Dec. 2003

NASIG Newsletter, Dec 2003

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1094&context=nasig

Dec. 2003

The complexities of managing, controlling, and cataloging the elusive electronic journal were discussed in a comprehensive presentation by Sharon Wiles-Young and Judy McNally, of Lehigh University, at the Pennsylvania Library Association's Annual Conference in Pittsburgh, PA, October NEWSLETTER PRESIDENT'S CORNER Anne McKee NASIG President 29 30 34 I really can't believe that it's been 5 months since I assumed the NASIG Presidency - it really does seem like yesterday that Eleanor passed the “virtual” gavel to me at the close of the 2003 conference. Things have moved at such a rapid state that it's nice every once in a while to sit down and “take a breather.” This is my chance for the month! The Board is just back from a VERY busy 48hour Board meeting in Milwaukee. Historically, the fall Board meeting is always held at the site of the next conference, and I think the rest of the NASIG Board would agree with me that Milwaukee, WI is an absolutely fantastic site for our 2004 conference. The city is quite walkable, there is great public transportation, and for those who like to shop, a large, multi-level mall is just one block east of the hotel where the conference will be held! - Username/Passwords no longer required to access issues of the Newsletter! TABLE OF CONTENTS During our city tour we saw all the lovely things that Milwaukee offers to NASIG. Anyone who has ever heard of Milwaukee knows the justifiable HIGH reputation Milwaukee enjoys in hosting numerous cultural festivals. The week we are in town will be the nation’s largest Polish festival, and the Milwaukee Art Museum will be sponsoring its art festival. We just received verification from the Milwaukee Brewers that they will be in town for a home game, so combined with all the great restaurants and pubs that call Milwaukee home, there will be something to offer every NASIG conference attendee. Along with the GREAT conference location however, is an equally dazzling program. Thanks to the 2-½ day retreat the Program Planning Committee held in Portland with facilitator Betty Kjellberg, the program was carefully reviewed, updated, renewed, and re-invigorated. You will be hearing many more exciting things in the upcoming weeks and months from the PPC, but I did want to stress that the new program “schedule” was adopted by unanimous vote of the NASIG Board. While speakers have not been finalized, it has been most gratifying to see the dramatic increase in speaker proposals for this next conference. As Marilyn Geller and Emily McElroy, CoChairs of PPC, stated in their report, the proposals received have proven to be an “embarrassment of riches.” Each proposal was better than the one before, which makes selection for the program that much more difficult! J Please ensure that your calendars are marked for June 17th-20th since this REALLY is a conference you do NOT want to miss. However, along with the exciting conference developments were some very sobering realities, which need to be discussed openly and candidly by the membership. For most of the history of NASIG, our membership dues have only provided 40% of our operating budget. The other 60% comes in from whatever surplus we might (or might not) make from the conference as well as our annual payment from Haworth Press for the conference Proceedings. As anyone knows, an organization cannot continue to grow, prosper and flourish if 60% of its budget is based on tenuous grounds. The NASIG Board has begun the discussion, which will take place over many months, on the available options to increase our revenue and ensure the security and vitality of this dynamic organization, as well as establish a plan to boost operating reserves. Our absolute goal is to continue the programs that the membership has told us were of utmost importance (such as the awards and scholarships). Accordingly, we have pledged to offer the lowest possible conference registration price. You may remember that last year we were able to pick up the cost of transportation (looping from the hotels to campus and the reception at the public library) PLUS the Passkey cost (the surcharge on each hotel reservation). Thus, these fees were NOT passed along to the conference attendees. We were able to do this, as NASIG was fortunate to realize some lower charges than we had budgeted for at the William & Mary Conference. The new fiscal realities are that NASIG is not able to assume any costs associated with the registration fees for 2004. To hold registration costs, the NASIG Board has already voted to offer one social event at the 2004 conference. As the city has so much to offer, there will be no lack of choices for evenings out on your own or as part of a larger group. I for one am already planning on hitting the Polish Festival and then I’m going to have a hard decision to make between the Art Festival and its gorgeous museum or the Brewers Game! (Though, those of you who attended the baseball game in North Carolina may remember that it was I who kicked over one glass of beer that seemed to turn into Niagara Falls, cascading down 20 rows of bleachers. Hmm, perhaps the Art Festival is the way I should go!) J As with all Board meetings that I’ve been privileged to attend, the agenda was chock-full of important agenda items, such as the great committee reports we receive detailing in full how NASIG’s committees really help to accomplish the goals of this organization. There are some proposed bylaw changes that will be sent forward for a vote of the membership--including one proposal to establish a true petition process for the nominations ballot. This is a way for the membership to have more ownership in the nominations and elections process. Another proposal approved by the Board was the naming of the Newsletter Editor as an ex-officio, non-voting member of the Board. For the past several years the Newsletter Editor has been a Board “guest” at all Board meetings. Per Article V, Section 1 of the NASIG Bylaws, “Ex-officio members, appointed by the Board to assist the organization in any capacity, may serve at the pleasure of the Board.” The adoption of an ex-officio was simply a means of formalizing a practice that has been in effect for the last eight years or so. As I reported in my last column, NASIG (with its new strategic plan) is at a “crossroads.” It is important to know that the Board is, to the very last person, very grateful to be given the chance to help lead NASIG into its new direction. I want to continually stress, however, that we will ensure that our core value system remains at the forefront of any new initiatives. It is appropriate at this time of year to look back, evaluate what we have done, aim ourselves to new directions, and give thanks for the blessings in each of our lives. I want to thank you again for the confidence you expressed when you elected me as Vice-President/President-elect. I take this responsibility very seriously, but I also give thanks for having the opportunity to serve NASIG in this capacity. Please remember that you may always contact me either thru phone or via: . I do travel frequently, but I ALWAYS have access to email. The very happiest of holidays for each and every one of you and may we all experience peace in 2004. Anne NASIG EXECUTIVE BOARD MINUTES Bea Caraway, NASIG Secretary Date, Time: October 23, 2003, 8:16 A.M. – approximately 5:30 P.M. Place: Milwaukee Hilton City Center, Kilbourne Room, Milwaukee, WI Guests: Pam Cipkowski, co-chair (with Denise Novak), 2004 Conference Planning Committee Marilyn Geller and Emily McElroy, co-chairs, 2004 Program Planning Committee Charlene Simser, NASIG Newsletter editor-in-chief 1.0 Welcome (McKee) McKee called the meeting to order at 8:16 A.M. and welcomed board members and guests. She made one change to the agenda: for item 7.12, substitute a report on the mentoring program for the scheduled report on peer organizations. McKee said that she planned to ask for formal votes more frequently than may have been the case in past board meetings. Persing volunteered to be the time-keeper during the meeting. 2.0 Secretary’s report (Caraway) 2.1 Board actions since board meeting June 25, 2003: 7/30/03 Board voted to move the NASIG archives, with the exception of the conference souvenirs, to a permanent home in the archives of the University of Illinois. 7/31/03 Board voted to accept the PPC 2004 program format recommendation. 10/01/03 Board accepted, with thanks, the final report of the 2003 Conference Planning Committee. 10/17/03 Board happily accepted the 2004 conference logo (to be used on anything conference related, including the Proceedings) upon recommendation of the 2004 CPC. Persing moved (Tenney seconded) that the board approve the list of board decisions as recorded. Motion passed unanimously. 2.2 Board roster updates Caraway distributed copies of the 2003/2004 board rosters and asked board members to make corrections. 2.3 Revisions to the executive working calendar Caraway asked for changes needing to be made to the executive working calendar. None were noted. Caraway asked that board members contact her as they work with the calendar and discover inaccuracies. Caraway asked for clarification about the mechanism for making changes to the executive board working calendar. All agreed that all changes should go through the board liaisons to the secretary and from the secretary to the web master. The secretary will in turn notify board members of all such changes. Caraway reported that she had received no more NASIG banners since the June board meeting. ACTION: Caraway will post one more call for banners to NASIG-L. DATE: Immediately after the fall board meeting. 3.0 Treasurer’s report (Novak) 3.1 2003 budget (expenditures, detailed, balance sheet) Novak reported that NASIG had a total equity of $150,203.51 and liabilities of $0.00 as of October 11, 2003. Some committees have over expended their budgets due to unanticipated expenses, e.g., implementation of online registration and facilitation for strategic planning. 3.2.1 2003 conference The 2003 conference posted income of $162,643.24. Expenses as of October 11, 2003 totaled $143,914.69; however, Novak has just received a few more invoices totaling approximately $2,000. 3.2.2 Proposed 2004 budget The telephone category in the administrative budget received an increase of $200 to cover conference calls. Committee chairs who need to make conference calls should ask for help from their board liaison to set them up. Following a period of questions, answers, and discussion, Tenney moved (Cook seconded) that the board adopt the proposed 2004 budget. Motion passed unanimously. 3.2.3 Operating reserves (McKee) McKee addressed NASIG’s lack of a plan for putting money away to cover operating expenses in the event of a period of financial difficulty. Our only income is from dues, which pay for 25-30% of annual operating expenses, from the income we receive from our publisher, Haworth Press, based upon the Proceedings, and from any surplus that may result from the conference. To make up the difference between income and expenses, we rely on conference surpluses from two or three years ago. However, conference surpluses are unpredictable and unreliable, and in some years, the conference runs a deficit. The kernel of such a “rainy-day fund” could be the Schwab account, to which NASIG has added some money over the years and from which it has withdrawn nothing for several years. McKee argued for creating a long-term plan for building a surplus which would allow NASIG to continue to exist in the event of a financial disaster, e.g., having to cancel a conference at the last minute. ACTION: The Finance Committee will study the issue and report back to the board. DATE: By the fall 2004 board meeting. [Order of agenda items changed as indicated below] 7.0 Committee reports 7.1 Archivist’s report (Caraway) Caraway reported that archivist Lange has reminded committee chairs to send materials for the archives, has filed materials and updated the inventory as she has received them, has continued to correspond with the University of Illinois regarding details of the transfer of materials, and has begun the folder-by-folder listing of materials required by the University of Illinois. As soon as the University of Illinois archives supplies the board with a memorandum of understanding, the board will be able to vote to accept the memorandum. Following that action, Holley Lange, NASIG archivist, can proceed with the transfer of materials to their permanent home. The board members extended their appreciation to Lange for her work on behalf of NASIG. ACTION: Caraway to follow up with Lange about the memo of understanding. DATE: Immediately following the fall board meeting. 7.2 Awards and Recognition (Randall) Randall reported on actions taken by the committee since the June board meeting, including revising award announcements prior to the 2004 cycle and updating FAQs to reflect any related changes. Procedures for blind review of Tuttle award applications were completed. The board directed that all applications be subject to blind review. ACTION: Randall to direct the committee to institute blind review procedures for all award applications. DATE: ASAP. For the sake of clarity, the board asked that the committee revise the documentation and announcement for the Fritz Schwartz Award to provide an unambiguous statement that the award is intended for students enrolled in master’s degree programs in library science, not in doctoral programs. ACTION: Randall to direct the committee to specify that eligibility for the Fritz Schwartz Award is limited to students enrolled in an ALA-accredited master’s degree program. DATE: By the beginning of the 2005 award cycle. Board discussion centered around a question put forward by the committee itself, that is, whether the committee might not be able to function as effectively with fewer members. At present there are 18 members including the co-chairs. Board members suggested several alternative schemes for committee composition. ACTION: Randall to work with VP/Pres.-Elect Savage to discuss these alternatives further and report back to the board. DATE: By the January board meeting. McKee informed the board that Bill Cohen, Haworth Press (publisher of the NASIG Proceedings) had offered to co-sponsor the student grant awards. The board reaffirmed that this goes against NASIG’s policy prohibiting sponsorship by commercial entities. The co-chairs thanked outgoing members for their contributions and extended a warm welcome to new committee members. 4.0 Conference Planning Committee (Cipkowski and Novak) Cipkowski and Novak presented the report of CPC progress to date. Cipkowski began by noting that the CPC consisted of a reasonable number of members—9 members and 2 co-chairs. Assignments have been distributed to them and work is well under way. The Hilton Milwaukee City Center will be the conference hotel, charging $105 plus tax per night for single or double occupancy. Some nearby hotels are slightly less expensive while others are slightly higher. The 2004 conference logo has been designed and will appear on conference materials. Regarding rights to use the logo for various purposes, the board agreed that a model agreement should be drawn up and included in the CPC manual for use by each CPC. ACTION: Tenney will investigate some existing permission forms of this sort and recommend a draft. DATE: Before the 2004 CPC revises and sends the manual on to the 2005 CPC. Regarding souvenirs, the board reaffirmed its decision from 2 years ago to not pass on unsold souvenirs for more than 2 years. Louise Diodato, committee member in charge of souvenirs, suggested the idea of selling some library-related, locally produced items on a consignment basis. The board thanked Louise for her creative thinking. ACTION: CPC to investigate this idea further and report back to the board. DATE: By the January board meeting. The opening session is tentatively planned to take place at the Milwaukee Public Library and the opening reception to follow in the Milwaukee Public Museum. The conference web site should be ready to go live as a “skeleton” site by November 15, 2003. Additional information will be included as time goes on. The CPC asked for direction on whether to organize a fun run this year. The board would be happy to see a fun run for attendees but has some concern about safety and liability issues on city streets. ACTION: Cipkowski to work with the CPC to find out what, if anything, is required by the city in order to have a fun run; also to find out if anyone in local running clubs would be willing to help out with the run. DATE: Before the conference brochure is completed. The board discussed the idea of setting member and nonmember rates for conference attendance but came to no firm conclusion. The discussion was tabled until the next day’s meeting. Todd O’Leary, of the Milwaukee Convention and Visitors Bureau, joined the board and showed samples of the publications his organization can provide for no charge or a minimal charge. These include city maps, photos of Milwaukee attractions to include on the conference web site, calendars of local events, and so forth. He can also send promotional materials to NASIG continuing education events that take place before conference registration closes. Volunteers are available to stuff conference packets at no charge. For a modest fee ($13.50 per hour, minimum 4 hours), the bureau can also offer to staff a visitor information desk in the hotel for providing restaurant and other information and for making meal reservations. The remainder of the day’s agenda consisted of a tour of places where meetings or events may occur: the public library, the Milwaukee Public Museum, the library’s meeting rooms at Marquette University, Miller Park, and the Hilton meeting and reception rooms. Agenda item 4.1 (rate structures for the conference – member vs. non-member) was deferred until later in the meeting. The afternoon’s tours and the day’s work concluded at approximately 5:30 P.M. NASIG Executive Board Minutes (cont.) Date, Time: October 25, 2003, 8:15 A.M. – 5:36 P.M. 7.0 Committee reports (cont.) 7.3 Bylaws (Tenney) Tenney reported on the committee’s progress since the June 2003 board meeting, which included revising committee guidelines to reflect the changes which had been made to the bylaws in the spring 2003 vote. 7.3.1 Clarification about length of term for members-atlarge In response to an earlier request from the board, the committee investigated term limits and restrictions on people who fill out partial terms in the case of an unexpected vacancy. The board was interested in knowing if a person filling out an unexpired term could be nominated for reelection to that same position. Their finding: NASIG uses Robert’s Rules of Order except in cases where NASIG’s bylaws differ explicitly, and Robert’s states that “an officer who has served more than half a term…is considered to have served a full term.” Consequently, the Bylaws Committee advised that the current bylaws cover this matter sufficiently and recommended that they not be changed. The board gratefully accepted their recommendation. 7.3.2. Clarification on termination of a member’s rights In response to the recent improper use of the NASIG Directory by a NASIG member, the board asked the Bylaws Committee to investigate whether the section on membership needed revision to include information on member responsibilities and behavior. As in the case of term lengths, the committee advised the board that Robert’s included procedures to cover such situations and that no major revision to the NASIG bylaws was required. The committee offered a draft statement that could be added to the NASIG bylaws, and Savage suggested including a statement to the effect that power to decide on sanctions for violations rests with the board. . The committee also recommended adding to the NASIG-L FAQ specific guidelines to cover responsibilities of members, appropriate behavior, and actions to be taken when infractions occur. ACTION: Tenney to ask the Bylaws Committee to revise their draft statement for the bylaws, to draft a section on member responsibilities and behavior for the NASIG-L FAQ, and to send the back to the board for approval. DATE: ASAP. Tenney noted that the committee had collaborated with the Nominations and Elections Committee on the question of petition candidates. McKee commended both committees for modeling effective collaboration and thanked the members of the Bylaws Committee for their hard work. 7.4 Continuing Education (MacAdam) MacAdam reported on activities since the June board meeting. These included a successful mentoring program at the 2003 conference, with 40 pairs of mentors and mentees participating. Following the 2003 conference, the mentoring program began reporting temporarily to past president Eleanor Cook. In addition, the committee awarded the Mexican Student grant to Pablo Carrasco Renteria. Following the 2003 conference, the responsibility for this grant was shifted to the Awards and Recognition Committee. Continuing education events since June 2003 included 1) an SCCTP Integrating Resources workshop as a preconference to the Kentucky Library Association’s annual conference (NASIG offered partial sponsorship) and 2) a program entitled “Managing, Controlling, and Cataloging the Elusive Electronic Journal,” offered at the Pennsylvania Library Association’s annual conference (NASIG offered partial sponsorship). Several events for 2004 are presently in the planning stages. The discussion on library school outreach was postponed until the board reached the agenda item on the Public Relations and Outreach Task Force. In response to McKee’s question as to whether the Continuing Education Committee had developed any of their own ideas for CE events, MacAdam said that they had not. Board members contributed several ideas, including taking up unused ideas from the call for program ideas for the 2004 conference. The co-chairs expressed special appreciation to immediate past members Lisa Furubotten and Elizabeth Parang for their much-missed expertise in planning events in Mexico and Puerto Rico. The board thanked the members and cochairs of the Continuing Education Committee for their enthusiasm and commitment. 7.5 Database and Directory (Persing) Persing reported that renewal letters had been mailed on October 3, 2003, at a total cost of $628.11, and that as of October 10, 2003, NASIG membership numbered 1338. The committee also piloted a web-accessible printable version of the online Membership Directory, which is updated twice monthly. As usual, the committee has done a good job of executing its schedule of Directory maintenance and updates. 7.5.1 Print-on-demand Directory The committee prepared a recommendation to the board regarding the future of the commercially printed NASIG Membership Directory. A printable online version of the Directory offers these advantages: 1) it would avoid the current problem of the print version having outdated information almost as soon as it is distributed, 2) an online, printable version would be updated twice month and will therefore make an accurate version available to members virtually all the time, 3) it would be far less expensive to produce. In the ensuing discussion, Persing noted that producing a printable online Directory would save $6,000-$7,000 annually. Page said that any printable version must be effortless to print, and therefore should probably be in PDF. Savage added that the searchable database must remain available to the membership, and not be replaced by a printable version only. MacAdam asked what last year’s membership survey revealed about opinions of an online-only Directory, but no one present had the answer readily available. Simser suggested that both versions (commercially printed and online printable) should be available for at least a year. McKee expressed her opinion that moving exclusively to a printable online Directory entailed too much change for now. In response, MacAdam suggested tracking the number of times the printable version is downloaded during this year. ACTION: Persing to find out from ECC if it is possible to track the number of times the printable Directory is downloaded. DATE: ASAP ACTION: Persing to ask the chair of D&D to include, with each NASIG-L announcement of new members, a reminder that a printable version is available on NASIGWeb. The board thanked the committee for their initiative in offering a recommendation to the board. 7.5.2 Conversion of Membership Directory to SQL server Schmitt led off the discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of converting the database, which is presently in Access, to SQL. The disadvantage is that it is more complex to manage than Access and that, consequently, the Electronic Communications Committee would be heavily involved in conversion and in ongoing technical support. Advantages include 1) being able to have a tiered fee structure in online registration for members and non-members (because there could be membership look-up via a link from the registration form to the database, and 2) being able to maintain a permanent record of each member’s NASIG-related activity, e.g., one’s committee assignments and offices held. Treasurer Novak indicated that she would be more comfortable with one more cycle of the new online registration before making yet another change to the process by converting the membership database to SQL. After considerable discussion, Persing recommended that the Electronic Communications and the Database and Directory Committees convert the membership database to SQL in time for the 2005 round of renewals and conference registration. ACTION: Persing to ask ECC to begin investigating what would be involved in such a conversion schedule. DATE: Persing will report back to the board at the January board meeting. 7.5.3 Deadline for renewals or new memberships In the event the board institutes a member/non-member fee structure for conference registration, the deadline for joining or renewing in order to be eligible for the member conference fee must be figured only after taking into account the timeline for processing new and renewed memberships, the database purge for non-renewed members, the printing of labels from the database for ballot mailings, and the opening of conference registration. Persing must check on these schedules before being able to recommend a deadline for renewals or new memberships. ACTION: Persing to verify the scheduled times for the above activities and recommend to the board a reasonable deadline for renewals or new memberships. DATE: ASAP. 7.6 Electronic Communications (Persing) Persing reported that in addition to the committee’s routine activities since the June board meeting, they have begun tracking statistics for hits on the Newsletter at the request of the Newsletter editor. In response to a number of reported problems in accessing NASIGweb after the posting of NASIG-L announcements that direct attention to the web site, Bee.net removed the company's standard limit of 100 simultaneous users so that NASIGweb users now have unlimited access. No problems have been reported since this change in access levels. Anna Creech is working with Newsletter editor Char Simser to create an online conference photo gallery. Four new listservs (PPC1-L through PPC4-L) were created for the Program Planning Committee subgroups; they can be reused each year. NASIG now has a total of 33 listservs. In response to a previous request for a recommendation to the board about adding a search-enabled feature to NASIGWeb, the committee asked for specific guidance as to what should be accessible to the search tool: public pages only or password-protected areas, too? In the latter case, non-members might well retrieve links to pages, including all of the newsletters, that they would then be blocked form viewing. After some discussion on this point, Persing moved (Page seconded) that the Newsletter no longer be password-protected. The motion passed unanimously. This action cleared the way to consider once again what portions of the web site should be searchable. Simser asked if it would be possible to exclude the Newsletter from a given search in order to reduce the number of hits, if one so desired. ACTION: Persing to find out if one may exclude certain areas of NASIGWeb from a search, e.g., the newsletters. DATE: ASAP. Following discussion, Persing moved (Cook seconded) that the ECC create indexing for all non-passwordprotected areas of NASIGWeb. The motion passed unanimously. The board extended its gratitude to the Electronic Communications Committee for their diligence and conscientiousness. 7.7 Evaluation and Assessment (Schmitt) Schmitt report that in all, conference attendees turned in 238 conference forms, 47 preconference forms, and 38 poster session forms. The EAC keyed in ratings and comments and created summary reports, which were then distributed to the appropriate recipients. In addition, since this was NASIG’s first year to be in hotels, not dorms, the EAC, at the request of the board, created a short survey emailed it to the approximately 60 attendees who did not stay in one of the conference hotels. This survey confirmed that some attendees chose to stretch their conference dollars by selecting less expensive accommodations. There was discussion about the inclusion of individual speaker ratings in the conference evaluation form. The current procedure involves sending a reminder to each speaker that his or her evaluation is available upon request. Depending on how many speakers typically request evaluations, the committee may rethink including the individual speaker sections on the evaluation form. Options for streamlining the process are having EAC send out speaker evaluations automatically or having the Program Planning Committee send a request form to each speaker. ACTION: Schmitt to find out from EAC how many speakers requested an evaluation report this year. DATE: ASAP 7.7.1 A major issue now being considered is whether or not to move to a web-based evaluation form. President McKee has appointed a task force to study the issue, including reviewing current options and resources available for web-based surveys and related electronic data analysis tools. McKee will announce the names of the task force members in the weeks following the fall board meeting. The task force is to submit its final report to the board by the January 2004 board meeting. Schmitt is to serve as the task force’s liaison to the board. If the task force were to recommend and the board to approve adopting such a tool, implementation would not take place during 2004. The primary concern of the EAC when considering a web-based application is the time that would be required to redesign the form. 7.8 Newsletter (Simser) Simser reported on activities since the last board meeting. Staffing changes: Carol MacAdam, Step Schmitt, and Pam Cipkowski stepped down from their positions on the editorial board to assume responsibilities on the NASIG board and with the Conference Planning Committee. Five new staff members joined the Newsletter: Susan Andrews (columns editor), Sharon Heminger (copy editor), Maggie Rioux (profiles editor), Mykie Howard (html), and Kathy Kobyljanec (conference editor). Kathy Kobyljanec’s work as conference editor has ended; she will now maintain the NASIG “Calendar of Events.” (This responsibility was previously assumed by the html editor.) Despite the changes, the most recent issue of the Newsletter appeared in both the html and pdf versions within a few days of the September 1 deadline. Regarding the change from the Newsletter’s being password-protected to its being a publicly-accessible document, Simser indicated that she would include an announcement to that effect when she sends the link out to NASIG-L for the next issue. Reporting on progress toward creating a digital archive of conference photos, Simser announced that Anna Creech (ECC member) was working with her on this project. A tentative proposal would be to have an index list of all the annual conferences with links to each set of photos. In addition, there could be a link from the annual conference web site itself. This could also be the place to link to a photo gallery of all souvenirs from past conferences. Cook suggested setting as a goal to have photos up and available by the 20th anniversary conference. Schmitt brought up the question of needing permission from the people pictured in the photographs. Most thought that it would be sufficient to get permission from the photographer only. Novak then moved (Tenney seconded) that the Newsletter editor move forward with a digital photograph archive. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION: Persing will ask ECC to provide help with technical specifications. ACTION: Simser will try to locate photos from previous newsletters. ACTION: Novak will ask someone she knows who may be able to convert photos to digital photos. DATE: By January board meeting. 7.9 Nominations and Elections (Cook) Cook reported that Nominations and Elections had issued calls for nominations according to its usual schedule, i.e., during and in the weeks following the 2003 conference. 7.9.1 Proposed Bylaws Change N&E assisted the Bylaws Committee by giving input on a proposed revision of article VII, section I of the bylaws. The revision would allow nominees by petition to appear on the official ballot. If approved by the membership, the change would take effect for the election of officers and members-at-large for 2005. Discussion centered in part on the timing for board approval of the slate of candidates and distribution by the Nominations and Elections Committee of that slate to the membership. These dates and the deadline for membership renewals must be synchronized in order to verify the membership status of petition candidates. As the bylaws language includes no dates, the Nominations and Elections Committee will work out the timing in cooperation with the Database and Directory Committee and the treasurer in order to establish a workable process. ACTION: Cook to ask N&E to work with D&D to establish a workable timeline for distributing the official ballot, receiving petition ballots, and verifying membership status. In further discussion, McKee expressed concern over the small number of endorsements required by the proposed bylaws language (10) in order for a petition candidate to appear on the ballot. Randall suggested that every call for nominations include a link to a page detailing the petition process. Cook moved (MacAdam seconded) that the text of the bylaws revision as amended be sent to the membership for a vote. There were 9 yes votes and 2 abstentions. The motion passed. After the vote, the question arose as to whether or not a position statement would be required of a petition candidate. ACTION: Cook to ask N&E to determine whether or not a petition candidate is required to submit a position statement. DATE: By the January board meeting. The board thanked the Nominations and Elections Committee and Bylaws Committee for working so well together on the question of petition candidates. 7.10 Proceedings (Randall) Randall reported that the manuscript submission deadline for the conference Proceedings was changed to October 31 this year, about a month later than in the past. All the papers but one were submitted. One paper from the 2002 Proceedings was inadvertently omitted but will be included in the 2003 Proceedings (with an editorial comment) and in the online version of the 2002 Proceedings. The indexer for the 2003 Proceedings will be LadyJane Hickey McKee announced that she will appoint a task force to investigate all potential outlets for publication of the Proceedings. Haworth currently publishes the Proceedings. 7.11 Publications (Page) Page reported that the online conference handouts were a glowing success, thanks to Michelle Seikel and Rick Anderson. Betty Landesman and Lillian DeBlois continue to work with Frieda Rosenberg on the NASIGuide to the serial holdings format. Marit Taylor is fine-tuning the human resources directory on NASIGWeb. Page introduced the topic of possible involvement of the Publications Committee in a project to preserve ezines. NASIG member Steve Oberg had suggested the idea to the committee. After some discussion, the board asked Page to request that the committee survey what related projects, if any, are presently under way outside NASIG. ACTION: Publications Committee to investigate what projects are under way to preserve ezines. DATE: By the January board meeting. Geller and McElroy reported that the PPC is pleased with the response to the three calls for programming ideas rather than the traditional call for proposals that had a single deadline in August. They recommend that this approach be continued next year with some refinements. Another change this year consists in the PPC taking an active role in finding appropriate speakers to take on topics of great interest, rather than only primarily choosing among ready-made proposals that were submitted. A third change is the creation of subgroups of committee members not along program-type lines (plenary, concurrent, workshop), but rather according to implementation of various changes to the program structure (poster sessions; working lunches; exhibits; business meeting; and handling paperwork, both within the PPC and for the presenters). The co-chairs went over a very preliminary outline of possible programs and discussed with the board some changes in scheduling that may be required because of room configurations at the conference hotel. ACTION: PPC to finalize the program content and schedule for the 2004 conference. DATE: By the January board meeting. 4.1 Rate structures – member vs. non-member (deferred from Friday’s agenda) Board discussion revealed no dissent on the topic of charging a higher conference fee for non-members than for members. Most organizations, including ALA, do this. It may motivate people to join NASIG, and if not, it will create an added benefit for NASIG members by helping to defray some small part of the cost to members. Persing moved (MacAdam seconded) that NASIG set higher fees for non-members than for members. The motion passed unanimously. The fees for the annual conference will be set, as usual, during the January board meeting. 7.14 Site Selection (Page, Tenney) For the 2005 conference, to be held in Minneapolis, Page collected comparative information on costs, services, and facilities for three hotels, the Hilton, the Hyatt, and the Marriott. After careful consideration of this information, the board decided to drop the Marriott but to ask Page to negotiate food prices further with the Hilton and the Hyatt before a final decision is made. ACTION: Page to pursue further negotiations and report back to the board, with a goal of signing a contract with one or the other of the hotels by December 12, 2003. DATE: ASAP but before December 31, 2003. For the 2006 conference, Page and Tenney have sent inquiries to and requests for information from Denver, CO, Memphis, TN, and Charlotte, NC. Denver and Memphis have responded. A NASIG member contacted NASIG concerning the possibility of holding the 2006 conference at their campus. If a complete preliminary site selection checklist form is completed and returned, the site selection team will investigate further. 7.16 Publicist (Cook) Cook indicated that she had sent 80 English and 10 Spanish brochures in response to requests from NASIG members to be distributed at regional events. To the list of lists that NASIG announcements go to, she has added LibAdmin and ERIL-L. She has also added our corresponding members as well as contacts from Australia and New Zealand to her address list. Lisa Furubotten has agreed to serve as the contact specifically for the Mexican list, which has proved difficult to subscribe and unsubscribe to. The publicist will forward announcements to her to forward on to the list. In response to Cook’s comments about the timeconsuming nature of the work and the need to use a separate email address to accomplish it, Savage suggested having ECC establish a generic publicist email address, which would allow for permanent subscription to the appropriate lists. ACTION: Persing to ask ECC to create an email address for the publicist. DATE: ASAP 8.0 New Business 8.1 Appointment of Newsletter editor as board ex-officio (McKee) McKee put forward for discussion the idea of making the position of Newsletter editor an ex-officio board position. After very brief discussion, Novak moved (Savage seconded) that the position of Newsletter editor be an exofficio member of the board. The motion passed unanimously. Randall then moved (Persing seconded) that any ex-officio board member be a non-voting member. The motion passed unanimously. 8.2 Registration fee waiver for PPC co-chairs (McKee, Savage) The question proposed for discussion was whether the cochairs of the Program Planning Committee should have the conference registration fee waived. The reimbursement policy stipulates that members and cochairs of the Conference Planning Committee receive waivers of the conference registration fee. The board reached no agreement on the question and tabled it for discussion at a later board meeting. 8.3 UKSG proposal (McKee) Following the June 2003 board meeting, McKee contacted the UKSG and asked for a proposal for cooperating on Serials e-News. The draft letter from the UKSG came in August 2003 and reflects the key points enumerated by the NASIG board at the June board meeting. Important clarifications that arose during the discussion included the fact that Serials eNews would not replace the NASIG Newsletter and that the distribution of the publication would be via NASIG-L. It was mentioned that cooperating with the UKSG on Serials eNews would help move us toward one of the goals in the new strategic plan, i.e., to increase NASIG’s visibility worldwide. At the end of the discussion, there was no consensus. McKee offered to contact UKSG again to ask for permission to distribute an electronic copy of a back issue to the NASIG membership in order to find out what members might think of it. ACTION: McKee to ask for permission to distribute a copy of Serials eNews to the NASIG membership. DATE: ASAP. 8.5 Late-night socials (McKee, Cook) Past-president Cook reported that the hospitality suite next to her room at the Portland Marriott had served as the location for unofficial late-night socials during the 2003 conference. The invitation spread by word of mouth, not to be exclusive but in order to be discreet about bringing our own food and drink into the hotel. All interested NASIG members and guests were welcome. Approximately 40-50 people came each evening, and on the first evening most of the student grant winners attended. Mentoring pairs also attended. Guests were invited to “BYOB” (which a few did), contribute snacks (which one did), and make contributions to help defray the cost (which several did). Cook recommended providing a similar arrangement in Milwaukee, for the cost would be minimal (the cost of the room and the cost of food and drink brought in but not catered by the hotel). During the discussion, which followed the recommendation, it was noted that the costs to host a hospitality suite in a hotel are much higher than to have a space for a late-night social on campus. Usually such campus rooms are free of charge, and the catering costs are minimal. At a hotel, to the cost of the room must be added the cost of hotel catering, which is prohibitively expensive. However, trying to “sneak” food and drink into the suite was strongly discouraged as an alternative. Page suggested that board members instead volunteer to lead groups to bars, coffee shops, and so forth each evening. Daily announcements could include information about such groups, and the information could also be posted to the message board. The CPC will suggest suitable places close to the hotel in Milwaukee. 8.4 Purchasing a NASIG-owned laptop for CPC (Tenney, Schmitt) Background information: The biggest obstacle to online registration is getting good technical support for the registrar. The availability of good tech support depends upon where the registrar is located and whether he or she has someone to trouble-shoot as needed. Proposal: NASIG would buy a PC and printer. A designated member of ECC would set up the laptop with the required software and files and mail it to the registrar, who can bring it to the conference in order to conduct onsite registration. Presently, the registrar must own or be able to borrow a laptop to bring to conference. At the end of the conference, the registrar could give the PC and printer to the designated ECC member for reworking before the next round of conference registrations begins. Cost: $1500-$2000. Discussion centered on the cost relative to the benefit of this expenditure compared to other potential expenditures. The board also discussed in what ways various possible expenditures might further particular strategic goals. Examples include the cost of cooperating on the UKSG publication, Serials eNews, which would enhance NASIG’s visibility worldwide, and the cost of awarding conference grants to students, which we assume helps further our goal of identifying and recruiting new serials to the profession. Determining the relative importance of various goals and the extent to which the action would help us attain them was a task the board could not accomplish on such a limited schedule; the topic promises to be an ongoing point of discussion. Regarding student awards, Schmitt suggested having a fund-raiser to earn money to fund some of the student awards if the board decided to give fewer of them. Novak suggested tabling the issue of a NASIG-owned PC until we can find the money to carry out the recommendation. ACTION: Each liaison is to examine his or her committee budgets and report on any possible extra funds. DATE: By the January board meeting. Since the topic of student grants had been brought up, consideration was given to the number of grants to be awarded for the 2004 conference. After discussion, Cook moved (Persing seconded) that NASIG award up to three student grants, one Fritz Schwartz, one Horizon, one Mexican Student Grant, and up to one Tuttle award in 2004. The motion passed unanimously. 7.15 PR/Outreach Task Force recommendations In response to its charge “to review the former RC&M Committee’s charge and responsibilities, and recommend a replacement committee that can address these needs and others that are relevant to public relations and outreach efforts,” the PR/Outreach Task Force report offered a proposal which took the charge into account and also considered how it related to the strategic plan. Their recommendation is that rather than attempt to accomplish everything with volunteers, NASIG form a relationship with a firm familiar with the library and serials communities to provide professional management in the following areas: membership acquisition and management, organizational news and public relations, and professional organization liaisons. While volunteers are essential to NASIG and show great dedication, the task force believes that the expertise and time required to offer professional management as noted above may not reasonably be expected of volunteers. Discussion: Savage noted that membership acquisition and management are qualitatively different from organizational news and public relations or professional organization liaisons and could perhaps continue to be accomplished by volunteers. Page wondered how we could execute the recommendation of the PR/Outreach Task Force. She suggested asking a new task force to investigate how the proposal could be carried out and how much it would cost. McKee noted that Betty Kjellberg could give us some starting points for such an investigation. The new task force could be made up of some of the PR/Outreach Task Force members with some new ones added. Page would like to see the proposal fleshed out with several different scenarios. ACTION: McKee to appoint a task force to determine various options and their costs for implementing the recommendations of the PR/Outreach Task Force. DATE: By the January board meeting. As for the mentoring program, which had been supposed to move from the Continuing Education Committee to the now-disbanded RC&M, Cook suggested that it become the Mentoring Committee, perhaps with library school outreach as part of its charge. McKee disagreed with the notion of turning it into a committee now. Tenney proposed letting the mentoring program continue to work independently and report to the past president until after June at least, then revisit the question, to which everyone agreed. With regard to the question of library outreach, which was one of the issues the PR/Outreach Task Force had been asked to consider, pending the results of the new task force, the board directed MacAdam to ask Deberah England and Kim Maxwell to compile a list of contacts at all of the ALA-accredited schools. 9.0 Other business Novak observed that the afternoon of tours to local facilities selected for social events, opening sessions, and meeting spaces were not a good use of the board members’ time. She suggested, and the board agreed, that in the future, a 1-hour drive around the city would suffice, and only if CPC had a concern about a particular location should the board visit it at length. strongly, suggesting that only those committees with action or discussion items listed should be allotted time on the board agenda. Novak asked each liaison to instruct his or her committee chairs to send invoices to her before December 31. She also asked that board members send her their invoices right after the board meeting. As each committee had been asked to submit a draft of a report form that would include, among other pertinent elements, any significant statistics collected, the board examined and offered suggestions for each committee’s report form. The board agreed that the generic report form should be in Times New Roman, 12 point, with 1-inch margins. The web liaison for each committee is to store the report template on the committee’s web page along with a reminder about the formatting requirements. ACTION: Each liaison to inform his or her committee chair(s) of the formatting requirements for the reports and to ask the chair to have the web liaison mount the template and instructions on the committee’s web page. DATE: ASAP. 8.8 Commercial aspects discussion, including COUNTER (all) When discussing the advisability of joining COUNTER at a cost of $500, the board quickly agreed that we cannot take this on until our finances are healthier. The question of involving commercial NASIG conference participants by way of product reviews elicited considerable discussion. Conference participants who work for vendors that supply a particular product or service could all have a brief time to demonstrate the product or service to other interested NASIG attendees. Advantages noted were that such reviews had a strong educational function and that they supported the strategic plan’s goal of reaching out to the vendor community more effectively. Disadvantages noted were that product reviews were too much like selling, that they presented uneven opportunities for vendors, and that they were in conflict with NASIG’s current non-commercialism policy. After long discussion, Page moved (Savage seconded) that we add to the 2004 conference program product demonstrations focused on a particular topic or product area to be recommended by PPC. There were 7 yes votes, 2 no votes, and 1 abstention. The motion passed. Savage noted that perhaps not all committee reports need to be discussed at the board meeting. McKee agreed Novak moved to adjourn. No second being required, McKee adjourned at 5:35 P.M. TREASURER’S REPORT Denise Novak, NASIG Treasurer NASIG currently has $150,203.5 in assets. This includes $97,632.43 in bank balances and $52,571.08 in the investment account. NASIG has expended $54,834.79 on operating expenses for the year 2003. This includes all committee activity, such as the Membership Directory, Awards and Recognition Committee and Continuing Education Committee expenses. I am very pleased to report that the 2003 Portland Conference currently shows a surplus of $18,728.55. This figure is not quite final since a few invoices have come in since this report was submitted. NASIG is, for the most part, financially stable. However, it should be noted that NASIG needs to keep an operating reserve in case of an emergency. The organization has counted on annual conferences generating a surplus to meet its operating expenses and membership dues account for only 30 to 40% of the income needed to meets its financial obligations. In the coming months the Finance Committee will look at ways to increase revenue. Balance Sheet (Includes unrealized gains) As of 10/11/03 ASSETS Cash and Bank Accounts Charles Schwab-Cash CHECKING-264 SAVINGS-267 TOTAL Cash and Bank Accounts Investments Charles Schwab TOTAL Investments TOTAL ASSETS 2003 Portland Conference 1/1/03 Through 10/11/03 INCOME Conference Registration Pre-conference Income Conference-Tours Conference-Souvenirs Other TOTAL INCOME EXPENSES Conference-Equipment Rental Conference-Temporary Help Conference-Building Rent Conference-Entertainment Conference-Meals Credit Card Charges Conference-Photocopying & Printing Conference-Postage Conference-Receptions Conference-Supplies Conference-Speakers Conference-Tours Conference-Transportation Conference-Parking Conference-Other Conference-Refund Contracted Services Credit Card Services TOTAL EXPENSES TOTAL INCOME - EXPENSES NASIG Budget Expenditures 1/1/03 Through 10/11/03 Admin-Board Expenses Awards & Recognition By-Laws Continuing Education Conference Planning Conference Site 2004 Electronic Communications Evaluation Finance Nominations & Elections Database & Directory Proceedings Publicist Reg. Council & Membership Strategic Planning Task Force NASIG 19TH Minutes of the June board meeting, previously published in the September issue of the NASIG Newsletter, had not been formally approved by the Board at the time of publication. Those minutes should reflect the following revision to the third paragraph of section 6.9: Nominations and Elections further indicated that the committee would like to revise the weighting system used to evaluate the nominee profile. They believe that non-NASIG activities should be given less weight. The committee recommended and the board Mark it on your calendars, write it on the back of your hand, commit it to memory— whatever you do, plan ahead now to attend the 19th annual NASIG conference June 17-20, 2004, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin! The city is prepared to roll out the red carpet for NASIG conference attendees: with so much going on in the city, you might need to spend a few extra days in town! Consider your home base in Milwaukee, the historic downtown Milwaukee Hilton: a steal for NASIG conference attendees at $105 per night plus tax for one of the top hotels in town. Imagine rolling out of bed in your air-conditioned room with a view of Lake Michigan, heading down the elevator to a deluxe continental breakfast, and then walking a few steps down the hall to your first conference session. No scurrying across campus or turning a map in circles to find the correct route to where you’re going: you’ll be right there already! During your break between sessions, head back upstairs to your room to relax for a spell, make a few phone calls, or give a wave to your spouse and kids as they head downstairs to the hotel’s indoor waterpark. PPC UPDATE Marilyn Geller and Emily McElroy, Co-Chairs The Program Planning Committee (PPC) is really excited as we move forward with our plans for the 2004 conference in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. As mentioned in the September Newsletter, PPC decided to establish three calls for ideas rather than the traditional call for proposals that had a deadline in August or September. Our first and second calls for ideas were less formal in proposal format than previous years; we asked for not just proposals but also ideas of potential programs. And you responded with over 53 program ideas. These submissions were combined with 113 other ideas gathered from the evaluation forms, committee brainstorming, and individual solicitations. The third call for ideas has a deadline of November 15th. PPC has found it difficult at times to sort through the many excellent ideas we have received. Even more exciting is that the source of these proposals is distributed over a wide range of membership categories. With more proposal review ahead of us, we can comfortably say that agreed on a weighting of 50% for NASIG activities, 25% for non-NASIG activities, and 25% for the candidate’s position statement for the administrative officers (secretary, treasurer, and vice president); for members-at-large, a weighting of 33% each for NASIG activities, non-NASIG activities, and the position statement. This information should be widely available in order to promote openness in the process. After choosing from an excellent slate of conference programming during the day, you’ll have more than enough to choose from for your nightly program in Milwaukee. The Milwaukee Brewers will be in town: take in a game at the Brewers’ three-years-new stadium with its state-of-the-art retractable roof. And don’t forget to look for the racing sausages on the field between innings! Or you can walk down to the lake to view the stunning new art museum addition and enjoy the Lakefront Festival of Arts, which will be going on the weekend of the NASIG conference. Also on the lakefront that weekend is the country’s biggest Polish Fest celebration: 90 acres of food, dancing, bands, cultural exhibits, and more. Make Milwaukee your base for an extended vacation: head up to Green Bay after the conference for a visit to the Green Bay Packers renovated football stadium and visit the renowned Packers Hall of Fame. Take a drive out to the country to see Frank Lloyd Wright’s estate, Taliesin, in Spring Green. Or take a shopping excursion down to Chicago—a mere 80 miles from Milwaukee. Whatever your interests are, plan ahead now to make the trip to Milwaukee for the NASIG 2004 conference! the 2004 conference will have a wide variety of programs, speakers, and interesting formats to choose from. One change that we are introducing for the 2004 conference is in what we call the programs. Traditionally, we divided the program into plenary, concurrents, and workshops. We decided that didn’t necessarily reflect what the sessions were about, so we are moving away from the old terminology. In 2004 we are calling them Vision, Strategy, and Tactics sessions. More changes in the program will be announced in the next Newsletter as we finalize the conference schedule and program. Another change we have introduced was the way in which PPC handled the distribution of committee work. Instead NASIG 2003, held at Portland State University, Portland, Oregon can officially be declared a success! Due to the hard work and creative energy of the CPC and PPC of this conference, a surplus of $18,727.55 was realized. Special thanks go to Wendy Stewart (CPC), Kris Kern (CPC), Kate Manuel (PPC), Sherry Sullivan (PPC) and Charity Martin (PPC). These co-chairs, and their committee members, put much time and energy into making the NASIG 2003 a great success. Countless people at Portland State University contributed time, energy, and resources into making it a lovely event. The Online Registration Task Force deserves a round of applause for all of the hard work that went into developing and implementing the new online registration system. Also, special thanks to Denise Novak, NASIG Treasurer, for all of the time and energy that she put into the financial demands of the conference. CPC Co-Chairs Wendy and Kris NASIG 18TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE (2003) CPC WRAP-UP Kris Kern and Wendy Stewart, CPC Co-Chairs of breaking up into plenary/concurrent, workshop, and poster subgroups, the entire committee had input in reviewing all of the program ideas. As a result of some of the discussions during our facilitation sessions and postconference discussions, we have created subgroups of the committee to explore how to implement some of our recommended changes and to investigate changes for future conferences. The Program Planning Committee wishes to extend a thank you to the many suggestions we have received from the membership, board, and our incredible board liaison, Steve Savage. 2003 CPC Members: Sandy Beehler, Marcia Bianchi, Kay Brooks, Kristi DeShazo, Susanna Flodin, Linda Frederickson, Marita Kunkel, Peter McCracken, Bonnie Parks, Linda Pitts, Bob Schatz, Jian Wang, Kim WilsonSt.Clair, Kris Kern, Co-Chair, Wendy Stewart, Co-Chair 2003 PPC Members: Eve Davis, June Garner, Kit Kennedy, Lee Kreiger, Pat Loghry, Lanell Rabner, Connie Roberts, Rose Robischon, Steve Savage, Gale Teaster, Kate Manuel, Co-Chair, Charity Martin, CoChair, Sherry Sullivan, Co-Chair Online Registration Task Force: Stephanie Schmitt, Chair, Denise Novak, Jill Emery, Beth Weston, with assistance from Sandy Beehler and Kristi DeShazo The following is a statistical breakdown of conference attendance and attendee selections. Total Number of Registrants Accompanying Guests Total Non NASIG Members Total NASIG Members First Timers Total Full Conference Registrants Total Paying Full Conference Registration Total Day Registrants Total Staying In Conference Hotels NASIG's 18th Annual Conference at Portland State University was a first in many ways. It was the first conference to take place in Oregon. It was the first conference where attendees stayed in hotels instead of dorm rooms. For the first time, after the category of serials librarians, more survey respondents identified themselves as electronic resources librarians than any other type of librarian. Two hundred and thirty-eight conference attendees completed and turned in evaluation forms for this conference. University libraries again provided the largest number of respondents, but the percentage was down to 58% (compared to 61.3% last year). College libraries were once again the second most represented group, coming in at 10.1%. This number, down from 13.5% last year, is probably the result of the community college category being re-instated this year. This latter category showed a representation of 2.1%. The total percentage for academic library respondents was down to slightly over 70%, typical of years prior to last year's conference at the College of William and Mary. Medical library representation increased to 8.8% (up from 5.3% last year). Subscription vendor responses came in next, remaining fairly steady at 3.4% (down from 3.9% last year). Government, national, or state libraries tied with special and corporate libraries, each making up 2.9% of respondents. This was a slight increase for the latter category and a decrease for the former category. Law library responses increased to 2.5% (compared to 2.1% last year) and public library responses remained steady at 2.1%. Library networks, consortiums, or utilities made up 1.3% of respondents, a slight increase from last year. Students provided 0.8% of survey responses and 3.4% chose the category of "other," (a substantial increase from last year's 1.1%). The number of respondents with over 10 years of serialsrelated experience rose to 56.4% (up from 51.4% last year). The percentage with less than one year of experience dropped to 2.6%, less than half of what it was last year. Attendees with 1-3 years experience and 4-6 years experience each made of 15.8% of respondents. Those with 7-10 years experience accounted for 9.4% of responses. Serials librarians again made up 54.3% of survey respondents. Electronic resources librarians came in second, at 36.3%. Acquisitions librarians and catalog librarians showed fairly equal representation, at 29.9% and 29.1% of respondents respectively. This compares with 31.7% and 37.1% respectively last year. The change in representation between catalog, acquisitions, and electronic resources librarians seems significant in that more librarians are taking on duties in this latter category, while fewer are remaining in the categories. more traditional Collection development librarian representation decreased slightly to 23.5%, while reference librarian representation increased to 18.8%. Processing and binding unit staff rose slightly to 13.2% and training and development staff came in at 12.4%. Each of the rest of the categories applied to less than 10% of respondents. Library directors, managers, and preservation staff tied for the smallest number of respondents, each coming in at 0.9%. NASIGers tour Vista House On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the highest) the overall conference in Portland rated a 4.06. Geographic location rated 4.83, comparing favorably with last year's rating of 4.49. Respondents particularly liked Portland's location, beauty, and culture. Hotel living got a high rating of 4.55 and many positive comments, although there were some who missed the dorm atmosphere. Meeting rooms came in at 3.95 and were generally considered to be too small and noisy. Meals and breaks got ratings of 3.83 and 4.08 respectively, and garnered mixed reviews. Social events came in at 3.92. The library soiree got rave reviews but many respondents commented negatively on the lack of other social activities. The Conference Opening banquet and awards ceremony was well received. Most respondents liked the atmosphere and the presentations. The majority of complaints centered around the lack of a social hour before or after the banquet, so that there was no time to mingle with others. Respondents also liked that the awards ceremony was included in the Opening session. View of Vista House and the Columbia River There was a very mixed reaction to this year's Business Meeting. While most respondents felt that it was fast, informative and to the point, there were also many complaints about the brevity of the session and lack of substance, particularly with regard to financial details. It seems the membership is split on the issue of how much business they wish to hear about. While the presentation was well-received, some felt that it might have been more appropriate at the Opening session. The most popular session, with a rating of 4.59, was Steve Shadle's double workshop "Case Studies in Serials Cataloging." This was followed by concurrent session 10, "Hot Topics: Industry Consolidation and Its Effects on Serials," presented by Michael Markwith, Miriam Gilbert, Kim Maxwell and Keith Courtney and rating 4.52. Workshop 9, "Tools for Tenure Trailblazing," by Claire Dygert and Markel Tumlin, came in a close third with a rating of 4.50. VP Steve and President Anne at the Saturday evening soiree This year's plenary sessions were well-received. Plenary 1, Leigh Watson Healy's keynote address on "Trends in the Information Content Industry" got an overwhelmingly favorable reaction, and a rating of 4.04. Plenary 3, the Wrap Up Panel, rated 3.89 with most respondents feeling it was an excellent panel but that it would have been better with fewer speakers and more discussion time. Plenary 2, the Town Hall forum was also very popular, with a rating of 3.68, and many thought it should continue to be offered at least every few years; however, this reaction was countered by a substantial amount of criticism of the Town Hall approach. Concurrent sessions as a whole showed ratings from 3.60 to 4.52, with 5 of the 10 sessions rating over 4.00. There were 12 regular workshops this year, rating from 2.79 to 4.59 with 6 of the sessions showing ratings over 4.00. There were also 7 "research set" workshops which rated between 3.33 and 4.22. Three of these sessions came in at 4.00 or higher. The highest rating poster session was Dalene Hawthorne's "Administrative Metadata for Continuing Resources," with a rating of 4.26. The overall poster session rating rose to 3.89 (up from 3.83 last year). Most comments were favorable, although there were still complaints about overcrowding and the location of the poster session site. Respondents felt that more publicity is needed for poster sessions and that they should be presented throughout the conference, not just on one day. Based on the comments of the three years that poster sessions have been offered, respondents continue to feel that they are useful and that the presentation improves each year. This year's preconferences were extremely well received, garnering two of the highest ratings of the conference. Karen Darling's preconference "Cataloging for the NonCataloger" rated 4.55 and a suggestion to have her return to present future changes and updates to the rules. "The Seventy Percent Solution," presented by Claudia Weston, Mary Ellen Kenreich, and Sarah Beasley, rated 4.43 with attendees liking the mix of presentations and the style of the speakers. Most of the suggestions for future preconferences centered on cataloging, particularly of electronic resources. The conference schedule rated 3.87. Regarding the absence of an official late night social, 42.4% of respondents said they missed this opportunity for socializing and networking, while 57.6% said they did not miss it. 73.8% of respondents said they would be willing to have NASIG investigate the use of all-in-one conference centers for future conferences, while 26.2% were against this idea. The April-May time period garnered the most votes, while May-June came in second and October-November came in third. Overall comments regarding the conference schedule were positive as far as scheduling of sessions and breaks was concerned; however, there were criticisms about most elements of the daily schedule. Many enjoyed the long lunches while many others thought they were too long. The same was true for other breaks. More specific commments included complaints about the cataloging double workshop overlapping with the other catalogingfocused workshops, and several suggestions to move the User Groups to sometime during the conference rather than after the last conference session. The conference information packet generated numerous negative comments and suggestions for improvement. Respondents found the program and session schedule to be very confusing and advocated a return to the previous format. The same was true of the registration materials, with many attendees saying it was unclear how many sessions should be chosen from each group. Several respondents said that the division of sessions into concurrents, workshops, workplace issues, etc., adds to the confusion and recommended one schedule for everything. Respondents in general were positive about the information available from the web site, while at the same time making suggestions for improvements. As this was the first year that NASIG used hotels for its conference, a Hotel Questionnaire was sent to all attendees who did not stay in conference hotels. NASIG identified 70 people in this category, 10 of whom were easily identifiable local residents. Surveys were e-mailed to the remaining 60 attendees. Sixteen, or approximately 25%, responded to some portion of the survey. Six of the respondents stayed with a friend or relative. Two others were local attendees who drove in from outside Portland and attended only one day of the conference. The remaining 8 respondents paid between $35 and $130 per night for single occupancy at a non-conference hotel. Seven of these paid $70 or less. All respondents were pleased with the quality and convenience of their hotels. With the possible exception of 1 respondent, those who chose to stay in a non-conference hotel did so for budgetary reasons. When asked what a conference hotel should cost, answers ranged from $50 to $150 per night, with the $80 range receiving 2 votes. The evaluation survey is produced by members of the Evaluation and Assessment Committee. The Committee welcomes your suggestions and feedback regarding the survey form and the conference itself. All suggestions are forwarded to the appropriate Board and/or Committee members, in a continuing effort to improve NASIG's conference and other activities. Individual speakers evaluations should (). wishing to obtain their speaker contact Josie Williamson Once again, "thanks to everyone!" from your Evaluation and Assessment Committee: Beth Holley (Chair) Wendy Baia NASIG PROFILES KATY GINANNI, NOMINATIONS & ELECTIONS COMMITTEE CHAIR Maggie Rioux When I first contacted Katy Ginanni about doing her profile for the NASIG Newsletter, she told me she was too boring to make an interesting profile subject. Hah!! In the next sentence of her email, she also proceeded to tell me that she was just about to leave for a three-week trip climbing Mt. Kilimanjaro in celebration of her midlife crisis. Boring – yeah right. As you might suspect from this lead-in, Katy is quite an interesting person in a number of ways. As you should already know, she’s this year’s Chair of the Nominations & Elections Committee, on which she served as a member last year. And when not climbing African mountains, she’s a Training Specialist for EBSCO, based in Birmingham, Alabama (We’ll get to what that is in a few minutes). Katy got into serials the way many of us did – by accident. After graduating from Auburn University in 1984 with a B.A., she discovered nobody was beating down the door to hire liberal arts majors (surprise, surprise). Then a family friend offered her a temporary position in Special Collections at Vanderbilt, where she soon realized that library stuff is fun. She started library school at Vanderbilt and, when her temporary position ended, switched to a regular job in serials acquisitions in order to get a tuition discount. And guess what? She ended up loving serials as well as librarianship. After a few years in library-based serials, Katy was recruited to join EBSCO as an Account Services Manager. At EBSCO, the Account Services Manager is the person who travels to her assigned customer libraries, provides training in the various products and services to the customers, coordinates with the Customer Service Department, and generally solves problems and tries to keep everybody happy. This is also when Katy joined NASIG. So far, she sounds more or less like the rest of us, right? Well, here’s where it starts to get interesting as we take another step on the road to Kilimanjaro. To quote Katy’s email: “In 1999 I’d been at EBSCO for seven years as an Account Services Manager and was feeling a little burned out by the regular, routine travel. So, I decided to move to Africa!” Actually, what she did was join the Peace Corps and go off to teach English to Form One students in Zimbabwe (that’s the equivalent of 8th graders in the US). She’d considered joining right out of college, but says she lacked the self-confidence to realize that even a liberal arts graduate has a lot of useful skills. And that’s certainly one thing working with serials and serialists gives you: self-confidence (some would say chutzpah, even). Katy hoped that after the first year she could work with her school’s new library. Unfortunately, due to civil strife in Zimbabwe, her Peace Corps adventure was cut short and she was evacuated from her school and returned to the US.* Personally, I think I’d rather face civil strife any day in preference to teaching 13-year-olds. Katy with guides at the summit of Mt. Kilimanjaro Back in the US of A in the fall of 2000, Katy put her new teaching skills to good use by returning to work at EBSCO, but this time as a Training Specialist. This time around she gets to train not only EBSCO customers, but also EBSCO personnel, in the use of all sorts of Webbased services and products, as well as creating training materials. And the best part is that, since EBSCO has offices (and customers) all over the world, that’s where she gets sent to do her training. She reports that she’s attended meetings in Vietnam and Beijing, visited EBSCO offices in Mexico, Johannesburg, London, Berlin, and Madrid, and done seminars for customers in Australia and New Zealand. Wow! If I weren’t so close to thinking retirement thoughts, I’d be tempted to send in my resume. And so we come, finally, to Kilimanjaro (What a woman! Even her mid-life crisis is exciting.). According to Katy, the story began last February when she overheard a couple of young colleagues talking about climbing Kilimanjaro, which, as does all mention of Africa, pricked up her ears. Well, that got her to thinking about doing it herself, and, after the initial self-doubts passed, determination set in. She did a lot of dieting and aerobic exercise and made all the necessary arrangements for the September adventure. It was also a chance to be reunited with a friend from England who taught at the same school in Zimbabwe and who also arranged to go on the trek. Before she left Katy said that, “Even if I don’t reach the summit, it will be fun and a great experience.” Well, after she got back, she shared her trip diary with me, and she definitely achieved two out of three: she reached the summit (see accompanying photo) and it was certainly a great experience. However, from the adventures she described in her diary (spending seven days doing heavy aerobic exercise at an altitude above 11,000 ft., reaching The NASIG Nominations & Elections Committee is one of those essential “infrastructure” committees that we tend to take for granted until they do something we disagree with (like not putting your favorite person on the ballot). I know I did until I was their Executive Board liaison last year and learned just how hard they all work and how important this job is to the continued existence of NASIG. N&E is charged with soliciting nominations for administrative officers and Executive Board members at large, evaluating the proposed candidates’ qualifications, preparing a slate of candidates, and then actually conducting the election. All of this has to be done objectively, confidentially, with a proper audit trail, and also according to a fairly strict timeline. The process starts almost as soon as the committee organizes itself at the annual conference. A call for nominations goes out over NASIG-L inviting all members to submit names of those they think would be good potential members of the Executive Board. Each year nominations are sought for a Vice-President/PresidentElect, and (usually) three Members-at-Large. Also, in the 19,340 ft. summit, being wet a lot and very cold a lot), I’m not sure she’d exactly call it “fun” yet. Talk to her at NASIG in June when she’s nicely warmed up and dried out. After all this adventure, Katy should be absolutely bursting with self-confidence and the feeling that she can do anything – which should make her current NASIG assignment as Chair of the Nominations & Elections committee seem like a piece of cake. She was a member of the committee last year (her first NASIG committee assignment) and was able to understudy the highly organized Beverley Geer, last year’s Chair. The hard part is keeping the members of the committee on task and getting them to come to consensus on the slate of candidates for the ballot, but for someone who has taught 13-year-olds and climbed a mountain, that should be right up her alley. And when you see her in Milwaukee in June, ask her what she’s got planned for her next trick. Everest, maybe? Does EBSCO have any staff in Nepal who need training? *She did, however, take advantage of being in Africa to get certified to scuba dive in Zanzibar. She highly recommends the Indian Ocean as a diving destination. alternating years, a Treasurer and a Secretary need to be elected. At this stage the committee is just gathering a pool of “people who would be good” and members may send in as many names as they have in mind, including themselves. Surprisingly, getting as large a pool of names as possible is one of the hard parts of the committee’s job. It seems as if NASIG members are reluctant to toss someone else’s proverbial hat in the ring and equally reluctant to seem egotistical by throwing their own in. Don’t be. It’s too late now, but next summer please send in the names of everyone you can think of who would make a good leader of NASIG (of course, they have to be a NASIG member, so Arnold Schwarzenegger is out). After nominations close in mid-October, the committee’s real work begins. After non-NASIG members and current members of the N&E committee are eliminated, the remaining list of names is divided up among the committee members, and each person on the list is contacted to see if they would be interested in being considered for the ballot (remember somebody else probably put their name in). If so, they are asked to complete a profile form giving information about themselves, their involvement in serials, their NASIG activities, and their non-NASIG professional activities. This might include attendance at conferences, serving on committees of various organizations, relevant publications and presentations, etc. They are also asked to write a brief position statement indicating why they would be a good addition to the NASIG Board. While this can be offputting for some potential candidates, it gives N&E a way to evaluate the person’s recognition of major issues relevant to NASIG and what he sees as his potential contribution. Although this is not an exercise in writing a term paper, it does give the committee a chance to see if the person is able to state her case in a reasonably clear manner and also gives a measure of the seriousness with which the person takes his potential nomination and service on the Board. At this point also, the committee members can try to do some persuading if folks are reluctant to have their names under consideration. While there is a lot of work involved in being a Board member, it can also be a lot of fun and a chance to make a real difference in NASIG. This is what committee members try to convey to the people they are contacting, since it’s in NASIG’s interest to have as many people from as many different member constituencies as possible considered for placement on the slate. Okay, now we have a list of people, smaller than before, who are actually willing to be considered for the NASIG ballot. With luck, this can be as many as fifty names, and it needs to be winnowed down in some fairly objective way to a practical number for the ballot (think of this as a sort of primary election). Here’s where the profiles and position statements come into play. Each member of the committee now reviews the information submitted by each willing nominee, using an evaluation form which assigns relative weights to each of three areas. Once all the candidate ratings have been compiled, there is usually a clear consensus as to the top two (or sometimes three) candidates for each office (or two times the number of vacancies for Member at Large). [Ed. note: See additional information about weighting of nominee profiles in the update to June's board meeting minutes, published in this issue of the Newsletter.] Once the slate is decided upon, the Chair presents it to the Executive Board for their information and then the actual election can take place. The election itself is pretty straightforward. The slate is announced on NASIG-L, ballots are printed, mailed, returned, and counted by the Chair. The Chair’s count is verified by an additional person agreed to by the committee. This person needn’t even be a NASIG member – just someone known to be honest who can count, is willing and preferably located close to the Chair so that ballots don’t have to be mailed (Note: the returned paper ballots are retained by the Chair for 120 days after the election, just in case the results are challenged.). After the final count is in, all candidates on the ballot are notified of the outcome as quickly as possible. The Board is then notified and then the results are posted to NASIG-L, after which the N&E Committee can relax – their work is done for the year. Now that we’ve dealt with the routine finish to the process, let’s go back for a moment to the “primary election” where the committee members winnow the list of willing nominees down to the actual slate for the ballot. “Why not just put everybody on the ballot who’s willing?” I can hear you asking. Well, yeah, that’s a thought, but then you, the member, would have to read all those profiles and our ballot return rate would be a heck of a lot less than the miserable 50% or less we get now. So we get our representatives, in the form of the committee members, to do it for us. The evaluation criteria are pretty clear and have evolved over the years. For administrative officers, the candidates are rated 50% on NASIG activities, 25% on non-NASIG professional activities and 25% on their position statement. Member at large candidates are rated evenly (33%) on all the areas. More weight is given to NASIG activities for officer candidates since our President, Secretary, and Treasurer should be people who are very familiar with the organization and who have demonstrated their commitment to NASIG through taking active participation in leadership roles. More relative weight is given to non-NASIG activities for Member at Large so that folks who are new to NASIG but who would be excellent Board members are not penalized for their newness. The position statements help committee members assess the potential candidates’ understanding of NASIG, their familiarity with relevant issues, and their commitment to serving as a leader of NASIG. Within these parameters, the committee also tries to field a slate which represents as many of NASIG’s varying constituent groups as possible. At least two names are chosen for the final ballot for each office/seat to be filled. This is in contrast to many organizations which only give members one choice per slot. Also, it should be noted that current Board members and officers whose terms are expiring, but who are eligible for a reelection to a second term, have to be explicitly nominated and then go through the same evaluation process as those who would be serving for the first time. Nobody gets a free pass. A couple of other points of interest about this committee. First, it’s one of only a few NASIG committees with an appointment term of one year instead of two. Second, at least half of the committee each year has to be nonreturning members. Both of these policies are designed to keep the committee membership turning over so that there will be fresh points of view each year. And yes, there are often several former Executive Board members on this committee. As a previous NASIG President, I can tell you that I looked to retiring Board members for this committee because they have an excellent understanding of just what’s involved in serving on the Board and are likely to be the most persuasive in getting potential nominees to agree to go forward with the nomination process. And I can also safely say that there is absolutely NO desire to perpetuate any “in group” on the Board. If some of the names on the ballot look familiar, it’s because these are the folks who have served on various hardworking committees and continue to be willing to step up to the plate and take time and responsibility for keeping NASIG successful. Hopefully, next year everyone who has read this far will submit at least one name for nomination. Also, I hope each of you still reading will promise yourself that if you get a call from N&E asking if you’re willing to be considered for the ballot and complete a profile that you’ll respond with an enthusiastic yes. And by the way, while you’re waiting for the call, please complete a NASIG volunteer application form (http://www.nasig.org/members/forms/ volunteer.html). Who knows, you could end up being on the Nominations & Elections Committee instead of the ballot. Oh, just one more thing – when that NASIG ballot comes in the mail in a few months, take the time to read the candidates’ information on the NASIG website and VOTE!!! NASIG AWARDS 2004 NASIG CONFERENCE STUDENT GRANT ANNOUNCEMENT The North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG) is currently seeking candidates for grants to attend the Nineteenth Annual Conference to be held at the Historic Hilton Milwaukee City Center Milwaukee, Wisconsin, June 17-20, 2004. Established in 1985, NASIG is an independent, international organization that promotes communication and sharing of ideas among all members of the serials information chain - anyone working with or concerned about serials. For more information about NASIG, please see the NASIG web page at http://www.nasig.org. Through the granting of these awards, NASIG desires to encourage participation in this information chain by students who are interested in pursuing some aspect of serials work upon completion of their professional degrees. Each year the annual conference is held in a different city where the various segments of the serials community (including publishers, vendors, and librarians) meet in an informal setting to network and share information. The conference includes the presentation of papers, panels, workshops, tours, and social events. SCOPE OF AWARD: Recipients are expected to attend the entire conference and submit a brief written report to NASIG, which will be excerpted for publication in the NASIG Newsletter. Expenses for travel, registration, meals, and lodging will be paid by NASIG. Each recipient will also receive a year's membership in NASIG. ELIGIBILITY: Students who are currently enrolled at the graduate level in a library school ALA-accredited now and/or at the time of enrollment, who do not already have an ALA accredited degree, and who have expressed an interest in some aspect of serials work, are eligible. Applicants must be full- or part-time students at the time of application. In order to accept an award, a recipient must not be employed in a position requiring an ALA accredited degree, or on leave from such a position, at the time of acceptance of the grant. Equal consideration will be given to all qualified applicants, with preference given to those earning their degrees the year of the conference. Students do not have to be NASIG members to apply, and they must not have earned their degrees earlier than the end of the school year prior to the NASIG conference. Applicants must not have attended a previous NASIG conference, but may have participated in a NASIG conference as a local volunteer. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Application forms will be available after November 15, 2003, through the NASIG Web Page http://www.nasig.org/public/timedated /studentgrantapplication.doc and from Rachel L. Frick, Co-Chair, Awards & Recognition Committee. Completed application and reference questionnaires, http://www .nasig.org/public/timedated/studentgrantrefquestions.doc, should be emailed as Microsoft Word or plain text attachments to: Rachel L. Frick Co-Chair, NASIG Awards & Recognition Committee University of Richmond Boatwright Memorial Library Phone: (804) 289-8942 E-mail: APPLICATION DEADLINE: Applications must be emailed by FEBRUARY 15, 2004. Applications emailed after this date will not be considered. AWARD NOTIFICATION: Award recipients will be notified by APRIL 1, 2004. 2004 FRITZ SCHWARTZ SERIALS EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIP The North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG) and the Serials Industry Systems Advisory Committee (SISAC) team up each year to award a $2500 scholarship to a library science graduate student who demonstrates excellence in scholarship and the potential for accomplishment in a serials career. The purpose of the scholarship is to advance the serials profession by providing an aspiring library student who has prior serials experience with enhanced educational opportunities. The award is named in honor of Fritz Schwartz, who was a well-known and highly respected authority on Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), the Internet, and library standards. A frequent speaker at NASIG annual conferences, his last NASIG appearance was to conduct a highly rated workshop at the 10th Conference at Duke University. He actively participated in various committees within SISAC, the National Information Standards Organization (NISO), and the International Committee on EDI for Serials (ICEDIS). At the time of his death Fritz was Manager of Electronic Services and Standards at the Faxon Company. NASIG and SISAC are pleased to offer this scholarship in memory of Fritz's many contributions to the library profession and to honor his energy, warmth, humor, and passion for standards. NASIG is an independent, international organization committed to promoting communication and sharing of ideas among all people working with or concerned about serial publications. More information about the organization is available at http://www.nasig.org. SISAC provides a forum for professionals throughout the entire serials chain to work together in developing standardized formats with which to electronically transmit serials information. In addition to the scholarship, the recipient will also receive a Student Grant Award to attend the NASIG conference for the year in which the scholarship is granted and will receive a one-year NASIG membership. The nineteenth Annual Conference will be held at the Historic Hilton Milwaukee City Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, June 17-20, 2004. ELIGIBILITY: At the time the scholarship is awarded, the applicant must be entering an ALA-accredited graduate library program or must have completed no more than twelve hours of academic requirements towards the graduate degree at a graduate library program accredited at the time of enrollment. The applicant must have serialsrelated work experience and a desire to pursue a professional serials career after earning the graduate library degree. The following materials are required to be submitted electronically, either in Microsoft Word or plain text (.txt) format by the applicant: • A completed application form; • Letters of reference from two information professionals; • A resume or curriculum vita; • A statement of the applicant's career objectives (not to exceed 250 words); • A statement describing how the applicant's qualifications satisfy the eligibility requirements and the purpose of the award (not to exceed 250 words). The award winner will be required to be enrolled for a minimum of six credit hours of library/information science courses per semester/quarter during the academic year that the award is granted. The award winner will be ineligible to reapply for the scholarship. Only one scholarship will be awarded per academic year. Application forms will be available after November 15, 2003, through the NASIG Web Page http://www.nasig .org/public/timedated/fritzapplication.doc, and from Rachel L. Frick, Co-Chair, Awards & Recognition Committee. Applications will only be accepted in electronic form. Completed applications and all related materials, http://www.nasig.org/public/timedated/ fritzrefquestions.doc, should be e-mailed to: Rachel L. Frick Co-Chair, NASIG Awards & Recognition Committee University of Richmond Phone: (804) 289-8942 E-mail: APPLICATION DEADLINE: Applications and related materials must be emailed by FEBRUARY 15, 2004. Applications emailed after this date will not be considered. AWARD NOTIFICATION: The award recipient will be notified by APRIL 1, 2004. The North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG) is currently seeking candidates for grants to attend the Eighteenth Annual Conference to be held at The Historic Hilton Milwaukee City Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, June 17th – 20th, 2004. NASIG is an international organization committed to promoting communication and sharing of ideas among all people working with or concerned about serial publications. More information about the organization is available at the NASIG Web Page: http://www.nasig.org. DESCRIPTION OF AWARD: The purpose of the NASIG Horizon Award is to advance the serials profession by providing promising new serialists with the opportunity to accelerate their knowledge and understanding of serials by networking and interacting with a wide range of dedicated professionals working in all segments of the serials information chain. The award provides the recipient with a firsthand introduction to NASIG by sponsoring attendance at the NASIG annual conference. NASIG will pay for all conference registration, housing, and travel costs. In addition, to encourage active participation in NASIG, the recipient will receive a year's free membership in NASIG and will be invited to serve on a NASIG committee the year following the award. One award will be given in 2004. ELIGIBILITY: Applicants must currently be in a position of a professional nature with primary responsibilities for some aspect of serials, e.g. head of serials, serials acquisitions, serials vendor, serials publisher. Applicants must have served in this position for no more than three years at the time of the application PURPOSE: The grant will provide funding for an individual working in any area of the serials information chain to foster international communication and education through activities involving some aspect of serials such as, but not limited to: research, collaborative projects, job exchanges, and presentation of papers at conferences. Applicants may be either serialists practicing in North American countries seeking funding for appropriate activities involving some aspect of serials taking place outside North American countries, or serialists practicing outside North American countries seeking funding for appropriate activities involving some aspect of serials in North American countries. The grant is named in honor of Marcia Tuttle. TERM OF AWARD: One year. 2004 NASIG HORIZON AWARD ANNOUNCEMENT deadline and must not have been in a professional library or library-related position (e.g. book vendor, publisher) for more than five years at the time of the application deadline. Applicants must not have attended any previous NASIG conferences, but may have participated in a NASIG conference as a local volunteer. Applicants do not have to be a member of NASIG. Preference will be given to applicants employed by a North American organization or institution (to facilitate participation in NASIG) and to those whose career goals include professional growth and development in serials. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Application forms will be available through the NASIG Web Page http://www.nasig.org/public/timedated/horizonapplication .doc, and from Philenese Slaughter, Co-Chair, Awards & Recognition Committee. Applications will only be accepted in electronic form. Completed applications and all related materials, http://www.nasig.org/public/ timedated/horizonrefquestions.doc, should be e-mailed to: Philenese Slaughter Co-Chair, NASIG Awards & Recognition Committee Austin Peay State University Phone: (931) 221-7741 E-mail: APPLICATION DEADLINE: Applications must be emailed by FEBRUARY 15, 2004. Applications e-mailed after this date will not be considered. AWARD NOTIFICATION: The award recipient shall be notified by APRIL 1, 2004. ELIGIBILITY: Applicants may be either serialists practicing in North American countries (defined for this purpose as the United States, Canada, Mexico, and Greenland) seeking funding for appropriate activities involving some aspect of serials taking place outside North American countries, or serialists practicing outside North American countries seeking funding for appropriate activities involving some aspect of serials in North American countries. Applicants must have at least five years of professional experience in the serials information chain. Proposed projects must deal with some aspect of serials and include foreign travel. Foreign or English language skills should be adequate to project needs. HOW TO APPLY: Applicants should submit the following materials in English: • A completed application • A written proposal outlining the project and including proposed completion dates • Current resume or curriculum vita • A minimum of three references, including one from the applicant’s supervisor (previous supervisor may be substituted if there is no current supervisor) and one from a colleague at a different institution or company • A letter of support from the foreign institution or collaborator as appropriate. Application forms will be available after November 15, 2003, through the NASIG Web Page http://www.nasig. org/public/timedated/Tuttleapplication.doc, and from Philenese Slaughter, Co-Chair, Awards & Recognition Committee. Applications will only be accepted in electronic form. Completed applications and all related materials should be e-mailed to: Philenese Slaughter Co-Chair, NASIG Awards & Recognition Committee Felix G. Woodward Library Austin Peay State University Marcia Tuttle has had a distinguished career in serials librarianship. She was the winner of the first Bowker/Ulrich's Serials Librarianship Award in 1985. Marcia published her landmark textbook, Introduction to Serials Management, in 1983. The series continued with five volumes of Advances in Serials Management, which Marcia originated and co-edited from 1985-1992. The series is used by all affiliated with the serials business. This series was followed by Managing Serials, published in 1996. Another publication which Marcia began publishing and editing in the 1980's is The Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues (NSPI). Although NSPI ceased publication in 2001, it was a timely publication for librarians worldwide with practical information and controversial viewpoints on serials pricing and related topics. Marcia also serves on the editorial board for Serials Review. With October Ivins, Marcia organized the Aqueduct Group, a retreat for librarians to discuss a variety of topics relating to serials. Out of these gatherings came a call for action known as "The Aqueduct Agenda" which was published in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Library Journal, and Serials Review. AMOUNT OF THE AWARD: The award includes a $2000 grant and a one-year free NASIG membership. NASIG will give one award per year or no award, depending upon the applications. AWARDEE'S RESPONSIBILITIES: An essential part of this award is the dissemination of the results of the project. The awardee is required to submit a final project report to the NASIG Executive Board. This report needs to be suitable for publication in a journal focused on serial issues, such as Serials Review. The final report should include the purpose of the project, the process followed, the achievements, and a literature review or bibliography. The awardee is strongly encouraged to share the results of the project by presenting a workshop or poster session at the NASIG annual conference following the award. APPLICATION DEADLINE: Applications must be emailed by FEBRUARY 15, 2004. Applications received after this deadline will not be considered. AWARD NOTIFICATION: Awardee will be notified by APRIL 1, 2004. Marcia was one of a select few to attend a United Kingdom Serials Group (UKSG) conference in 1984, a meeting of minds/ideas, which resulted in a genesis of our own serials organization, the North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG). NASIG held its first conference in 1986. Marcia was present at that conference and has attended many NASIG conferences since. She served as chair of the Conference Planning Committee (CPC) for the Tenth Anniversary Conference held at Duke University in 1996. She has chaired the ALA RTSD (now ALCTS) Serials Section. Marcia currently serves as an associate moderator for SERIALST. She has taught a generation of serials librarians (and some vendors) in her serials courses at the library school at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Marcia loves to travel, and she enjoys making presentations on serials topics. Over the years she has been invited to speak at meetings all over North America, as well as at conferences in Europe, South Africa, and Australia. A number of these talks have been published in various library journals. Marcia Tuttle is indeed a well-respected international librarian, and it is an honor to have this International Grant named after her. & Recognition OTHER SERIALS NEWS CHARLESTON CONFERENCE STRATEGIES FOR DEFINING A QUALITY JOURNAL Presented and reported by Yvette Diven, Director of Serials Product Development, R.R. Bowker This year’s Charleston Library Conference, November 58, included a “Lively Lunch” discussion of strategies that libraries are using to define quality in their serials collections. About 20 librarians, publishers, and vendors attended and shared their views on the topic. Yvette Diven presented Ulrich’s figures on new serials titles published since January 2001. Of the 3,757 titles with a start year of 2001, 2002, or 2003, some 3,686 are still in active publication. Subject areas represented among the new launches include business and economics, medical sciences, arts and humanities, children and youth, law, and science and technology. About one third (1,206) of these publications are academic or scholarly, and a full third (1,264) are available in electronic format. The Lively Lunch attendees were asked to consider how to decide which titles might be quality additions to a core collection, or a better fit than titles currently in a collection. The group began by reviewing a number of definitions of “quality” and “core” which revealed different perspectives on quality among academic, public, special libraries, and publishers. Appropriateness for the intended audience, price, format availability, and other perceptions of quality varied. All agreed, however, that even if the definitions were different for individual collections, the need to maintain quality in collections is essential to meeting the needs of a library’s user community. Ms. Diven then presented information gathered from participants in several Bowker focus groups organized in Fall 2002. The focus groups brought librarians together to talk about a key issue facing serialists in all types of libraries – how to decide what to keep and what to drop in times of shrinking budgets, higher journal costs, and increased demands for quality resources. During the course of the focus groups, 3 types of strategies emerged as essential to defining journal quality: “Ask the Experts”; using quantitative data to make qualitative decisions; and a distinct set of “home-grown” strategies. Lively Lunch attendees had the opportunity to discuss and critique each of the 3 strategies. Looking to outside experts for a definition of a quality journal is key to the “Ask the Experts” strategy. Publishers, faculty members, accreditation boards, and Bowker’s Magazines for Libraries were among the experts identified as trusted sources of quality recommendations. Reliance on publisher name and authority was critiqued from both sides. It was noted by several of the session’s attendees that journal quality may actually improve, rather than decline, in cases of a change in publisher if the new publisher puts more focus on accuracy and author selection. While noted as useful, faculty recommendations were not universally accepted by the group as a principal source of expertise, since being published in a particular journal might lead a faculty member to recommend one journal more strongly than another of otherwise equal strength. The scope of Magazines for Libraries, with its 179 subject specialists, was discussed in terms of the range of factors its experts use to make journal-quality recommendations: what is purchased by various types and sizes of libraries, price, editors and editorial policy, a predictable publication cycle, the journal’s suitability for its intended audience, and others. The group agreed that even for so-called experts, it is important to incorporate numerous factors to create a well-rounded definition of quality. As examples of quantitative strategies for defining journal and collection quality, Collection Depth Indicators and ISI® Impact Factors were discussed. Libraries who depend on these measures look to the numbers to identify the best journals for their collections and to determine their collections’ overall quality. Collection Depth Indicators are numerical values used to “describe a library’s collecting activity and goals” (http://www.wln.org/products/aca/indicators.htm) and characterize a library’s current collection level, acquisitions commitment, and collection goal. The group discussed the use of these indicators alone to define a journal’s quality and suggested that in order to gain a higher level of collection depth (such as the Research level), a library might need to have an extensive collection. The question was raised as to whether an extensive collection necessarily defined a quality collection. For some attendees, from smaller institutions, the definition of quality was not defined in terms of collection size but rather in terms of suitability for the library’s users. Similarly, ISI® Impact Factor, a measure of “the frequency with which the ‘average article’ in a journal has been cited in a particular year or period” (source: Thomson ISI®’s Journal Citation Reports®), was critiqued as a sole definition of quality journals. Academic libraries may rely heavily on Impact Factors when deciding between journals, but attendees commented that public libraries may still maintain quality collections without a large number of high Impact Factor titles among their holdings. The group agreed that looking to quantitative measures alone was not a strategy that lends itself to a balanced definition of quality. The third quality-defining strategy discussed was a set of home-grown quality factors libraries have developed. Among academic libraries, the refereed status of a journal helps to identify it as a quality journal. Knowing that a publication contains peer-reviewed articles means for some librarians that the content of the journal is more authoritative than the content of an otherwise similar journal. This strategy was critiqued by the Lively Lunch attendees as having limitations for public libraries’ serials collections, but still being valuable for specific user groups. Another home-grown solution presented includes finding out if and where a journal is abstracted and indexed. Results from a Bowker survey of [Presented at the 23rd annual Charleston Conference on Book and Serial Acquisition, November 2003.] In April 2002 the director of the Phillips Memorial Library requested a comprehensive inventory of all print journal holdings with quantitative retention recommendations - and he wanted it done in six weeks time. The day that all librarians dread had dawned on Paul Bazin, the Serials Librarian at Providence College, but he had an idea. That idea grew into a plan, and the plan in turn developed a periodicals collection management system (PCMS) for his library’s periodicals. It was this plan and its results that Bazin and Janice Schuster, Coordinator of Reference Services, presented at this year’s Charleston Conference. Phillips Memorial Library was preparing to undergo renovation, the catalyst for the director’s request. The periodicals collection was estimated to be around 1650 titles in print at that time, though a physical shelf check had never been performed. The inventory was seen by PERIODICALS COLLECTION MANAGEMENT: ORGANIZING, CREATING, AND IMPLEMENTING A SYSTEM Presented by Paul Bazin & Janice Schuster, Providence College Reported by Chris Matz ulrichsweb.com subscribers conducted in June 2003 revealed that for 91% of all respondents (out of 162 total responses) knowing that a journal is abstracted and indexed is important or extremely important. The overall importance of “being indexed” as a factor in selection and de-selection was important or extremely important to 80% of all respondents. The use of A&I data to determine quality was critiqued by the group as generally a good strategy for traditional serials but a bit more problematic for new publications or for new format publications— such as Open Access Journals—that are not yet indexed. Format availability as a quality factor met with mixed results among attendees, who suggested that a journal need not be available online in order to be a quality journal, or may be so subject- or discipline-specific that it may remain in print for many years to come. Bazin as an opportunity to incorporate existing data with the shelf check information into a consolidated database. It would require cooperation from every staff member in the library, however, and it would take more than six weeks. With the director’s approval, Bazin was able to disregard the immediate deadline in favor of this considered, long-term strategy, and he set about recruiting assistance to organize the PCMS. Schuster in turn enlisted the support of her colleagues in the Reference Department, and she and Bazin identified a student worker - “None of this would have been possible without Dayna Mancini,” said Bazin - who had a knack with Microsoft Access, an ideal tool for compiling the PCMS, with its features for turning data into statistics and reports. Prior to this effect, very general questions about Providence’s journals could be fielded either from the serials module in their ILS (Innovative) or the Ebsco subscription invoice, but Access would combine relative data from these sources and fold in the findings from the shelf check to create a powerful tool for collection management. to handle the easier chores, while librarians took on more of the detail-oriented work. One of the limits to Access is that data fields had to be determined in advance, as it is difficult to add or delete fields later. This required extensive planning by the PC librarians, all of which was done on paper before being committed to Access. The foundation for the database was in title, publisher, ISSN, and the typical fields related to periodicals, and then consideration was extended to those journal titles no longer received, those housed in the library in bound and/or microformats, and those available electronically. Checking the titles’ data against their shelf holdings was time-consuming, according to Bazin, but vital for accuracy. These tasks were farmed out based on anticipated difficulty; student workers could be expected Once the information had all been collected, the database could be created, with fields and forms for entry. The security of the PCMS was password-protected, so only a select number of individuals could actually enter or manipulate data. After just over a year and an enormous effort by the entire library staff, the PCMS was completed, and it continues to be updated for easy use by patrons as well as more sophisticated analysis by Liaison librarians and faculty members for collection development decisions. Moreover, the PCMS now works with the Innovative serials module and the library’s web page for simultaneous updates, and the flexible input makes title changes a snap. THE SERIALS MANAGEMENT PRE-CONFERENCE AT THE CHARLESTON CONFERENCE 2003 Presented by: Buzzy Basch (Basch Subscriptions, Inc.), Susan Zappen (Skidmore College), Deana Astle (East Carolina University), Trisha Davis (Ohio State University), Jim Mouw (University of Chicago), Chuck Hamaker (University of North Carolina—Charlotte), and John McDonald (California Institute of Technology) Reported by Cris Ferguson, Furman University Libraries The Serials Management pre-conference at the Charleston Conference was coordinated by Buzzy Basch, President of Basch Subscriptions, Inc. The pre-conference session consisted of 6 presentations. Basch opened the session with discussion of developments in the serials publishing industry, mentioning increased journal prices and the trend towards decreased customer service from the publisher. In her presentation titled “Déjà Vu: Inflated Prices and Deflated Budgets” Susan Zappen, the Associate College Librarian for Collections at Skidmore College, discussed Skidmore’s recent cancellation project. She outlined the steps the Skidmore library took in the cancellation process and how this recent project was similar to one conducted in 1991 at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. In her presentation Zappen emphasized that faculty awareness and participation in the cancellation project are of the utmost importance for the endeavor to be successful. The second presentation of the day was given by Deana Astle, Associate Director for Collection Development at East Carolina University. Astle discussed the ramifications of subscribing to electronic resources, mentioning the fact that electronic resources tie librarians’ hands more than print resources. License agreements are difficult to negotiate and may make stipulations that affect overall collection development, such as reduced cancellations. Trisha Davis, who is the Head of the Serials/Electronic Resources Department at Ohio State University, also discussed the pricing of electronic resources. Drawing on her experience with the OhioLINK consortium, Davis outlined the advantages and disadvantages of current pricing models like the Big Deal and the Flip. She also discussed how these pricing models impact the management of serial titles. For example, while it may be financially advantageous to purchase electronic resources through a consortium, it complicates the issue of selection, because each participating institution has its own individual patrons with individual needs. Jim Mouw, the Acquisitions and Electronic Resources Officer at the University of Chicago, spoke on the role of electronic information in libraries. The growth in the number of electronic resources and the increased demand for e-resources has led to a change in philosophy in library collection development and created a number of issues for libraries. One issue that was addressed is the cancellation of print titles for electronic versions. Mouw stated that the cancellation of print titles should be considered a long term and permanent decision. Libraries should not cancel print unless they are prepared never to own it again. Chuck Hamaker, the Associate University Librarian for Collections & Technical Services at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, spoke about usage statistics and how to interpret them for use in collection development. One possibility he mentioned was using usage statistics to the library’s advantage in price negotiation for electronic resources. budget would have been impacted if every publisher used the same pricing model. The last presentation of the pre-conference was “Tiered Pricing Models,” which was given by John McDonald, Acquisitions Librarian at the California Institute of Technology. McDonald outlined 13 different pricing models for electronic resources, comparing how Caltech’s The pre-conference session concluded with lively discussion about the feasibility of usage-based pricing, which presents a new range of budgetary challenges for libraries. PENNSYLVANIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION MANAGING, CONTROLLING, & CATALOGING THE ELUSIVE ELECTRONIC JOURNAL Presented by Sharon Wiles-Young and Judy McNally, Lehigh University Reported by Susan B. Markley and Merrill Stein, Villanova University Trends: Various studies, such as the Pew Internet and American Life Project and OCLC’s March 2003 five-year information format trend report, were cited as evidence of the pervasive use of the Internet by high school and college students. Students’ expectations for immediate delivery of electronic resources and their intolerance for delays have fueled the need for libraries to provide these services in a timely manner. LibQual+ comments from Lehigh University students and faculty clearly indicated that they wanted more electronic resources, in all subject areas, and they want them now. As patron expectations grow, so does the pressure on the institutions to provide more. There is now a clear trend toward “online only” access within the next five years. A study of SCI titles found that 30% were online in 1998; by 2002 75% were online. The same trend was seen in SSCI titles. Management: At the same time, librarians are wrestling with effectively managing their expanding electronic collections. New skills were required by both librarians and their staff to discover and identify newly available e-journals; to register and license these materials; to determine pricing and purchasing details; to track the status of newly purchased titles; to access them and maintain adequate bibliographic control; to establish and maintain collection development programs; to efficiently use statistics to reflect collection decisions, and to promote these resources while educating the users on how to access them. Collection development operations are faced with making difficult decisions about balancing the acquisition of core or subject-related journals against relying on aggregator packages which often contain titles not deemed essential to the library’s collection needs. Often the titles within a package duplicate titles in other databases. The speakers suggested promoting feedback from librarians and selected faculty on trial subscriptions as a possible, but limited course of action. Pricing of databases and journal packages remains a problem as publishers struggle with pricing models and options such as supplying archives or backfiles, permanent access vs. current issues only, and the number of concurrent users permitted. Cost could also depend on FTE at the University or FTE in a specific discipline and whether print is purchased with the online version. As the tracking of usage statistics becomes more sophisticated, providing libraries with more specific information on what titles are being accessed, publishers will have to reevaluate their pricing policies and options to meet increased library demands for greater control over what titles are being offered, how they are packaged, with pay per use or pay for articles options. Other acquisition issues deal with licensing agreements, tracking orders and renewals, expenditures and payments, ordering direct or relying on venders, going it alone, or ordering through regional consortial agreements. In the mid-90’s publisher licenses were very restrictive, but with pressure from some of the ARL libraries and interested serial groups, today’s licenses now allow for remote access, walk in users, e-mail, downloading, storing on courseware, ILL, and e-reserve use. It was suggested that librarians pay particular attention to clauses in the license that deal with access after cancellation, perpetual access, access at other sites or branches of their library, penalties when illegal use was discovered, subscription period coverage, terms for multiyear contracts, refunds when publisher’s server is down for extended periods of time, and the easy availability of clear usage statistics. The pros and cons of consortium licensing were also discussed. While negotiations for many libraries were centralized, and smaller libraries realized additional titles to their collection, more funds were committed to packages that included titles of little interest to some libraries, and larger libraries ended up subsidizing the collections of smaller libraries. The tracking of these acquisitions presented numerous recordkeeping problems, but the use of new tools such as Serial Solutions or Ebsco A-Z, ejournal services, or locally developed MS Access databases were possible solutions in the tracking of subscriptions. Cataloging Challenges and Changes: Cataloging of electronic resources presents additional problems for libraries. Both print and electronic resources need to provide adequate descriptive information and the provision for significant access points. Rules and guidelines were cited for cataloging the elusive electronic journals. Pros and cons were also offered for the single record approach, the separate record approach, and the aggregator neutral records. Other cataloging issues covered the best use of different fields in the MARC records, how best to check links, the advisability of checking in electronic issues, and the pros and cons of loading sets of records. Link resolvers, such as SFX, LinkFinderPlus, and LinkSource are allowing users to link to article level, not just title level. Metasearch tools such as Encompass and Metalib, allow for searching over Fall has brought many changes, not just in the leaves and the weather, but in jobs! Anne Draper is now Senior Information Management Analyst at the Treasury Board of Canada. She was previously Chief, Government Publications & Serials Cataloguing Div. at the National Library of Canada. Anne’s new addresses are: TITLE CHANGES Susan Andrews [Note: Please report promotions, awards, new degrees, new positions, and other significant professional milestones. You may submit items about yourself or other members to Susan Andrews (). Contributions on behalf of fellow members will be cleared with the person mentioned in the news item before they are printed. Please include your e-mail address or phone number.] many different sources. All these tools require configurations, system expertise, additional money, and extensive staff time to implement. Staffing Issues: The speakers reported on a recent study that cited the increase in staff workload with the growth of electronic journals. Staff are now more interdependent with other library departments, and their tasks are more complex when dealing with licensing, cataloging, record management, troubleshooting access problems, site monitoring, and setting up links to A & I databases. Since almost no libraries in the study reported hiring more staff, those already working in serials had to take on additional workloads and involve other areas of the library. This distributed staffing model may now be the best way to tackle the complexities of digital resources. Conclusions: Lehigh University has relied on a 6-member team approach to deal with their electronic collection. They discussed problems and reviewed new resources, established a spreadsheet of tasks, developed a web page with an E-journal FAQ for the help desk with links to publisher sites, and an e-mail link for reporting access problems. They also considered policies for electronic only options with future purchases, elimination of print backfiles, new promotion techniques, and better user education. A team approach that relies on the sharing of information and the interdependence of many departments seems to be the best and most efficient way to deal with the electronic transition in the libraries of the future. Jennifer Duncan, who was Networked Electronic Resources Librarian at Columbia University Libraries, wrote: “I started my new job as Electronic Resources Librarian here at Utah State in August. My husband and I made the move from New York City to Logan, Utah where we are now both on the tenure clock but enjoying lots of hiking through the Wasatch-Cache National Forests in the beautiful Rocky Mountains. I'll be responsible for coordinating the acquisition of and managing access to electronic resources, and I'll also be sitting on the Reference Desk--something I've been missing for the past few years.” Her new addresses are: Formerly Serials Librarian at Mississippi State University, Christine L. Ferguson wanted to tell us that: “I began here at Furman on August 11, 2003. This new position is more heavily involved in the acquisitions and maintenance of electronic resources than my previous position. As the Electronic Resources /Serials Librarian I set up trials for databases, negotiate licenses, and authenticate access. I also supervise one staff member, who is responsible for handling all of Furman's print serials. In addition to my responsibilities in the area of electronic resources, I act as a Liaison to academic departments and work the reference desk. On a personal note, the move to South Carolina from Mississippi has put me much closer to my parents, my brother and his wife, and my nephew, all of whom also live in SC.” Christine’s new addresses are: Furman University James B Duke Library 3300 Poinsett Hwy Greenville, SC 29613 Phone: (864) 294-2713 Fax: (864) 294-3004 E-mail: Congratulations to Jim Foti who wrote: “In August I graduated from the University of Washington's Information School with a Master's degree in Library and Information Science, focusing on special librarianship. Recently I started in a temporary position as the librarian for Sound Transit, working in their information center (which primarily consists of government serial publications). Based in Seattle, Sound Transit is the regional transportation authority for a three-county area in central Puget Sound. I'm hoping this will lead to many more years of public service for agencies involved with science, technology, and engineering issues, continuing a trend from my pre-MLIS years.” Jim’s new email address is: Barbara Hall has left her position as Associate Librarian, Collections and Technical Services at Hong Kong Inst. of Education Library to become Associate Librarian, Technical Services at Zayed University in the United Arab Emirates. Her new addresses are: Zayed University Library and Learning Resource Center PO Box 19282 Dubai, United Arab Emirates Phone: (971-4) 2648899 E-mail: Andrea Jascur, formerly Reference Librarian at Cardinal Stritch University, made more than one big change. She only just made it back from her honeymoon in time to tell us that: “Yes, I did change jobs since I had to move to the Kansas City area because my husband (also a librarian) was already living and working here. I started my new position at Linda Hall Library on August 25. As the title suggests, I am working as a Reference Librarian and that essentially describes my basic duties. I have given a couple of tours and basic instruction sessions to groups of students who have come from area colleges and universities. (Science and mathematics professors will sometimes bring their students in for an orientation to our resources and facility.) I am being trained to work in the Search Service which is a fee-based service that we offer to individuals or companies who need very time-intensive and in-depth research that goes beyond what we can handle at the reference desk.” Andrea’s new addresses are: Linda Hall Library 5109 Cherry St Kansas City, MO 64110 Phone: (816) 926-8725 E-mail: Another congratulations, this time for Rebecca L. Kranz, who graduated October 2002 and started her new job as Reference Librarian-Arts at Wake Forest University. She sent us this note: “I recently began my first professional position as a reference and instruction librarian at Wake Forest. As I have a master's in art history in addition to the MLS, my main goal was to find a job in an art library, whether reference or tech. services. I think the latter is harder to come by, and ideally, I was looking for a combination of both.” Rebecca’s new contact information is: Wake Forest University Z. Smith Reynolds Library PO Box 7777 Winston-Salem, NC 27101 Phone: (336) 758-4303 Fax: (336) 758-5605 E-mail: Patricia A. Loghry is now Resource and Collections Special Projects Librarian at University of Notre Dame. She was previously Head, Serials Acquisitions Dept. at the same institution. Patricia’s new addresses are: University of Notre Dame 208 Hesburgh Library Notre Dame, IN 46556 Phone: (574) 631-7456 Fax: (574) 631-8273 E-mail: Emily McElroy, who was previously employed as Serials & Electronics Collections Librarian at Loyola University Health Sciences Library, sent this email: “I wanted to let you know that I have switched jobs in the last few months. I started October 8th at the University of Oregon as their new Collection Development and Acquisitions Librarian. So far, I enjoy the move from Chicago to the Pacific Northwest.” Her new addresses are: Collection Development & Acquisitions Librarian University of Oregon Libraries 1299 University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-1299 Phone: 541-346-1646 Fax: 541-346-3485 E-mail: Formerly the Japanese Cataloger at the University of Pittsburgh, Keiko Okuhara has made some really big changes and she wrote to say: “Aloha to all NASIG colleagues!! My first day at Hawaii was July 22, 2003. Moving to Hawaii was not in my anticipated plan but it has happened. I wanted to expand my work area, not be confined to the Japan-related subject. I used to work at the law library in North Carolina and enjoyed working there. Since this is the first professional position at a law library, the expectation is different from the one I had in NC. Besides cataloging, I do reference work as well. It is enjoyable to serve the user but, nevertheless, it is a big adjustment for me to learn legal resources and the secret of reference services. I try to do it little by little. Overall, I am happy that I am in Hawaii, and look forward to more challenges ahead of me in cataloging integrating resources and serials. Lastly, although Hawaii is almost a foreign country, I am wishing that the NASIG annual meeting would be held in Hawaii some day. You will be welcomed with Aloha spirit and really know why I am happy in Hawaii.” Keiko’s new position is now the Bibliographic Services/Systems Librarian at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, William S. Richardson School of Law and her new contact information is: University of Hawaii at Manoa William S. Richardson School of Law Library 2525 Dole Street Honolulu, HI 96826 Victoria M. Peters moved from the vendor side of serials to the academic. She was formerly Regional Sales Manager for Swets Blackwell. She is now Acquisitions Coordinator at Minnesota State University, Mankato and about her new job she noted: “I began my new position at Minnesota State University, Mankato on August 11, 2003, in an academic year faculty position that allows me to pursue professional challenges and achieve personal goals. Especially interesting for me is the system migration to Ex Libris Aleph system currently in process. While the pace continues to stimulate me, the ability to spend time with family is a definite plus. I continue to work with the NASIG CEC and look forward to meeting my vendor and librarian colleagues at upcoming conferences.” Her new addresses are: Memorial Library ML 3097 PO Box 8419 Mankato, MN 56002 Phone: (507) 389-5050 Fax: (507) 389-5151 E-mail: Starting September 2, 2003, the former Acquisitions & Serials Librarian at Nova Southeastern University Libraries, Dr. Peter V. Picerno stated that: “My new job is Head of Collection Services at the Scarborough-Phillips Library on the campus of St. Edward's University and it basically entails: planning and overseeing the library materials budget, its allocation, and expenditure; responsibility for the library's collection development policy; responsibility for all functions of the technical services department including acquisitions, serials, cataloging, gifts and donations; responsibility for the negotiation and implementation of all electronic resources site licenses and contracts, including e-books, e-journals, and databases. What this job does is puts me into the mainstream of library materials acquisitions in all formats so that I'm faced with the challenge of balancing a collection in several formats with the ultimate goal of meeting the needs of our users in the broadest and most complete way within the constraints of the library's budget. “ His new addresses are: St. Edwards University Address: Scarborough-Phillips Library 3001 S Congress Ave Austin, TX 78704-6489 Phone: (512) 464-8825 Fax: (512) 448-8737 Sandra A. River reports that she is now Architecture and Humanities Librarian at the Texas Tech University’s Architecture Library. She was the Current Periodicals/Microforms Librarian at the same University. Sandra’s current addresses are: Texas Tech University Architecture Library Box 42091 Lubbock, TX 79409-2091 Phone: (806) 742-8058 Fax: (806) 742-1964 E-mail: According to Michael A. Somers, who worked as Assistant Dean for Library Services at Indiana State University’s Cunningham Memorial Library and has now moved up to Director of the Libraries at Bridgewater State College's Clement C. Maxwell Library, “Bridgewater State College is the largest state-supported college in Massachusetts. Located in the southeastern section of the state, the College serves both traditional and non-traditional student populations. The College offers a wide variety of undergraduate majors and concentrations as well as a number of highly regarded graduate programs. As the director of the Libraries, it is my pleasure to work with a dedicated staff of librarians and library assistants to identify, acquire, organize and offer information resources and services that support the teaching, research and service needs of the campus communities. My major duties include strategic planning, resource and technology development, and fundraising.” Michael’s new contact information is: Bridgewater State College Clement C. Maxwell Library 10 Shaw Rd Bridgewater, MA 02325 Phone: (508) 531-1255 Fax: (508) 531-1349 E-mail: Former Librarian at Costabile Associates, Tylka Vetula, now Librarian at George Washington University’s Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library wrote: “I left my position as the Serials Librarian at the Burns Law Library a few years ago to try my hand at cataloging. I cataloged prints and photographs for the National Library of Medicine's History of Medicine for a little over a year. It was very much like serials, however, it was not serials. When the opportunity came to join the Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library as the serials librarian I jumped at the chance. It is nice to be back in the chaotic world of serials.” Tylka’s new addresses are: George Washington University Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library 2300 Eye St NW Washington, DC 20037 Phone: (202) 994-9756 Fax: (202) 223-3691 E-mail: Formerly Systems Training Librarian, Marlene W. Vikor wrote: “Beginning 2002, my job title changed to LIMS3 Implementation Coordinator, as University of Maryland Libraries prepared to bring up our third generation local system with the 15 other institutions of the University System of Maryland and Affiliated Institutions (USMAI). Since that time, my job responsibilities have included: Within a team environment, plan & develop the Bibliographic Database piece of LIMS3, including the associated holdings and item records, in coordination with staff in the University of Maryland Libraries Technical Services Division, the Information Technology Division, and USMAI Institutions. On January 6, 2003, thirteen campuses "went live" on Aleph and by August, 2003 all 16 institutions were "on board." We continue to work on the many details of effectively operating a "singlebibliographic record serves all" database we call catalogusmai.” Marlene’s updated contact information is: University of Maryland, College Park Technical Svcs Div McKeldin Library Rm 2200 College Park, MD 20742-7011 Phone: (301) 405-9302 Fax: (301) 314-9971 E-mail: CALENDAR [Please submit announcements for upcoming meetings, conferences, workshops and other events of interest to your NASIG colleagues to Kathy Kobyljanec, .] December 7-12, 2003 XML Conference and Exposition 2003 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania http://www.xmlconference.org/xmlusa/ January 9-14, 2004 American Library Association Midwinter Meeting San Diego, California http://www/ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=Events1 (choose ALA MidWinter meeting) February 24-28, 2004 Public Library Association 10th National Conference Seattle, Washington http://www.ala.org (choose Events and Conferences/upcoming conferences/) March 29-31, 2004 UKSG 27th Annual Conference and Exhibition Manchester, England http://www.uksg.org/events/annualconf04.asp May 5-7, 2004 Off-Campus Library Services 11th Conference Carefree, Arizona http://ocls.cmich.edu/conference.htm May 21-26, 2004 Medical Library Association Annual Meeting Washington, D.C. http://www/mlanet.org/am/am2004/index.html June 17-20, 2004 NASIG 19th Annual Conference Milwaukee, Wisconsin June 24-30, 2004 American Library Association Annual Conference Orlando, Florida See also the American Libraries “Datebook” at: http://www.ala.org/alonline/datebook/datebook.html. NASIG NEWSLETTER The NASIG Newsletter (ISSN: 1542-3417) is published 4 times per year for the members of the North American Serials Interest Group, Inc. Members of the Editorial Board of the Newsletter are: Members of the Newsletter Editorial Board are: NASIG NEWSLETTER COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The NASIG Newsletter is copyright by the North American Serials Interest Group and NASIG encourages its widest use. In accordance with the U.S. Copyright Act's Fair Use provisions, readers may make a single copy of any of the work for reading, education, study, or research purposes. In addition, NASIG permits copying and circulation in any manner, provided that such circulation is done for free and the items are not re-sold in any way, whether for- profit or not-for-profit. Any reproduction for sale may only be done with the permission of the NASIG Board, with a request submitted to the current President of NASIG, under terms which will be set by the Board. Send all submissions/editorial comments to: Charlene Simser Kansas State University 137 Hale Library Manhattan, KS 66506-1200 Phone: (785) 532-7444 Fax: (785) 532-7644 E-mail: Send all items for “Title Changes” to: Susan Andrews Texas A&M University—Commerce Library P.O. Box 3011 Commerce, TX 75429-3011 Phone: (903) 886-5733 Fax: (903) 886-5723 E-mail: Send all items for the Calendar to: Kathy Koblyjanec, Send all inquiries concerning the NASIG organization, membership, and change of address information to: Bea Caraway Trinity University Elizabeth Huth Coates Library 715 Stadium Drive San Antonio, TX 78212-7200 Phone: (210) 999-7292 Fax: (210) 999-8021 E-mail: NASIG address: NASIG, Inc. PMB 214 2103 North Decatur Road Decatur, GA (USA) 30033-5305 URL: http://www.nasig.org 7.13 Program Planning Committee (Savage, Geller , McElroy)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1094&context=nasig

Dec. 2003, NASIG Newsletter, 2003,