser, ECC members Abigail Bordeaux and Anna Creech inventoried and weeded files from NASIGWeb’s root directory. Paper copies of weeded files were sent to the Archivist.
ECC reported that since the beginning of May, NASIGWeb has received a total of 1,092,003 hits averaging 7,137 per day.
21:4 (2006:12) Committee Updates: CEC
November 28, 2006 at 5:50 pm | In Continuing Education | Leave a CommentCONTINUING EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Paoshan Yue and Betty Landesman, Co-Chairs
2006 PROGRAMS AND BUDGET
An e-journal / e-resources workshop at Mississippi State University was successfully completed in July. A distance education program for SCCTP trainers to develop online teaching techniques was also completed in September, where seven SCCTP trainers took part in the “Teaching Courses in a Live Online Environment” taught by the Continuing Education Librarian of Amigos Library Services in four live online sessions.
Additionally, due to the cancellation of three planned events as noted in the 2006 annual report (April), $2,250 of the 2006 CEC budget became available for reallocation. An effort was made in early June to put out a call for program proposals to dispose the fund, but it did not generate new proposals.
Two CEC members, Steve Oberg and Paoshan Yue, also serve on the Library School Outreach Task Force (LSOTF). They participated in group discussions on planning a NASIG Library School Ambassadors pilot project, which will be proposed by the LSOTF.
2007 BUDGET AND PROGRAMS
The 2007 co-chairs put out a call for programming ideas and firm proposals in July. As a result, several proposals and ideas were received that have been incorporated in the 2007 budget proposal. These include three events which CEC has supported in the past and two new programs regarding CONSER access level record for serials and metadata standards and applications. Funds have also been requested for a pilot project to develop an online training course.
21:4 (2006:12) Committee Updates: Bylaws
November 28, 2006 at 5:46 pm | In Bylaws | Leave a Comment[Ed. note: Highlights from a report submitted for the fall Executive Board meeting.]
BYLAWS COMMITTEE
Adolfo Tarango and Konstantin Gurevich, Co-Chairs
The Committee is continuing its ongoing review of the Bylaws per the Executive Board’s request. To date, the Committee has identified various editorial changes and some more substantive changes that could be made to the NASIG Bylaws. A listing of recommended revisions is presented under separate cover for the Board’s review.
21:4 (2006:12) Profiles: Kathryn Wesley
November 28, 2006 at 5:09 pm | In Newsletter, Profiles | Leave a CommentKATHRYN WESLEY
Maggie Rioux, Profiles Editor
The more of these profiles I write, the more I am struck by the preponderance in our field of accidental serialists – for many of us our karma seems to have caused us to just fall into some aspect of serials and then gotten hooked on them. Serials definitely are addictive.(1) Also their showing up at odd intervals (particularly the irregulars) causes them to fall into a pattern of random-interval reinforcement, which I learned, in a graduate course in a former lifetime, is the most strongly addictive of all.
This issue’s profile subject, Kathryn Wesley, exemplifies both the accidentalness and the addictiveness of this area of endeavor. Kathryn first got hooked on librarianship as a way of making herself employable. She started in college (Northeast Louisiana University – she’s definitely a southern girl) as a biology major, switched to English, and was persuaded by a cousin to get a minor in library science. She became both employable and a cataloging junkie. She worked for several years at the public library in Natchez, Mississippi, doing reference, cataloging and acquisitions (no serials yet to speak of).
Southern belles Carol Green, Kathryn Wesley and June Garner discover the
joys of Polish food during NASIG 2004 in Milwaukee. Photo courtesy of NASIG
member Paula Webb.
In 1991, Kathryn tried to break away from the path that fate had laid out for her, but even though she tried this before serials had taken hold as the final addiction, her attempt was doomed to failure. Seeking a life outside of librarianship, she took a job related to her original field of biology as a lab technician for a mid-sized poultry company in Jackson, Mississippi, where she was now living (how’s that for a career change?). The company had several feed production and processing plants scattered across Mississippi and Alabama and the lab was a separate facility which did quality-control testing of various sorts. It was a broad range of test subjects: nutritional content of feed and feed ingredients, pesticide residues in fat samples, assorted microbiological subjects (salmonella, listeria and other bad guys) and even QC testing on the wax-covered boxes that are used to ship chicken to restaurants and grocery stores. She started out doing calcium and phosphorus assays, then moved to doing prep work on fat samples. She says that wearing a lab coat to work was wicked cool, but unfortunately, that was about the only perk – the job paid minimum wage. She moved to an administrative assistant position and ended up in charge of the HazMat database for the company. There she was – cataloging and organizing data again, but not near as much fun as doing it in a library.
About this time Kathryn’s spousal unit decided he needed more education and they packed up and moved to Mississippi State University where our intrepid heroine found herself another library job (no lab coat, but decent pay), this time in acquisitions and serials. While hubby studied, Kathryn got herself hooked on serials.
Hubby finished his schooling and it was Kathryn’s turn. They went straight to library school at the University of Southern Mississippi, where she received her MLIS in 1997. The next stop was Clemson University in South Carolina (moving steadily east, but definitely staying south) where she started in March 1998 as a serials cataloger. She gets to solve all sorts of interesting database and cataloging problems, but no lab coat. No salmonella, either.
It was here, as soon as she started, that Kathryn was told by her supervisor that she was going to want to join NASIG and attend the conference. That first conference was Boulder, Colorado, and Kathryn says it was great positive reinforcement for both serials and NASIG. She was hooked on both. She decided to get involved in committee work and volunteered for Database & Directory, figuring that her experience in both cataloging and the database in the chicken lab gave her a solid background. She was right. Kathryn spent four successful years on D&D, the last two as chair. She was also a consultant to the group which developed our online conference registration system. She then moved on to spend two one-year terms on the Nominations & Elections Committee, again as chair in her second term. This past spring (for her sins), Kathryn was appointed editor-in-chief of the NASIG Newsletter (succeeding the wonderful Char Simser) and is now my new boss.
What’s next? Well, first there are a whole bunch of Newsletter issues to get out. Kathryn was well-oriented by her predecessor and thinks she’s starting to get the hang of it (Of course, she’s aided by a marvelous and highly-talented staff, especially the profiles editor). She’s done a lot of editing for friends and colleagues over the years, although on an informal basis, and says she’s actually more comfortable editing than writing. And of course we know she’s really well organized (there’s that chicken lab again). She also sees the Newsletter continuing to evolve. First we went all-electronic and now we’re starting to move from the static html format to a potentially-interactive newsblog format. “The Newsletter has always been one of the primary avenues of communication for the organization, but now that communication has the potential to be two-way.” Also, she says we should look for less capitalization – she wants less capitalization of Non-Proper Nouns. Yes, ma’am.
And after the Newsletter? Well, who knows. Our last two editors-in-chief have gone on to become NASIG presidents, so who can say, but if she’s elected, I think she should open the conference wearing a lab coat and maybe even carrying a rubber chicken. Don’t you agree with me, gentle reader?
(1) Gentle reader, I think I don’t have the right term here. What seems more appropriate is to call this habit “serialism,” but that doesn’t sound quite right either. So I guess I’ll stick with just plain serials until a better term comes along.
21:4 (2006:12) Profiles: Membership Development Committee
November 28, 2006 at 11:34 am | In Membership Development, Profiles | Leave a Comment
MEMBERSHIP DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Maggie Rioux, Profiles Editor
There’s a new kid in NASIG-town. Well, make that a new committee, or actually an almost-new committee. The committee which was, in years past, the Membership Committee has been re-defined and re-invented as the Membership Development Committee, with the emphasis on the Development part. Both the committee and the membership parts are intended to be the objects of the development part.
Back in the olden days, everybody knew what serials were – paper things that showed up periodically (pun intended) in a library. Everybody knew who the players were: publishers, subscription agents, librarians, back issue dealers. And everybody knew there was one organization where they could all get together – NASIG. Well, now that all has become so last millennium.
Now serials come in all flavors and media. They seem to show up in various places (mail boxes, computer screens, CD drawers) at random. The players still include the original three, but now there are also computer geeks, institutional repository people, archivers (dark and light), database managers, you name it. However the idea continues that there should still be one organization where we can all get together – NASIG. It’s the charge of the new Membership Development Committee to make sure we all know about it and feel welcome in the organization.
The committee is taking its charge seriously. Since being appointed last spring, they’ve been hard at work, meeting face-to-face in Denver and at ALA in June, participating in several conference calls and burning up the email lines in their efforts to help make NASIG more relevant to current and potential members. One good source of ideas was the brainstorming session at the Denver conference (if this gets done again in Louisville next May, be sure to attend if you can). The things they are working on cover a broad range.
One thing the group did this year was to follow up on all non-renewing members to see why they didn’t re-up. Some folks just couldn’t be located. Most didn’t renew because serials were no longer a part of their jobs and only a few cited the dues increase. One suggestion has been to include NASIG membership in the higher conference registration rate for non-members. Also, it is important to get all members to attend the first-timers reception at the conference (not just first-timers) so that new folks can be greeted and made to feel welcome.
A major part of the committee’s charge is to work at enlarging NASIG membership so that it is representative of all parts of the serials chain in proportion to the size of the sector. Yes, we definitely want better representation from publishers and other commercial sector folks of all ilks, but it may not be a bad thing that we have a lot of library-based members – there are an awful lot of library-based serialists out there in North America. The group is looking at what NASIG can offer some of these constituent groups in the way of programming and conference experiences that will make their membership valuable and worthwhile. Also, as the serials world expands to include new groups of folks (see above) we need to look at how to appeal to them as well.
Just to show you that everything is on the table if it will develop membership, the committee has even kicked around the idea of changing NASIG to NACIG, with the S for serials changing to a C for content. This might reflect our broader constituency base and also make it easier for those in a non-traditional part of serials to get support for membership and conference attendance. At least it’s a thought.
And who are these intrepid explorers – those who would dare even speculate on changing the sacred NASIG acronym? Well, there are two co-chairs: Tina Feick, who has been in NASIG since the very beginning, has attended all the conferences and knows everyone and everything, is one. The other co-chair is Marla Chesler, who also has a broad serials background, having worked for both libraries and vendors and who knows almost everyone and everything. The rest of the group, the full list of which you’ll find on NASIGWeb, is an excellent mix of library- and commercially-based folks.
By the time you read this, the Membership Development Committee will have made its major report to the Executive Board at its fall meeting. They’ll be hard at work beginning to implement some of the things they’ve learned and the recommendations they’ve taken to the Board. Please help them with their task by continuing to promote NASIG among your fellow serialists, welcoming new members either at the conference First Timers Reception or even by sending an email to someone you know on the list of new members posted to NASIG-L and last, but not least, by continuing to share ideas for developing NASIG and providing programming which will appeal to and benefit all of our varied serialist constituencies.
21:4 (2006:12) 21st Annual Conference: Evaluation Summary
November 27, 2006 at 5:53 pm | In Conference, Evaluation & Assessment | Leave a CommentCONFERENCE EVALUATON SUMMARY REPORT
Marla Baden, Chair, Evaluation & Assessment Committee
Committee members: Marla Baden (Chair), Joe Badics, Carole Bell, Jana Brubaker, Sarah Corvene, Sandy Folsom, Carole McEwan, Anne Mitchell (Co-Chair), Lori Terrill, Adam Chesler (Board Liaison).
NASIG’s 21st annual conference was held in Denver, Colorado, at the Marriott City Center Hotel. The conference began with a selection of preconference workshops, held its opening reception at the Red Rocks Conference Center and finished up with post-conference walking tours highlighting the Denver area. This year’s conference again included a variety of vision, strategy, and tactics sessions.
Three hundred and two conference evaluation forms were completed, which represented 49.27% of total conference attendees. This was the first conference in which evaluation forms were made available in an online format. One hundred and ten evaluations were completed online and 192 were submitted in paper (88 conference, 14 poster, 90 preconference). University librarians continue to be the overwhelming majority of respondents at 193. College libraries made up the second largest group of respondents at 18. Five community college libraries responded, bringing the total of academic library responses to 219. As in past years, the academic libraries represented the largest group of respondents.
Medical libraries ranked third in responses with 15. Representation from the various vendor groups (automated systems vendor, publisher, book vendor, database provider, subscription agent) was 38, which was higher than last year’s 15. Those indicating they were with automated systems vendors showed a marked increase in responses from 0 (2005) to 14. Government, national or state libraries represented remained the same as last year with 11 responding. Law libraries and special or corporate libraries were represented by 6 (down from 8 in 2005) and 5 (down from 8 in 2005) respectively. Both public libraries and library networks or consortia represented less than 1% of the total respondents, which was a drop in representation. Less than 1% of the respondents chose the category “Other.”
The number of respondents with over 10 years experience dropped for the third year in a row to 51.2% (56.9% in 2005). Those with 7-10 years experience represented 14.2%, an increase from 10.1% last year. Those with 4-6 years showed a slight increase with 16.95% and 1-3 years of experience stayed the same at 13%. Those with less than 1 year experience represented 4.5%, a slight gain from 4% in 2005. 45% of respondents had attended 1-5 previous conferences, and first time attendees at 21% were up from 16.5% in 2005. Those attending 6-10 were 20%, 11-15 were 9% and 16-20 were 6% of those responding. All of these categories showed a drop in percentages from last year.
The overwhelming majority of respondents, 365 (325 in 2005), identified themselves as serials, electronic resources or catalog librarians. Acquisitions librarian (84) and collection development librarian (69) were the next highest groups, showing a slight increase from 2005. Reference librarians (36) and processing/binding units (30) showed a slight decrease from 2005. Automated systems (20), customer relations (23), sales (20) and training & development (27) all showed a slight increase from last year. There were 16 respondents identifying themselves are paraprofessionals, which was an increase from 12 in 2005. Those identifying themselves as assistant/associate directors (12), library directors (2) and president/CEO/vice president (1) were up from those in 2005. As usual, many respondents identified themselves with multiple categories and “other” designations.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being high), survey respondents gave the 2006 conference a rating of 4.52. The attendees rated the overall conference facilities and local arrangement at 4.59. This again showed approval of the conference hotel setting. Denver as the location for the meeting rated slightly higher than Minneapolis (4.34) at 4.51. The hotel (4.56) and meeting rooms (4.26) received just a slightly lower rating than last year. The meals (4.27) and social events (4.25) were both rated higher than last year and seemed satisfactory to conference attendees. Breaks were rated at 4.08 just slightly higher than last year. The business meeting (3.83) rated higher than last year with a number of positive comments for holding the meeting during a sit-down luncheon.
The Denver conference continued a number of special programming events. The User Group Meetings and Informal Discussion Groups rated 3.89 and 3.99 respectively. The overwhelming majority of respondents wanted both these types of sessions to continue, although there were several comments suggesting that the two events be scheduled at different times so that they could attend both. The First Timer/Mentoring Meet and Greet received a 3.92 rating with a number of comments suggesting more time should be scheduled for this event. The Focused Vendor session received a rating of 3.59 which was much lower than the 4.12 rating in 2005. Respondents seemed to feel the topic was too broad and not focused enough and commented that there were no actual demos. While most comments indicated that the topic was not as strong as in previous years, they wanted the session to continue.
This year the conference presented three vision sessions. Vision Session 1, “Things Fall Apart” with Robin Sloan received a 4.56 rating. Vision Session 2, “All the News that’s Fit to Digitize: Creating Colorado’s Historic Newspaper Collection” with Jill Koelling received a 3.66 rating. Most respondents liked the program but questioned if it really was a topic for a vision session. The final Vision Session 3, “What’s a Serial When You’re Running on Internet Time?” with T. Scott Plutchak rated a 4.66.
Strategy Sessions generated ratings from 3.78 to 4.56 with 7 out of 10 sessions rating over 4.0. The highest session rating went to “Mountains, Valleys, and Pathways: Serials Users’ Needs and Steps to Meet Them” with Regina Romano Reynolds and Lynn Silipigni Connaway. The sessions averaged an overall rating of 4.13 and the speakers’ averaged an overall rating of 4.11.
There were 16 tactics sessions offered at this conference. Ratings ranged from 3.81 to 4.59 with 11 sessions rated at 4.0 or higher. The highest rated tactics session was “Linking the Library and Campus Course Management System” presented by Claire Dygert. The sessions averaged an overall rating of 4.19 and the speakers averaged an overall rating of 4.17.
There were only 43 respondents for the poster sessions. The overall rating for the poster sessions was 4.09, down from last year’s rating of 4.50. The majority of respondents (34) felt they had enough time to visit the posters. There were several comments that suggested more room and keeping posters away from the break/food area. The individual poster rankings ranged from 4.4 to 4.9. The highest ranking was for “Connecting Your ILS with an Outside Accounting System” presented by JoAnne Deeken.
There were four preconferences offered this year and all were very well received with ratings from 4.71 to 4.87. The preconferences had a much better evaluation response rate this year with each session having at least a 50% or better return rate. The comments were overwhelmingly positive for all the sessions.
The Evaluation & Assessment Committee would like to thank everyone who took the time to fill out the evaluation forms. Your comments and feedback are important as NASIG continues to strive to provide positive conference experiences. We welcome suggestions regarding the evaluation forms. Please address comments to Marla Baden, badenm@ipfw.edu.
21:4 (2006:12) 22nd Annual Conference: PPC Update
November 27, 2006 at 5:32 pm | In Conference, Program Planning | Leave a CommentPPC UPDATE
Rachel Frick and Sarah George, Co-Chairs
The NASIG 2007 Program Planning Committee has spent the past few weeks reviewing proposals and scouting out hot topics and speakers. As we write this, the committee is making final decisions about which proposals to accept. We hope to confirm all of our speakers by late November. By December 15th, we plan to announce the finalized program. So stay tuned!
This year we received over 50 proposals and ideas from two calls. It was hard to make decisions with such great applications, but the committee persevered! We are confident that you are going to enjoy the 2007 slate of presenters and topics.
PPC is pleased to announce the continuation of “no conflict” scheduling for the conference. For 2007, strategy and tactics sessions won’t overlap in order to provide the most for your conference dollar. Look for a healthy selection of pre-conference opportunities this year, in addition to past conference favorites such as informal discussion groups, poster sessions, and user groups.
Special thanks to each PPC member, the NASIG Board, and especially our Board liaison, Char Simser.
21:4 (2006:12) 22nd Annual Conference: CPC Update
November 27, 2006 at 5:26 pm | In Conference, Conference Planning | Leave a CommentCPC UPDATE
Angel Clemons and Tyler Goldberg, Co-Chairs
Preparations are well underway for the 22nd annual conference in Louisville, Kentucky. The Thursday evening event will be held at the Frazier International History Museum, whose collections offer visitors a view of 1000 years of history. Besides musical entertainment, we will see reenactments by Elizabethan sword masters and enjoy panoramic views of the Ohio River and downtown Louisville from the roof-top garden. Make sure to arrive in time for this event.
The conference will be held at the Galt House, located within walking distance of several downtown museums, as well as 4th Street Live, Louisville’s premier entertainment and retail district. We are still planning evening activities, including a dinner cruise on the Ohio River. More details will follow on our website, soon to go live. The Conference Planning Committee looks forward to seeing you May 31-June 3, 2007 in Louisville at NASIG’s annual conference.
21:4 (2006:12) Treasurer’s Report
November 20, 2006 at 7:25 pm | In Treasurer | Leave a CommentTREASURER’S REPORT
Rose Robischon, NASIG Treasurer
NASIG’s finances continue to remain stable. The balance sheet below reflects our income and assets as of October 26, 2006. Current assets are $298,255.89. This includes $234,215.21 in bank balances and $64,040.68 in the investment accounts.
Balance Sheet 10/26/2006
(Includes unrealized gains)
As of 10/26/06
ASSETS
–Cash and Bank Accounts
—-Charles Schwab-Cash $ 32,057.31
—-CHECKING-264 149,779.78
—-SAVINGS-267 84,435.43
–TOTAL Cash and Bank Accounts $266,272.52
–Investments
—-Charles Schwab $ 31,983.37
–TOTAL Investments $ 31,983.37
TOTAL ASSETS $298,255.89
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
–LIABILITIES $ 0.00
–EQUITY $298,255.89
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $298,255.89
The 2006 budget is on track.
NASIG Budget Expenditures
1/1/06 Through 10/26/06
Admin Board Expenses $-20,012.10
Archives -0
Awards & Recognition -7,489.18
Bylaws -0
Continuing Education -2,748.40
Conference Planning -1,705.56
Conference Site -0
Database & Directory -1,000.00
Electronic Communications -5,900.00
Evaluation -0
Membership Development -36.90
Nominations & Elections -2,783.84
Proceedings -94.35
Program Planning Committee -0
Publicist -0
Treasurer -7,433.38
OVERALL TOTAL -$49,298.06
NASIG is, for the most part, financially stable. As has been stated before, the organization needs to keep an operating reserve in the event of an emergency.
The conference invoices have been received and paid.
2006 Denver Conference
Summary Report
10/1/05 Through 10/26/06
|
INCOME |
|
|
Conference Registration (includes Pre-Conferences) |
$232,043.55 |
|
Conference Souvenirs |
2,587.25 |
|
TOTAL INCOME |
$234,630.80 |
|
|
|
|
EXPENSES |
|
|
Elite Expo Services |
$ 455.00 |
|
Printing Postcards |
265.88 |
|
SCCTP Workshop Materials |
400.00 |
|
Conference Entertainment |
825.00 |
|
Conference Meals |
139,411.89 |
|
Conference Souvenirs |
2,741.42 |
|
Conference Photocopying and Printing |
4,175.07 |
|
Conference Postage |
878.84 |
|
Conference Supplies |
884.44 |
|
Conference Speakers |
9,315.25 |
|
Conference Transportation |
4,896.00 |
|
Conference Parking |
615.00 |
|
Conference Travel |
85.00 |
|
Conference Other |
5,190.95 |
|
Conference Refund |
975.00 |
|
Conference Program |
1,125.00 |
|
TOTAL EXPENSES |
$172,239.34 |
|
|
|
|
TOTAL INCOME-EXPENSES |
$ 62,391.46 |
21:4 (2006:12) Executive Board Minutes
November 20, 2006 at 1:31 pm | In Executive Board | Leave a CommentNASIG EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING MINUTES
Joyce Tenney, NASIG Secretary
Date: August 22, 2006, 10am-11:30am
Place: Conference Call
Attending:
Denise Novak, President
Char Simser, Vice President/President-Elect
Mary Page, Past President
Rose Robischon, Treasurer
Joyce Tenney, Secretary
Members-at-Large:
Rick Anderson
Adam Chesler
Katy Ginanni
Kim Maxwell (joined meeting at 11:19am)
Alison Roth
Bob Schatz
Ex-Officio member:
Kathryn Wesley (joined meeting at 10:44am)
Novak called the telephone conference to order at 10:02am. She welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked for any additions to the agenda. Novak reported that Maxwell would join the group soon.
1.0 Update on action items (Tenney)
Tenney asked for any updates to the Executive Board Action Items from May 2006. Novak noted that the first Action Item was in process. A report will be given later in the meeting on the status of the Netspoke web conferencing. She noted that the second item was completed. PPC was notified in May. Ginanni reported that the fifth item was completed. Tenney noted that the sixth item was completed. Please report any updates to the secretary as they occur.
2.0 Treasurer’s update (Robischon)
Robischon reported that we are in good financial standing. The annual conference had a profit of $53,000. There is still one speaker payment outstanding, but the figures are complete enough to call it a success. Chesler inquired how this compared to past years and Robischon reported that the last two conferences had a profit of approximately $30,000 each.
3.0 Quick updates on committee work
3.1 Archives (Tenney)
Tenney reported that Sheryl Williams had been appointed archivist-in-training. She is working with the current NASIG Archivist to produce a NASIG Archives Manual. Ginanni suggested that upon completion of the manual, a Newsletter article on the archives would be a good idea. Tenney will relay that to the committee.
3.2 Awards & Recognition (Anderson)
Anderson reported that A & R is hard at work. Alan Diehlman had been appointed to serve as the Mexico Student Grant Coordinator for the committee, as Tony Harvell was unable to complete is term. Written procedures for the Mexico Student Grant process are being developed. The committee members are updating library school lists and contact information. Statistics on the number of applicants for awards and other items have been complied by the committee.
Anderson noted that there has been a drop in the number of applications for the Marcia Tuttle Award and the Fritz Schwartz Award. He reported that the committee is interested in raising awareness of these awards. They are also discussing possible fund raising scenarios. Novak asked that they include Savage from the Financial Development Committee in any planning.
3.3 Continuing Education Committee (Schatz)
Schatz reported that a call for ideas had been issued and there was lots of energy on the committee. He noted that it was too early in the year to determine if they would need additional ideas. In July CEC hosted an EJournal/EResource program and in September they would be hosting an SCCTP program. 3.4 Evaluation & Assessment (Chesler)
Chesler noted that the committee had completed the processing of evaluations of the 2006 conference and had distributed them. He reported that there is some ambiguity in the documentation regarding the distribution of the report. E&A will look at revising the manual to avoid future confusion. He will give an update at the November meeting.
3.5 Bylaws (Ginanni)
Ginanni reported that the co-chairs of the committee were leading the discussions of the review of the bylaws. They will encourage each of the committee members to contribute in the review process. They have not encountered many needed revisions yet. Page noted that in order to go to online voting there may be some changes needed in the bylaws. Ginanni has reported this to the committee and they are looking at that issue.
3.6 Database & Directory (Chesler)
Chesler reported that one of the co-chairs, Buddy Pennington, is a new dad and is taking a little time off from the committee, but all is going smoothly. There was one resignation from the committee, and Greg Matthews from Washington State University was appointed to fill the vacancy. Chesler reported that D&D was having some problems running reports, but were working with the Electronic Communications Committee to get the issues resolved. D&D also reported that there were some dead links on the NASIG Committee section of the NASIG website. Chesler will find out where the problematic links are and report back.
3.7 Financial Development Committee (Novak)
Novak reported that Savage has almost completed the document detailing how the various accounts to follow the Financial Plan would be set up. He will be in touch with Robischon.
3.8 Library School Outreach Task Force and Mentoring Task Force (Maxwell)
Novak reported for Maxwell that the committees would be reporting in September. The committees have been fairly inactive this summer due to vacations.
Maxwell reported the following after the conference call.
The Library School Outreach Task Force is reviewing the comments from the Board on their April 2006 report. They’ve been retooling their recommendations for a Library School Ambassador Program, and hope to have a report out for comment well before the November Board meeting. Their final report will be given to the Board no later than October 27, 2006.
3.9 Membership Development Committee (Maxwell)
The Membership Development Committee was so charged up after the Denver conference, they agreed to meet at ALA Annual in New Orleans! Almost everyone was able to attend, and the discussion was lively. They are still working on their report to the board, which will be ready by or before October 27, 2006.
3.10 Newsletter (Simser)
Simser reported that the blog format for the Newsletter went live with the special summer issue. She noted that Wesley reported some issues with formatting, but those issues were being solved and it seems to be working fine.Wesley may consider hiring someone to assist in formatting at a later date. Please send Wesley feedback on the blog format. She reported that more articles on serials related areas are needed. Simser asked everyone to announce to their committees that they need serials-related articles for the Newsletter.
ACTION: All board members should announce to their committees that the Newsletter is looking for articles on serials-related issues.
3.11 Nominations & Elections (Page)
Page reported that a call for nominations was issued. She will get actual figures on the number of nominations from the co-chairs and report them to the group. The deadline for nominations is September 1, 2006. The committee has a conference call scheduled right after that deadline. There has been discussion within the committee on the difference in the review of regular candidates, as opposed to the petition candidates. There was discussion on how the process of the petition was established.
Anderson noted that there may be a lack of knowledge about the process and how N&E does their review process. He suggested that there be a document or link to a document (if it already exists) when the call for nominations goes out to the membership. Ginanni noted that there was an article in the Newsletter, so it might be possible to add the link to that article in the Call for Nominations.
ACTION: Page will ask N&E to include the link to the Newsletter article in the next Call For Nominations and put it in the procedures to do it routinely.
3.12 Proceedings (Anderson)
Anderson reported that the Proceedings editors have received all of the papers from the speakers from the 2006 conference and are in the editing and reviewing process. The editors visited Haworth Press and found the session helpful. The indexer for 2006 Proceedings will be Melissa Beck. Novak reported that there had been a problem with one of the papers for the 2005 Proceedings. Regina Reynolds’s paper was put into the Proceedings with an incorrect title and summary. Apologies were issued to Reynolds and steps have been investigated to get a corrected copy of the paper published. This has caused the online version to be delayed. As soon as agreement is reached on the steps to be taken, Novak will inform the board.
3.13 Publications and PR (Page)
Page reported that an RFP for the publication of the conference Proceedings had not been written yet, but she would get the process started immediately. It was agreed that we would renew the contract with Haworth Press for one year.
ACTION: Novak will contact Haworth Press to renew contract for publication of Proceedings for one year.
ACTION: Page will get an RFP drafted and sent to the board for review for the publication of the Proceedings before the November Board meeting.
4.0 Conference Planning Committee (Roth)
Roth reported that the CPC is hard at work. Roth sent an update of committee activities to the board before this discussion. The next meeting of the CPC will be September 22 and at this meeting they will review where they are and what needs to be done. Roth asked that anyone with input or questions please contact her. Novak complimented the CPC and expressed her delight with the logo. Ginanni suggested an outing to Churchill Downs and Roth reported that CPC was investigating this for a Sunday tour option, as an all conference event to Churchill Downs would be too expensive. Roth noted that there may be issues with the public transportation in Louisville, as the there may be some budget cuts to the city and the trolley may be cut. CPC will keep this in mind as they plan events for the conference.
5.0 Program Planning Committee (Simser)
Simser reported that PPC had received 34 proposals from the first Call for Ideas. The committee is reviewing them and seeing where they may need to target the second Call for Ideas. A possible vision speaker is Bob Stein, Director of the Institute for the Future of the Book. Frick has been in contact with him to investigate options for a vision session. PPC has been reviewing the evaluations from the 2006 conference to see what they need to revise. They have noted the comments on the schedule and are looking for ways to enhance the User Groups and Informal Discussions. Ginanni expressed a hope that the Brainstorming session would be later in the day and Roth noted that it would be later in the morning. Ginanni suggested a program on Project Transfer. Simser will relay that to PPC. Simser asked that any ideas on vision speakers be sent to her as soon as possible. Novak complimented PPC on their hard work.
6.0 Update on RFP for Proceedings publisher (Page)
Information discussed under Proceedings Committee update.
7.0 Update on RFP for Outsourcing Technology (Page)
Page reported that she had a task group working on the drafting of the RFP. The task group consists of Maggie Rioux, Anna Creech, Dalene Hawthorne and Mary Page. Mary distributed to the board earlier in the morning a listing of items to be included in the RFP. Robischon noted that membership processing, new and renewal, should be included. Page noted that there were many companies that did this, so we should get some good bids. Novak asked the timeline for the project and Page reported that the draft RFP would be ready for the November board meeting. Novak noted that this would not be in time for the update of the 2007 conference for Online Registration. Novak will contact the programmer that has been working on the current Online Registration system and ask him to work with it again this year.
ACTION: Novak will appoint an Online Registration Task Force for the 2007 conference and ask the programmer to continue his work with the system for this year.
ACTION: Page will have a draft technology RFP ready for the November board meeting.
8.0 Update on Netspoke Web Conferencing (Robischon, Novak, Maxwell)
Robischon described the system and costs involved ($.32 per minute in addition to the regular $.15), She would like to see a few selected committees test the system. Ginanni suggested sending a message to Chairs-L asking for volunteers to test the system with committee work. Robischon will draft a document to send to Chairs-L and have Novak and Maxwell review. She noted it is a good system for committees that need to share documents for review and updating, but we need to control costs.
ACTION: Robischon will draft an announcement to go to Chairs-L to ask for volunteers for web conferencing test.
9.0 Novak asked if there were any additional items for discussion. The following items were discussed.
Robischon announced that she would be sending annual budget request information to committee chairs soon. Please make sure that the deadlines are met.
Anderson noted that the Newsletter article mentioned on the nominations and elections process is probably not sufficient or formal enough for the membership. Ginanni agreed and suggested a task group be established to draft a formal document. The group could consist of past Nominations & Elections chairs and liaisons. Novak asked that nominations for that group be sent to her immediately.
ACTION: Novak will appoint a task force to draft a formal document detailing the procedures of the Nominations and Elections committee for the membership.
9.1 Fall board meeting, Midwinter board meeting (Novak)
Novak reminded everyone of the fall board meeting times. Tenney requested that anyone not staying for the entire time please email her, as she must make the hotel reservations soon. Novak announced that the Midwinter board meeting would be at the Seattle Public Library. Sherry Palmiter has been very helpful in making the arrangements.
Wesley reported that she would be adding more categories to the newsblog (e.g. one for each individual committee). She noted that she is working with Anna Creech and they are investigating whether WordPress would allow publishing to another host (i.e., using WordPress software on their site, but publishing the files to NASIG’s site). Wesley noted that the September issue of the Newsletter is on target and should be published around the first of the month. She reported that there was a favorable mention of the Newsletter blog in Steve Oberg’s blog. Wesley inquired if everyone was comfortable with turning on the comments section of the blog and it was agreed to turn it on an experimental basis. Simser noted that it would be a good idea to add a link to the pdf. Wesley agreed and suggested it be added in the Table of Contents section.
Novak asked if there were any additional items to be discussed. Hearing none, the meeting was adjourned at 11:21am.
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
