NASIG Newsletter

LIBRARY SCHOOL OUTREACH TASK FORCE
Sarah Sutton, Chair

Date of Report: April 24, 2007

Committee members:  Linda Smith Griffin (Louisiana State University), Steve Oberg (Abbott Laboratories), Sarah Sutton (Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi), Paoshan Yue (University of Nevada, Reno)

Board Liaison:  Kim Maxwell (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

NARRATIVE OF ACTIVITIES SINCE LAST REPORT
In October 2006, the Library School Outreach Task Force made a proposal to the NASIG Board for a Library School Ambassadors Pilot Project to be conducted between November 2006 and June 2007.  The proposal was approved and a condensed version of it is included at the end of this report.

Below is a description of project results to date. Since the pilot project technically continues until the end of May 2007, any additional progress and accomplishments that are achieved will be reported to our board liaison who can present them to the board at their meeting in conjunction with the 2007 annual conference. 

NASIG LIBRARY SCHOOL AMBASSADORS PILOT PROJECT 2006-07 RESULTS

1. Selecting Library schools for the pilot project
We met our pilot project objective for each task force member to select the library school(s) with which to work for the pilot project no later than December 1, 2006.  The schools we selected are described in the table at the end of this report.  Despite “warning ourselves” that taking on more than one school might be too much work, many of us did so.  As we predicted, those of us who had chosen to be ambassador to more than one school found that we were unable to contribute as much time to each school as we would have liked to have done.

2. Making contact with the library schools.
We also set objectives to make contact with faculty and directors at each school, to make sure that they were aware of the opportunities for NASIG student grant awards, conference and continuing education events, and, when possible, attend a social gathering at the school.  All of the task force members made contact with their library schools. 

Our attempts at contact met with varying levels of success.  In general, it seemed that in cases where the ambassador had an already established relationship with a library school (e.g. working in the campus library, alumni, current student) the ambassador received a warmer reception than in those cases where there was no relationship other than geographic proximity.

In some cases, prior commitments and responsibilities delayed contact with library schools until after the awards application deadline. Although two 2007 student award winners come from library schools with pilot project ambassadors, the overall number of NASIG award applications did not increase substantially over 2006.  We did not provide for a systematic method for discovering conference and continuing education opportunities and communicating them among ourselves.  Thus communicating them to our library schools was not as organized as we would have liked it to be.

3. Creating support materials
We set objectives that called for each ambassador to “select one new material for potential distribution to library school constituents and will take charge of its creation” and to “work with the ECC to create a web page which would describe the Ambassadors program and be a resource for ambassadors” neither of which we fulfilled.  Although we had hopes of fulfilling them as well as all of our other objectives, these were our lowest priority.  Most of the task force members underestimated the amount of time and effort that would be required to fulfill the combination of objectives we set for ourselves and so spent what time was available for ambassador work fulfilling higher priority objectives like establishing contact with our library schools and maintaining their awareness of NASIG awards and continuing education opportunities.

RECOMMENDATION: DEVELOP THE AMBASSADOR PROGRAM OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS

Based on the results above, the task force recommends to the NASIG Board that Library School Outreach become a standing NASIG committee.  The committee’s primary charge would be to develop the Library School Ambassadors program based on the procedures described in the original pilot project proposal with the following refinements and goals for the next three years.

1. Committee member selection and responsibilities
It has been useful to have representatives from the Awards & Recognition Committee, the Continuing Education Committee, and the Membership Development Committee on the task force.  We recommend that this be continued and that three “at large” members be added to the committee roster. 

Beginning in 2007-08, we recommend differentiating between Library School Outreach Committee members and Library School Outreach Ambassadors in order to more evenly distribute the work load.  Committee members would include the representatives from A&R, CEC, and MDC and the at large members mentioned above. Over three years, the committee members would gradually assume a more supervisory role over ambassadors as the number of library schools with whom relationships are established continues to grow.  Committee members would be responsible for selecting additional library schools, creating support materials, and establishing assessment mechanisms, as described below.

Ambassadors, on the other hand, would be recruited from among the NASIG membership and would have the responsibility of establishing and maintaining a relationship with their library school. An “Ambassadorship” might be an opportunity for previous NASIG student award recipients to begin contributing to NASIG.

Committee members would not be restricted from also acting as ambassadors but would have the option not to do so if their other commitments don’t allow them to.  As an example of the need for this, if NASIG became aware of the need for a speaker at a library school to which an ambassador had not been assigned it would be the committee members’ responsibility to seek a suitable and geographically convenient NASIG member will to speak at the school.  Other committee member duties may include developing ambassador training and support materials and guiding ambassadors in their work as well as fulfilling the goals described below.

In 2007-08, the original task force members would slowly shift from ambassador duties to ambassador supervisory duties as they train the new committee members prior to rotating off the committee.  Original task force members would have the option of continuing as ambassadors to the school(s) they selected for the pilot project if they wished.  The goal for the year would be to develop a procedure by which ambassadors could to step down from their duties (since it is unrealistic to expect the same ambassador to continue indefinitely) and smoothly make the transition for the library school from one ambassador to another.  Another goal for the year would be to recruit volunteers to serve as ambassadors if the original task force members wish to reduce or eliminate their ambassador roles.

In 2008-09, the original task force members would rotate off the committee.  They would have the opportunity, however, to retain their ambassadorship(s). The senior committee members would again shift from ambassador duties to ambassador supervisory duties as they train the new committee members prior to rotating off the committee but would again have the option of continuing as ambassadors to the school(s) they selected for the pilot project if they wished.  A goal for the year would be to recruit and train enough ambassadors to communicate with fifteen library schools.  An additional goal might be to develop an ambassador training program.

In 2009-10, similar shifts and training would take place.  The goal for the year would be to recruit and train enough ambassadors to communicate with twenty library schools as well as to determine what the optimum length for an ambassador’s term based on the previous two years’ experiences.

2. Selecting library schools
In 2007-08, continue relationships with the original nine library schools. The nine schools would be divided among additional committee members or non-committee member ambassadors if the original ambassadors feel that they will be unable to devote enough of their efforts to more than one school.  Based on our experience, we recommend that library schools be matched with ambassadors who have an existing relationship with the school if possible.

In 2008-09, based on the additional year’s experience, expand the corps of ambassadors and library schools. Select additional library schools based on the availability of an ambassador with an existing relationship with the school and targeting schools that have not produced NASIG award winners.  During this year, experienced committee members may begin shifting their responsibilities from working as ambassadors to supervising several ambassadors as the roster of library schools expands.  A goal of adding six library schools this year for a total of fifteen should be achieved.

In 2009-10, again based on the additional year’s experience, continue to expand the corps of ambassadors and library schools.  Continue making library school selection based on both the availability of an ambassador with an existing relationship with the school and targeting schools that have not produced NASIG award winners.  During this year, experienced committee members should continue shifting their responsibilities from working as ambassadors to supervising several ambassadors as the roster of library schools expands. A goal of adding five library schools this year for a total of twenty should be achieved.

3. Support materials
We recommend that the new Library School Outreach Committee continue the work started by the task force on creating materials to support the ambassadors’ work with their library schools.

For 2007-08, we recommend setting a goal for committee members to work the Electronic Communications Committee to create a Library School Outreach Committee web page for sharing ideas, results, and materials that committee members and/or ambassadors have found useful in their work with library schools.

In 2008-09, as the committee gains more experience with the library schools’ needs, they can begin work with the Publications Committee on “creating (individually or collaboratively with other ambassadors and NASIG members) materials for distribution to library school constituents” as well as investigating formal methods (in addition to the committee web site) for communicating information about continuing education opportunities between the CEC, committee members, and ambassadors.

In 2009-10, the goal should be to create additional support materials and investigate new formats in which to provide them to library schools.

4. Evaluating the program’s success
It will be important to build in some measures of the success of the program, if for no other reason that to give the NASIG Board some evidence on which to base a decision whether or not to continue it.

For 2007-08, we recommend that the program’s success be measured by the number of additional award applications it generates.  This is data that is already collected by A&R, who not only observes the number of award applications received each year but can provide award applicants’ responses to a question about how they learned of the award which is asked on every application form.  The committee member representing A&R would obviously be able to take the lead on achieving this goal.

For 2008-09, success should again be measured by award applicants’ numbers and responses on their application forms.  Additionally, the goal for the year would be to select or create one additional measure of the programs’ success in raising library school awareness of conferences (especially the NASIG annual conference) and other continuing education opportunities, perhaps in collaboration with the Continuing Education Committee.

For 2009-10, the goal would be to continue to carefully collect data for all measurements of success and to report them to the NASIG Board at the end of the year with a recommendation as to whether the program’s success warrants its continued operation.

ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT THE NASIG STRATEGIC PLAN
The development of the NASIG Library School Ambassadors program directly supports strategic directions #2 in the Strategic Plan: “attract and strengthen involvement of diverse and broad-based constituencies in NASIG” through outreach to both library school students and library school faculty.

ANY CHANGES OR EXCEPTIONS TO BUDGET
None

STATISTICAL INFORMATION
None

ACTIONS REQUIRED BY BOARD
None

QUESTIONS FOR BOARD
None

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOARD
See above.

NAME OF PERSON SUBMITTING REPORT
Sarah Sutton, on behalf of the Library School Outreach Task Force, all of whom contributed to this report. 

PROPOSED NASIG LIBRARY SCHOOL AMBASSADORS PILOT PROJECT (CONDENSED)
OCTOBER 2006

1. Purpose:  

(A) To test the efficacy of a cohort of NASIG Library School Ambassadors in accomplishing the charges to the task force: increasing awareness and knowledge of NASIG and serials professions among library school faculty and students, coordinating and promoting NASIG’s efforts to do the same.
  
(B) To develop a plan for a full-fledged NASIG Library School Ambassador program for implementation in the summer of 2007 based on feedback from Ambassadors, library school faculty and students, and the general NASIG membership about their experiences with/in the pilot program.

2. Procedures:  

(A) Selecting library schools.
Current task force members will select two or three library schools to which they will serve as ambassadors based on physical proximity, existing affiliations, and data on which schools have and have not produced past award winners.  We recommend that no task force member take on more than three library schools for the initial project and that they take into consideration all of the expectations described below in deciding how many schools they wish to work with.

(B) Expectations and duties of ambassadors.
We recognize that differences exist between ambassadors and between library schools.  Ambassadors will be free to choose the methods of contact and level of participation with their selected library schools within the following parameters:

• Ambassadors will be expected to establish and maintain contact with the library school and use existing communication channels (e.g. listservs, electronic bulletin boards, etc.) to increase awareness of NASIG and NASIG-sponsored activities like awards, conferences, and continuing education opportunities. 

o Points of contact with a library school may be formal, including the graduate student organization, the director of the program, and/or faculty members (especially those who teach courses that are likely to include serials related content) or they may be informal, including postings to a public listserv, MySpace or other social networking community where students and/or faculty gather (physically or virtually).
o Items to be communicated include information about NASIG and NASIG activities like continuing education opportunities (workshops, lectures, conferences, forums etc.), venues for learning about serials-related work and issues (potential locations for practical experiences and award and grant opportunities).

• Ambassadors will be expected to keep abreast of the needs of the faculty and students at “their” library schools and to seek out opportunities to promote serials work in general and NASIG in particular there.  Ambassadors will be expected to use creativity to meet those needs but not necessarily to bear the entire burden of work themselves.  Rather, an ambassador will have his or her finger on the pulse of the library school and then use that information to create connections between NASIG and the school however is necessary.  For example, it may not be possible for an ambassador themselves to speak in person in a classroom in another city, but it would be possible for the ambassador to uncover the desire for a guest speaker on serials at the library school and to find a NASIG colleague who lives and works near the school and who would be happy to speak to a library school class.  Opportunities may include:

o Mentoring
o Guest lecturing
o Sharing/presenting current research and issues in serials work
o Acting as a resource for information about serials work in general and their own serials related experiences and interests

• Ambassadors will be expected to participate in creating (individually or collaboratively with other ambassadors and NASIG members) materials for distribution to library school constituents.  To begin with, ambassadors can make use of the NASIGuides and other public materials available on the NASIG website.  Additional materials in a range of formats (print, audio, and interactive) can be created based on library school needs identified by ambassadors and existing ideas put forward by the task force.  Those ideas include creating additional NASIGuides in cooperation with the Publications Committee, creating a brief podcast by the NASIG president about NASIG or about a particular project or issue given by an expert on that particular topic.  Other ideas include a blog or wiki discussion of potential serials-related careers that students and faculty may not be aware of to which both students and NASIG members would contribute.
• Ambassadors will be expected to report on what works and what doesn’t work in their association with library schools on an ambassadors list and in conference calls with the group. 

3. Evaluation:

The successes and failures of the pilot project will be the basis for the final development of a full fledged Ambassadors program.  Evaluation will be based on achieving the objectives stated above, on the experiences of ambassadors as reported on their list and in conference calls, on anonymous data from award applications (e.g., the library schools that student award applicants represent and the number of applicants compared to prior years), on informal interviews with award winners, and on library school faculty or students in attendance or volunteering at continuing education events.  The evaluation will be presented to the board in the form of a report at their meeting in June during the conference and to the NASIG membership in the form of an article in the summer 2008 issue of the NASIG Newsletter.