December 2016 Full Issue

NASIG Newsletter, Dec 2016

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:

http://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1802&context=nasig

December 2016 Full Issue

Annual Conference: Call for Proposals Profiles Oliver Pesch Standards Committee Columns Checking In Citations: Required Reading by NASIG Members Title Changes Serials & E-Resources News NISO-NASIG Webinar Report Executive Board Minutes July Table of Contents - The executive board met at our 2017 conference site for the fall meeting, and I have to say, as someone who grew up in Ohio, my expectations of Indianapolis were far below reality. I was impressed with the pedestrian friendliness of the downtown area, the architecture, and the people I met. The board dinner provided us with an opportunity to take in many of the downtown sites as we trekked about a mile or so to a fantastic German restaurant (The Rathskeller) housed in the basement of an old German clubhouse (The Athenaeum). In addition to the sidewalks of downtown Indianapolis, the board covered a lot of ground in our meeting. We discussed some of the details of the 2017 conference program and activities, providing feedback to the committees planning them, and hashed out some communications/workflows that had experienced hiccups in the last conference. Another thing we discussed is adding an organizational membership category for non-profits that want to be members but aren’t interested in the vendor expo or other sponsorship options. While we managed to whittle away at the action items from our past meetings, we ended up adding nearly as many more to the list as challenges or informational needs presented themselves. The Scholarly Communications Core Competencies Task Force is nearing the final stage of its work, and the draft looks very promising. The task force will be sharing the draft with the membership for additional feedback, and will likely also present at the 2017 conference. Speaking of task forces, the Strategic Planning Implementation Task Force will be soliciting feedback from the membership, so keep an eye out for that. So many great things are happening across the NASIG committees and task forces. You can read the details in their reports, and marvel as I do at how much this organization gets done with the help of volunteers. I was at the Charleston Conference earlier this fall, and only once did I get the “is NASIG still a thing” question. The questioner soon regretted it as I began to list off the amazing things we’re doing – from the core competencies to the standards work – NASIG is more relevant and significant than ever! NASIG Conference Report: Text Mining 101: What You Should Know As promised by the title of their presentation, the speakers provided a comprehensive overview of text mining and how it impacts and provides opportunities to libraries, library service providers, publishers, and, most importantly, researchers. Novak of Carnegie Mellon started the program off by defining text mining as “the automated processing of large amounts of structured digital texts” which enables researchers to analyze and interpret massive amounts of textual data, an impossibility using traditional retrieval methods. Pullman, also of Carnegie Mellon, highlighted examples of text mining projects that use word clouds built from mining large texts, including a class project looking at case documents in the Authors Guild v. Google copyright infringement case, and a Carnegie Mellon and Georgetown University joint project called the Six Degrees of Francis Bacon (http://www.sixdegreesoffrancisbacon.com/). This project has allowed researchers to trace the “social connections” between individuals during the time period of Bacon’s life. Pullman described how text mining challenges the traditional roles of library liaisons by going beyond the task of acquiring texts and providing access to them. He noted that “Librarians need to understand how texts are used in the digital age, what tools are available, and what issues impact their acquisition and access.” Pullman posed the question of how a librarian can stay informed in order to bring these new tools and methods to faculty and student patrons. He remains informed by reviewing faculty curriculum vitae, publications, syllabi, and research showcases. In general, participation in the research and scholarly communication life of faculty and students is critical. Novak discussed the acquisition factors associated with text mining. Acquiring text mining services requires knowledge of who will allow text mining, cost information, and licensing that will permit text mining to take place. At Carnegie Mellon users are presented with library guidance that describes text and data opportunities as well as links to free sources that allow text and data mining (http://www.library.cmu.edu/research/tdm/overview). Support of text mining of the JSTOR digital library was discussed by Kristen Garlock. She presented information on JSTOR’s free Data for Research service (http://about.jstor.org/service/data-for-research) which is “a self-service website for generating datasets from the content on JSTOR.” This type of service provides both opportunities and challenges for the organization. Opportunities include development and promotion of new types of scholarship, new partnerships, increased use of publications as scholarly tools, and increased recognition of influential articles. Challenges include staffing and support, keeping up with research trends, and the increasing number of requests for larger and more complex data sets. Cleary, from Springer Nature, described the publishing side of text mining. She noted that Springer Nature will very shortly be updating their text and data mining (TDM) policy. As noted on her slide presentation, “Springer grants text and data mining rights to subscribed content, providing the purpose is noncommercial research.” Individual researchers can download content directly from the SpringerLink platform without going through a registration process. Future SpringerLink subscription agreements and renewals will include a TDM clause; those holding current agreements may also add the TDM clause to take advantage of TDM now. Cleary provided some technical guidance to downloading content, indicating that the CrossRef TDM initiative may be useful. Springer Nature also provides a free metadata API that allows for searching Springer content. Call for Volunteers Steve Oberg, NASIG Vice President/President-Elect NASIG members, it’s that time again! I’m asking you all to consider volunteering to serve on one of our committees. As you know, we are an all-volunteer organization. NASIG’s ongoing success is largely due to the active participation in committees of people like you! In a tradition started by Anna Creech when she was Vice-President/President-Elect, I’d like to give you as much information as possible to help you in making a decision to volunteer. I've included a brief description below of what each committee does so as to give you a sense of the possible workload. Of course, if you have any questions you can always get in touch with me directly, as well (see the Membership Directory for my contact information). Awards and Recognition The Awards & Recognition Committee coordinates activities related to the awards application process for the annual conference, in addition to recognizing the work of the committee chairs and board positions. Recurring committee activities include:  revising and preparing award descriptions and applications as needed;  coordinating publicity of the awards to ILS programs with the Student Outreach Committee;  reviewing and evaluating award applications;  ordering and distributing recognition items for award winners and outgoing leadership positions;  serving as conference mentors to award winners at the annual conference;  gathering conference feedback from the award winners for publication in the Newsletter; Time commitment – varies by the time of year. The month of February, when we’re reviewing applications, the busiest time for the entire committee, typically takes a few hours a week. Other times of the year should involve no more than a couple of hours a month. Bylaws The Bylaws Committee is charged to receive, review, notify and educate the membership about proposed revisions or amendments to the Bylaws; to disseminate the ballots for voting on revisions or amendments; and to tabulate the votes. Any NASIG member may submit a proposal to the Bylaws Committee for a change to the Bylaws, but Bylaws Committee members may not solicit these revisions/amendments. The committee itself remains neutral, though it does review the bylaws annually to ensure that they remain consistent and error-free. As such, it is a little difficult to say approximately how many hours per week Bylaws Committee members might spend on committee work, since the Bylaws Committee is specifically designed to be more reactive than active. If there are no proposed changes during the year, hours of service could be quite light. However, when a bylaws change comes down the pipe, committee members should be poised and ready to leap into action! Committee members will be called upon to review and comment on the change proposal and help the chair prepare and proof the final draft of the amendment which is passed to the Executive Board for approval and then on to a ballot for the general membership. All of this must happen within a set time frame, so cat-like reflexes and a keen eye for common splices are valuable skills for the budding Bylaws Committee member. Communications & Marketing The Communications and Marketing Committee (CMC) educates and informs the NASIG membership with regard to the use and potential of electronic communications media in general, and the NASIG website, listservs, and social media forums in particular. Members of CMC rotate on regular duties which include maintaining the NASIG blog, jobs blog, spam filter, and SERIALST monitoring. Members also moderate NASIG-L and maintain electronic lists for the entire organization and for individual committees—when committee rosters change each year, CMC updates the listservs and constantly updates NASIG-L with new and unsubscribed members. CMC members coordinate mounting and maintaining information on the NASIG website and social media profiles, and consider options for implementing new electronic services. For example, CMC has been investigating the possibility of including more site content in the main nasig.org site search, and members have worked on mounting the new NASIG logo on the website, social media sites, and other locations. Approximate time spent on committee work may vary depending on the duty a member is assigned. This committee is unique in that members may not be required to spend large amounts of time on committee work each week, but they need to be communicative with other committee members about their availability. CMC is often handling membership communication issues that are time sensitive and need a quick response, so member availability is important. On average committee members could expect to spend 2-5 hours per week on committee duties. Conference Planning The Conference Planning Committee (CPC) is chaired by two NASIG members as co-chairs who are responsible for leading the committee that organizes all the logistical planning for the NASIG Annual Conference. Chairing CPC is a great way to hone talents in organization and delegation, and will offer an opportunity to gain insights into how NASIG consistently offers such a great annual conference. Examples of CPC duties include developing the theme for the conference, coordinating the design of the conference logo, working with the Program Planning Committee (PPC) to ensure the conference space will be configured to ensure a great conference experience, developing/maintaining the Annual Conference NASIG Newsletter September 2016 website, planning receptions and other social events for the conference, and working closely with the conference registrar. The CPC co-chairs are required to attend the annual fall NASIG Board meeting at the next conference location and report to the Board relevant CPC activities. CPC co-chairs also commit to submitting periodic updates for the conference planning activities to the NASIG Newsletter. Time commitment for cochairs varies at different points of the year, and is busiest in the months and weeks leading up to the Annual conference. Database and Directory As a regular committee member of D&D there is not much that needs to be done. Once a year, there is a large database clean-up project that involves the whole committee. At that time a committee member will probably spend 1 hour or so total reviewing their assigned section of the database. The chair and co-chair do spend more time accomplishing tasks for D&D. There are four monthly reports that need to be run and those take no more than 30 minutes each to run and email out to the appropriate people. After the conference there are new memberships to create, and depending on how many individuals there are, it can take a few hours. Then there are general questions about member records or helping members get into their records that pop up through the year. Those questions can take anywhere from a few minutes to no more than an hour depending on the issue. Evaluation and Assessment other committee members review them and offer comments. They also manage the process of awarding a drawing prize to a NASIG member for filling out the evaluation. During the annual conference, the chair holds a committee meeting. After the conference, the committee members are given names of speakers that want individual feedback on their presentations. Committee members provide written feedback to the speakers assigned to them by the chair. It is hard to put a weekly time estimate on these activities but the busiest time for all committee members is in the couple of months before and after the annual conference. For committee members, a rough estimate on time commitment would be about one hour a week in the couple of months before and after the annual conference. Membership Development The amount of time spent on committee work per week depends on the charges given by the Executive Board. The work required to be completed by the Membership Development is not demanding if the work is divided equally among the committee members. Each member should be expected to contribute at least 3-4 hours a month at the most. Ongoing tasks include sending via email welcome letters and non-renewals letters. A list is received once a month from the chair of the Database and Directory committee. Depending on the size of the list, this takes 30 minutes or less a month. It could take longer if the list is lengthy; however, the chair suggests dividing the list among the committee members. Mentoring The bulk of the committee’s work is performed by the chair and vice-chair. The chair is the main contact The NASIG Mentoring Group’s main responsibility is between the Board liaison and other NASIG organizing the conference first-time attendees’ committees. The chair creates the conference reception, which usually takes place on the first day of evaluation form and solicits feedback from the Board conference. In preparation for this event, once and from committee members. The chair ensures that registration opens, committee members begin sending NASIG conference attendees are encouraged to fill out out calls for mentors and mentees. The committee the evaluation form. The chair works closely with the requests lists of first-timers from the Registrar on a vice-chair. They draft several committee reports and the weekly basis, and begins sending invitations out to first5 NASIG Newsletter September 2016 timers. Two months before the conference, committee members contact CPC for first-timer’s reception information and continue to work with CPC on reception arrangements. Once the lists of mentors and mentees is complete, committee members match up mentors with mentees. Mentors are provided with contact information of their mentees and vice-versa, to facilitate communication among each mentor-mentee pair. Committee members discuss logistics of the firsttimer’s reception by email or conference call and create a flyer for the first-timer reception that is inserted into first-timer’s packets. The flyer is sent to CPC. During the first-timer’s reception, volunteers from CPC and/or other committees (Continuing Education) help with greeting invitees and connecting mentees with mentors. In 2016 we organized door prizes for the reception, which involved giving away coupons, while trying to connect mentors with their mentees. That was the time were volunteers proved very helpful in providing some orientation to the first-time conference attendees. After the conference, the Mentoring Group sends out a survey to the reception attendees and collects feedback from responders. Within 1-2 months, the committee submits an annual report to the Board. Nominations and Elections The Nominations & Elections Committee solicits nominations for the Executive Board, reviews proposed candidates’ qualifications, prepares a slate of candidates and the ballot, carries out the election, reports the results to the NASIG membership, and reviews any challenges to the election. Members spend approximately 15 hours total on committee work spread across the election timeline of 4-5 months including 3 conference calls. The chair of the committee spends approximately 40 hours total on committee work during the year, including preparing board reports. Program Planning members to recruit speakers for vision sessions and work closely with the board liaison as well as vision speakers throughout the year leading up to the conference. The chair and co-chair prepare calls for proposals in the autumn before the spring conference and send out at least one call for proposals in late September or early October, depending on upcoming conference dates and extend or send out a second call in November. PPC members review the proposals in November and December. The chair and co-chair organize a conference call with all committee members in late December or early January to finalize the slate of presentations for Board approval. Members of the PPC are assigned three to five sessions to coordinate in the months leading up to the conference. This includes: contacting speakers with specific requirements regarding their proposals; alerting speakers of their schedules; collecting and distributing data about their presentations. Committee work increases during the months leading up to the conference, but requirements during the fall and winter require fewer hours per week to complete committee duties and only basic housekeeping duties for the summer months (ensuring communications are working, offering suggestions for vision speakers). PPC committee members and chairs work throughout the conference, ensuring that presenters are present, that they have everything they need for their presentation, and participate in the speakers’ breakfast meeting where they meet with the speakers they are sponsoring. Continuing committee members and new committee members meet at the committee breakfast meeting and discuss issues from the conference as well as possible corrections or new procedures for the following conference. Standards The Program Planning Committee (PPC) is charged with organizing the program schedule and recruiting speakers to present at the annual conference. The PPC chair and co-chair work with the board and PPC 6 NASIG’s newest standing committee, the Standards Committee began its work in 2016. Please review the committee’s charge on nasig.org to find more information about its activities. This is an important initiative that furthers NASIG’s mission to develop and NASIG Newsletter September 2016 implement best practices and standards for the distribution, acquisition, and long-term accessibility of information resources in all formats and business models throughout their lifecycle. Student Outreach Currently, the main focus of the Student Outreach Committee (SOC) is brainstorming and implementing strategies for increasing awareness of NASIG as an organization with library school students. The committee works with library school ambassadors, current NASIG members who agree to liaise with library schools and to share information about NASIG and the e-resources/continuing resources/serials profession. The ambassadors assist the committee in maintaining accurate contact information for library school programs. The SOC committee also works closely with ambassadors to market the conference student awards to library school students. Committee work averages out to approximately one hour, every other week, with additional time spent during the conference award application season marketing the awards to library schools with no ambassador assignment. The majority of communication is through the committee listserv email. Typically, the chair and vice-chair collaborate on any draft proposals for new initiatives, solicit feedback from committee members, and then share this information with the board liaison. Call for Applicants for NASIG 2017 Grants, Awards, and Scholarships NASIG is pleased to announce the beginning of the application cycle for its 2017 grants, awards, and scholarships to be awarded at the Annual Conference being held in Indianapolis, Indiana. Professional/Para-professional Awards Please visit the Awards page on the NASIG website for full descriptions and applications. Birdie MacLennan Award An award for a mid-career professional in information management, covering conference registration, three nights lodging, and travel costs within North America. Capstone Award An award to recognize an individual who has made significant and distinguished contributions to the field of information resource management through recruiting and mentoring new professionals, service to NASIG or other professional organizations, notable research, or participation in organizations that advance innovation in the field. First Timer Award An award to a first time attendee, professional or paraprofessional, working in the information resources management field, covering conference registration, three nights lodging, and travel costs within North America. Paraprofessional Specialist Award Awards for promising paraprofessionals, covering cost of conference registration, three nights lodging, and travel within North America. Marcia Tuttle International Grant A $3,000 grant for an individual working in the information management chain to fund appropriate activities in fostering international communication and education. Horizon Award Awards for promising new information management professionals, covering cost of conference registration, three nights lodging, and travel within North America. Recipients will also be invited to serve on a NASIG committee. Rose Robischon Scholarship A scholarship awarded to an information management professional lacking funds for travel. The scholarship covers the cost of conference registration, three nights lodging, and travel within North America. Student Awards John Riddick Student Grant nights lodging, and travel within North America. Winners will be offered the opportunity to share a 1015-minute presentation during the conference at the Student Spotlight Session. Fritz Schwartz Education Scholarship A $3,000 scholarship and conference travel grant for a graduate student demonstrating excellence in scholarship and the potential for accomplishments in a serials career. The winner will be offered the opportunity to share a 10-15-minute presentation during the conference at the Student Spotlight Session. Grants for qualifying students to attend the NASIG annual conference, covering cost of registration, three The application deadline for the awards listed above Feb. 10, 2017. Upcoming Conference News CPC Update Danielle Williams and Sue Wiegand, CPC Co-Chairs Indianapolis is the city of car races and crossroads, and the Conference Planning Committee (CPC) continues to work on plans for the exciting June 2017 NASIG conference in Indy. The theme: Racing to the Crossroads. So cue the checkered flags as we map the track, setting you on the right course to catch up on all the newest trends and position your library to win the serials race to the future. VisitIndy (http://www.visitindy.com/) is working on a specially personalized website just for NASIG conference-goers, to be linked from the NASIG conference website (http://www.nasig.org/site_page.cfm?pk_association_ webpage_menu=700&pk_association_webpage=1228). This dynamic page will list all the exciting possibilities for activities and events that will be happening in June in Indy, highlighting the many varied adventures available, from urban nature trails to street fairs, world class shopping, and more. The opening reception will include an interactive car racing experience and great regional food. NASIGers will come to learn from each other and share best practices while enjoying networking opportunities and discovering a kaleidoscope of history, arts, parks, and people in the circle city. The committee will keep you posted as the 32nd annual conference plans develop, so plan to follow the (vroom!) action! PPC Update Steve Kelley, PPC chair & Violeta Ilik, PPC vice chair The Program Planning Committee (PPC) is excited about the program for the upcoming conference in June in Indianapolis, Indiana. We have three exciting vision speakers lined up that we are pleased to announce. They are Michel Dumontier of Maastricht University, who will speak on the cutting edge topic of semantic publishing; April Hathcock of New York University, a leading thinker and writer in the area of diversity and inclusion in libraries; and Carol Tilley of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, a renowned scholar in the field of comic books and graphic novels. In addition, we will have a rich variety of preconference workshop offerings. Topics will include best practices for managing research data; using COUNTER statistics; managing technical services projects; conducting collection assessment; and linked data and BIBFRAME. There will also be an all-day MARCEdit Basics workshop and a half-day MARCEdit Advanced workshop. More details will be forthcoming soon. The call for proposals will close on November 15, and the PPC will begin the evaluation process soon after. Presenters will be notified by mid-January. Calls for the great ideas showcase and the snapshot session will go out in early February. We will also be holding vendor lightning talks again this year. Finally, we will be adding a new type of programming: the student spotlight sessions which will allow library and information science graduate (LIS) students to give brief five to seven minute presentations. These sessions will be promoted and scheduled by the Student Outreach Committee. NASIG 32nd Annual Conference: Call for Proposals Extended Steve Kelley, PPC chair and Violeta Ilik, PPC vice-chair NASIG 32nd Annual Conference Racing to the Crossroads June 8 to 11, 2017 Indianapolis, IN Publishers, vendors, librarians, and others in the fields of electronic resources and serials are encouraged to submit proposals relating to scholarly communication, publishing, resource acquisition, management, and discovery. Proposals based on emerging trends, case studies, and descriptive and experimental research findings are encouraged. Proposals reflecting the conference theme will be especially valued. As we have in recent years, the PPC specifically welcomes programs focusing on the Core Competencies that the NASIG Core Competency Task Force developed for Electronic Resources Librarians. Please refer to the Core Competencies. Program topics inspired by the Core Competencies include:              Electronic resource life cycle and management Collection analysis and development Standards and systems of cataloging and classification, metadata, and indexing Technology and providing access to electronic resources Licensing and legal framework Standards, initiatives, and best practices Scholarly communication Life cycle of print serials Workflow of print resources Effective communication with those within and without the library community Supervision and management of staff in electronic and print serials departments Personal qualities of electronic and/or print serials resources librarians’ Management of projects related to electronic and/or print resources Please use the online form to submit a proposal or program or idea. This Call for Proposals will close on December 13, 2016. Please note the following: The PPC welcomes proposals that are still in the formative stages, and may work with potential presenters to focus their proposals further. Proposals should name any particular products or services that are integral to the content of the presentation. However, as a matter of NASIG policy, programs should not be used as a venue to promote or attack any product, service, or institution. Time management issues generally limit each session to one to three speakers for conference sessions. Panels of four (4) or more speakers are discouraged must be discussed in advance with the Program Planning Committee () Please refer to the NASIG reimbursement policy for reimbursement of speaker expenses. All session speakers must complete a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) prior to speaking at the conference. Profile of Oliver Pesch Christian Burris, Profiles Editor Photo Courtesy of Oliver Pesch Oliver Pesch is the Chief Product Strategist at EBSCO Information Services. In addition, he serves as co-chair of NISO’s (National Information Standards Organization) SUSHI (Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative) Standing Committee and the Executive Committee for Project COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources) as well being 10 NASIG Newsletter NASIG may provide online live streaming of presentation sessions, and all speakers will be required to give NASIG the right to stream this content. Inquiries may be sent to PPC at: We look forward to a great conference in Indianapolis! Profiles a member of several standards committees. Mr. Pesch previously served as the NISO Board of Directors chair in the 2008-2009 term and as interim director for part of 2014. As an advocate for library standards, he has articulated their importance both through his “Spotlight on Serials Standards” column in Serials Librarian and in his frequent speaking engagements at conferences across the country. How did you begin working with libraries? I have been involved in developing solutions for libraries for over three and a half decades. My first project related to libraries was a contract project to develop a cataloging module for an integrated library system (ILS). That was back in 1981 and from there I took on the role of head of development for that same system provider as we became one of the first organizations to offer a full-feature ILS that ran on a network of PC computers – that was a big deal back then! In 1986, after several years of ILS development, I joined two other individuals and we created a CD-ROM-based search and retrieval system that would deliver databases to libraries on that new platform. That company was ultimately acquired by EBSCO, and the software we developed evolved into what EBSCOhost and EBSCO Discovery Services (EDS) are today. You're the chief product strategist at EBSCO. Could you share more about what you do in this position? My role is about helping EBSCO set the direction of its products with a focus on our librarian tools related to managing, accessing, and analyzing library information resources. The role involves working with others within our product management team to set long-term visions for products and services and how they may interact in the future, and to anticipate what problems will need to be solved in the years ahead. With the bigger picture in mind, we are then better able to advise current product and service development so that it can address today’s needs while also anticipating future directions. Actual duties include keeping abreast of current trends in the market through the literature, engaging with librarians, participating in conferences as an observer, and through involvement in industry groups like NISO, COUNTER, etc. Did you have any projects that you enjoyed developing? I’ve enjoyed most of the projects I have been involved with but the ones that are really fun are where the team is able to produce a product or service that solves a problem that hasn’t been solved before, or solves it in a more elegant way. I’d be happy to highlight a couple of these – one related to EBSCO work and the other related to some standards work. full text link if they had a subscription. Databases like ERIC and MEDLINE that contained no full text suddenly were showing full text links for 50% or more of the results for some libraries. The evolution of this technology, introduced in the early 2000s, remains one of the key linking technologies, both for our OpenURL link resolver and for our EDS/EBSCOhost search interface, driven by an article-level knowledge base of over 150 million full text links. On the standards front, one of the most rewarding initiatives I had the good fortune of being involved with was SUSHI -- the Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative. The year was 2004 and the problem was finding a way for electronic resource management systems (ERMs) to automatically load COUNTER usage reports from a growing number of content providers. This project went from concept in July (a casual meeting in a hotel lobby at an ALA conference) to working prototypes that allowed ERMs to harvest real COUNTER statistics by November of the same year. That initial prototype was tweaked a little based on the feedback we received, but the overall approach remains the same as SUSHI is today. SUSHI is one of the more successful standards developed through NISO. That was a nice win! In the late 1990s, EBSCO’s portfolio of databases was growing and included a number of abstract and index (A&I) databases, like ERIC, MEDLINE and PsycInfo. How did you become involved with NISO? Customers searching these databases also subscribed to full text databases from EBSCO as well as had multiple I first became involved with NISO by being a member of subscriptions with e-journal publishers. Customers were its working groups. The early working groups I frustrated by the fact that a MEDLINE search result participated in were Z39.7 (Information Services and wouldn’t provide a direct link to the full text, and that Use Metrics & Statistics for Libraries and Information their users would have to conduct another search or go Providers) and the OpenURL working group that created to another site to find the full text of the article. To Z39.88. Both of these working groups were seeking address this challenge, we developed a technology standardization in areas which were important to which we called SmartLinks where we captured all the EBSCO and were of particular interest to me so they article-level metadata for all the full text we knew about were a good fit. Participating in these working groups (including the actual link to the article), whether that helped me better understand the power of was in an EBSCOhost full text database or available at a collaboration and cooperation to solve problems. publisher host. The system included article matching and rights checking components that would instantly As mentioned in the previous answer, such a problem match a search result in an A&I database against the presented itself in 2004 when a group of librarians and available full text and, if there was a match, it would vendors were trying to solve the problem of automating check the institution’s rights to the article and show the the harvesting of COUNTER usage reports. NISO was the 11 NASIG Newsletter September 2016 logical place to take this work and the result was SUSHI -- the Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative (Z39.93). I was co-chair of the original SUSHI committee and remain as co-chair today as we look to introduce SUSHI-Lite – a much more lightweight version of the protocol that will lower barriers to usage. Your column, “Spotlight on Serials Standards,” has been a popular feature of Serials Librarian. How did you get started writing it? In 2008 I published an article in Serials Librarian, “ONIX, Z and JWP: Library standards in a digital world1” that attempted to put the various standards and related initiatives in the context of the e-resource workflow by identifying which standards were available for information exchanges in the various stages of the workflow, the nature of the data exchanged and between which parties. After reviewing this article, the editors of Serials Librarian thought that serials standards would be a good topic for a regular column. They asked... and I agreed. How is NISO approached to consider and/or develop a new standard? The scholarly information community in general has always been a good source of ideas for new standards, but NISO doesn’t simply rely on being reactive to requests coming from the community and its membership. NISO has a committee structure in place to help manage the standard portfolio and engage the community. Currently there are three “Topic Committees,” each with responsibility for standards work in different topical areas that are somewhat aligned with the overall scholarly workflow. These are: Business Information; Collection & Content Management; and Discovery to Delivery. In addition to managing a set of current standards initiatives, the Topic Committees seek to identify new standard opportunities; track complimentary standards activity; convene thought-leader meetings around topics getting buzz in order to incubate; and, consider ideas from the community. Anyone with an idea for a standard can contact NISO at and they will make sure it is presented to the right group. Would you like to share anything else with us? I began working with libraries very early in their progression from print to online collections. It has been interesting watching the nature of collections, library workflows, and libraries themselves change over the past thirty plus years. And the rate of change continues to accelerate, as does the complexity of the networked information environment within which libraries now operate. No single organization can provide all the information, or all the services, or all the products needed by today’s libraries. True success can only happen through cooperation, collaboration, and interconnectivity. This is why I see standards work as having continued and growing importance, with organizations like NISO and COUNTER providing the forum where stakeholders in the information supply chain can come together to consider effective solutions that enable the necessary information exchange and interconnectivity. It is also why I am excited by the new FOLIO (the Future of Libraries Is Open) collaboration as it imagines a new open source library services platform where libraries will be able to customize their solutions by assembling the set of applications that address their specific needs (https://www.folio.org/). The FOLIO collaboration operates under the assumption that a community coming together to innovate on the challenges its members face can be far more agile and effective in solving those problems than any one person or organization attempting to do so on their own. These are exciting times! _________________________________ 1 Oliver Pesch, "ONIX, Z and JWP: Library Standards in a Digital World." Serials Librarian 53, no. 4 (2008): 63-78, http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J123v53n04_05. Profile of the Standards Committee Christian Burris, Profiles Editor Tessa Minchew, Standards Committee Chair [Christian Burris interviewed Tessa Minchew, the new Standards Committee Chair, via email concerning the committee’s charge and upcoming work.] The Standards Committee is relatively new to NASIG. How did it get started? That’s a really good question, and you might want to follow up with our board liaison, Angela Dresselhaus, for more details here because I was not in on the initial conversations. It is my understanding that the Standards Committee arose from NASIG’s desire to more formally support standards development within our profession in keeping with our mission to promote “the development and implementation of best practices and standards for the distribution, acquisition and longterm accessibility of information resources in all formats and business models throughout their lifecycle.” I imagine that the board quickly realized that organizing this type of work through an official committee would be much more efficient than commissioning individual volunteers to represent us with each organization, and having them report directly to the Board. And my vicechair, Mark Hemhauser, and I are all #TeamEfficientWorkflows! The committee has an interesting charge; could you describe it in your own words? It is interesting, isn’t it? I want to call us The NASIG Standards Hopper because that just sounds fun, but it is a good bit more involved than that. Basically, the Standards Committee is here to be part shepherd and part conduit for all NASIG standards-related work. We will represent NASIG’s interests to the standards organizations we choose to partner with and the initiatives we choose to participate in. The committee will consult with the membership via posts to NASIG-L and with the Executive Board to ensure that our actions and recommendations within these partner organizations and initiatives are in alignment with NASIG goals and are responsive to members’ input and concerns. We will also be doing outreach to the membership to keep them informed as to the progress of our work, and the value of standards development in general, and to recruit other members for participation in standards development as we see that we need to. To stay on top of things on our end, we’ll be having a monthly conference call and lots and lots of email discussion. What are some of the organizations that the committee represents on behalf of NASIG? We’re just getting started up, so we’re currently only organizational members of NISO and COUNTER. (URLs below if you’d like to read more about these super cool organizations.) COUNTER is a very new membership for us, so one of our members, Emily Ray, is exploring our obligations and opportunities there and she’s going to report back to us during our upcoming conference call. NISO (National Information Standards Organization) is an extremely participatory and prolific group so we’ve really had to hit the ground running there. They require us to have two official representatives, a primary rep who will cast our official vote on the various ballots, projects, and questions that are put forth every month, and a secondary rep who will be their back-up. Currently, our primary NISO rep is Beverly Geckle and our secondary is Christina Geuther. Everyone should give them both a big pat on the back because this is a whole lot of work to take on and they’re making it look easy. As I mentioned previously, we’ll be soliciting member input on these NISO votes via NASIG-L, so members interested in staying informed and/or giving us their two cents should make sure that they’re currently subscribed to the listserv. If you’ve unsubscribed and you want back on, you’ll need to get in touch with the Communications & Marketing Committee at so they can get you back on the list. NISO - http://www.niso.org/home COUNTER - https://www.projectcounter.org NASIG Newsletter September 2016 What have been some of the challenges for the committee? I’d say the main challenge for the committee right now is just the sheer volume and pace of the NISO ballots and how technical some of them are. We’re all coming from backgrounds that are related to this sort of work, but probably not at this level of expertise. So, we’re very anxious to hear from members who might have specialized knowledge in the areas covered by some of these ballots. If you see something in the monthly mailings that you would like to comment on, please reach out to us. Don’t be shy! We’re a fun bunch. How will NASIG members learn about the introduction of new standards? We’ll keep everyone posted on anything we’re involved with via NASIG-L, but NISO also has a number of specialized discussion lists that might be of interest, many of which are open to the general public (http://www.niso.org/lists/). I’m not aware of a COUNTER mailing list, but there are a whole lot of other standards pies out there that we don’t yet have our finger in. If you run across something interesting that Columns Checking In Kurt Blythe, Column Editor [Note: Please report promotions, awards, new degrees, new positions, and other significant professional milestones. You may submit items about yourself or other members to Kurt Blythe at . 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.] Welcome, one and all, to the greatest (library) show on earth! NASIG. you’d like us to explore, just give us a shout out at the email address below. If someone wants to provide input to the committee or ask a question, how can you be contacted? The email address will forward to the chair, vice chair, and board liaison. You’re also always welcome to contact me directly at . Do you have any additional comments? Just want to take a moment to recognize the rest of our awesome Standards Committee members whom I haven’t yet had a chance to mention; Jennifer Combs, Deberah England, Maria Hatfield, Jie Li, and Corrie Marsh. Jie has been doing a wonderful job managing our webpages and Maria just volunteered to represent us on the NISO working group that is revising the ISSN standard (ISO 3297), so we’re very excited about that. Everyone has pitched in to help get this committee off the ground in so many ways big and small, and I’m just very proud to be serving with such a great group of folks. Beginning with a couple of classmates from the University of Alberta: Robin Chorzempa writes, As a second year student of the Masters of Library and Information Studies (MLIS) program at the University of Alberta, Canada, I am interested in supporting my community by promoting lifelong learning, communication, and acquiring the tools necessary for finding quality resources. My interests are widespread and I continue to learn new things in my program, but also in my part time work in bibliographic services and at the Bruce Peel Special Collections Library. In bibliographic services, I work alongside the serials team on various projects, as well as being the one responsible for opening their mail! I chose to join NASIG because I would like to NASIG Newsletter September 2016 learn more about serials and the organization’s values. And, current student at San Jose State University, Megan Ozeran, writes, Lilith Lee writes, I am currently a student at the University of Alberta's online MLIS program. For the last two years I have experienced a lot of changes, from moving from Spain to Canada, to changing my career from teaching humanities in medicine to librarianship. I have discovered many engaging areas within information studies, and serial librarianship has appealed to me from my interest in twentiethcentury serials. Being new to the field, I strive to keep myself well-informed. When I saw NASIG's call for new members on my university mailing list, I decided immediately to join. I am very excited by the opportunities and activities NASIG offers! Then, University of Maryland grad, Fiona McNabb, writes, I'm really looking forward to getting involved, and I'm pretty sure this is the warmest welcome I've received from a professional organization. [Your humble editor takes a bow.] After college, I chose to pursue the Archives and Records Management specialization at University of Maryland's iSchool, and I made it all the way through my MLS (Masters of Library Science) without considering serials librarianship. I applied for a job as a government contractor at an archive under the National Library of Medicine's National Center for Biotechnology Information and a few months later, I was surprised to find myself not in the stacks organizing old books or records, but online, virtually up to my knees in biomedical research journal articles. At the digital archive PubMed Central, I have had the privilege of working on diverse tasks and projects at the convergence of government, archives, publishing, academia, and librarianship. I find the interplay between the different facets of my work fascinating, and I hope that NASIG will help me connect with others who share my interests as well as providing opportunities for multidisciplinary professional development. I'm a current MLIS student at San Jose State University, expecting to graduate in May 2017. At the moment I'm working in a small community college library where I am one of only two staff members, so I do a little bit of everything. This summer I was an intern at the CSU (California State University) Northridge library where I had the opportunity to explore digital services in three ways: creating records of faculty publications in the institutional repository; digitizing special collections; and managing electronic resources (e.g., analyzing cost/use for vendor databases). I recently joined NASIG because membership is free to students (yay!) and I thought it would be a great way to learn more about the world of scholarly communication. Once I have my MLIS I plan to continue as an academic librarian, and my general goal is to use new technologies to improve access to information and resources. [Editor’s note: I really like this column. We get some good stories. My personal thanks to all who provide them. And, welcome!] Citations: Required Reading by NASIG Members Kurt Blythe, Column Editor [Note: Please report citations for publications by the membership—to include scholarship, reviews, criticism, essays, and any other published works which would benefit the membership to read. You may submit citations on behalf of yourself or other members to Kurt Blythe at . Contributions on behalf of fellow members will be cleared with the author(s) before they are printed. Include contact information with submissions.] It’s been a very busy autumn for NASIG members (as is every season, of course). Rebecca Bearden presented at ENUG (ExLibris Northeast User Group) 2016 at SUNY New Paltz in New Paltz, NY this past October. The title of her presentation was Alma Prediction Pattern Basics. In brief: The University of Connecticut School of Law Library went live with Alma in February 2016. They completed prediction patterns set up for their entire current continuous/serial print collection by April 30, 2016. Self-taught, the serials staff dedicated a large amount of their time for three months to learning how to create appropriate captions and patterns for their complex serial collection including journals, looseleafs, interactive sets, and more. This presentation shared their method and approach, basics of setting up predictive serials, tips and tricks, and lessons learned. Then we have a citation for some names you all know: Borchert, Carol Ann, Charlene N. Simser, and Wendy C. Robertson, “Navigating the Political Waters of Open Access Publishing in Libraries,” in Open Access and the Future of Scholarly Communication: Policy and Infrastructure, ed. Smith, Kevin L, and Katherine A. Dickson (Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016),137–60. Meanwhile, Richard Guajardo, University of Houston, co-authored “Large-Scale RDA Enrichment of Legacy Data at the University of Houston System Libraries,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 54 (2016):159-178 with Annie Wu & Stephanie Rodriquez and, "Next Steps in Discovery Implementation: User-Centered Discovery System Redesign," Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference ( 2015 ) with Kelsey Brett and Frederick Young. Kelli Getz submitted: Getz, K. and Cronk, C. “Being earnest with collections: Let’s get in formation: Standardized data review for eresources management.” Against the Grain, 28, no. 5 (2016): 92-93. And Betty Landesman provided to the column: Article: Landesman, Betty. "Taming the E-Chaos Through Standards and Best Practices: An Update on Recent Developments," Serials Review 42 (2016): 210215. doi: 10.1080/00987913.2016.1211443. Along with colleague Jill Crane, NASIG member Marcella Lesher, from St. Mary’s University in San 16 Antonio, presented a poster at the 2016 Digital Frontiers Conference hosted at Rice University entitled, “From Print to Digital and Back Again—Using the Campus Newspaper to Explore Historical Events and Academic Culture.” Tessa Minchew had an invited article published in The Serials Librarian. “The Path of Least Resistance: Using Available Tools to Support the E-Resources Lifestyle,” The Serials Librarian 70 (2016): 236-246. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2016.1156968 And, Sarah Sutton, Ph.D., and a colleague recently published an e-resources management textbook: Ross, Sheri V.T. and Sutton, Sarah. W. Guide to Electronic Resources Management (Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited, 2016). Goodness, I (your faithful column editor) find this output invigorating. Title Changes Kurt Blythe, Column Editor [Note: Please report promotions, awards, new degrees, new positions, and other significant professional milestones. You may submit items about yourself or other members to Kurt Blythe at . 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.] In my humble opinion, we have some pretty serious title changes here. Please help me in congratulating: Carol Ann Borchert on her promotion to Director of Digital Scholarship Services for the University of South Florida Libraries. Likewise, Susan Davis became the interim Head of Acquisitions at the University of Buffalo (SUNY) in late September. In Susan’s own words: I will be overseeing the monographic acquisitions operation in addition to my continuing resources acquisitions responsibilities. I also have a staff of NASIG Newsletter September 2016 two, with a third person joining our team in the near future. As a long-time serials person I’d always heard that monographs were “easy” but they are a lot more complicated than I ever could have imagined. I also have to learn a lot more about item records and circulation status than was necessary for electronic resources. Learning all this new stuff is going to keep my brain sharp forever, too. Last (alphabetically by last name, of course), but certainly not least is Maria Hatfield, who had her title changed in August from Director of Integrated Solutions to the Vice President of Integrated Solutions at WT Cox Information Services. Serials & E-Resources News The NASIG-NISO (National Information Standards Organization) webinar “How Librarians Use, Implement, and Can Support Researcher Identifiers” (http://www.niso.org/news/events/2016/webinars/aug 10_webinar/) included three presentations covering both librarians’ and publishers’ involvement with research identifiers. The first presentation, “Attribution from a Research Library Perspective,” was from Micah Altman, Director of Research at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) Libraries. Altman’s talk covered the lifecycle view of research identifiers, emerging practices in the area, and the future of research identifiers. To create a broader background, Altman reminded the audience that the use of research identifiers should not be limited to published articles and that they can be applied to different types of works and entities (data, software, figures, images, etc.) It is also important to remember that the identifiers can be created and assigned at different stages of the research lifecycle. According to Altman, different types of identifiers exist for people, organizations, and works, and these identifiers have various relations with one another. He cited OCLC research that traced the use of research identifiers through a variety of library ecosystems and showed the complexity of the system.i Altman stated that the library community is well-placed to help foster the use of research identifiers both because of its ties with publication systems and because of its understanding of metadata. As an example of library involvement, Altman discussed MIT’s implementation of ORCID IDs (http://orcid.org/). The MIT implementation was a collaborative effort among institutional research, the information technology department, and the library. The library’s function was to provide outreach and patron support. MIT developed a multi-step ORCID registration process that included a pre-registration check to identify scholars who were already registered, multiple rounds of e-mails to potential participants, and a post-registration check. One of the positive outcomes of the MIT implementation was the ability of internal MIT systems to harvest information from external systems that had an associated ORCID ID. Altman’s examples of completed integrations included the local creation service and MIT profile system used for faculty evaluation and promotion. MIT is currently working on ORCID ID and DSpace integration that would allow associating ORCID IDs with open access publications and integration of ORCID IDs with the human resources system. MIT and other universities’ experiences contributed to ORCID, developing a standardized process for the institutional implementation of ORCID IDs and offering resources for planning, integration, and communicating on its website (https://members.orcid.org/researchorganizations). In the conclusion of his presentation, Altman listed emerging trends such as an effort to describe contributor roles, assign research identifiers to data, and create software repositories and software and data citation services. More information on Altman’s research and MIT’s participation with research identifiers can be found at http://informatics.mit.edu/. Emma Ganley’s presentation, “Data, Metadata, and Data Citation Practices at PLOS,” (Public Library of Science) continued the discussion about the emerging trend of data citation and the assigning of research identifiers to data. Ganley, who is a chief editor of PLOS Biology, contributed the publishers’ perspective to the research identifier discussion. Ganley’s first topic was the PLOS participation in ORCID that included signing the open letter and committing to follow best practices when collecting, processing, and displaying ORCID IDs. As a result of this action, PLOS is encouraging its authors to associate ORCID IDs with their profiles and to use them consistently for all content. PLOS also implemented auto-updates with CrossRef and other systems to make sure that the system cross-pollination based on ORCHD IDs was seamless to users. Next, Ganley discussed the PLOS implementation of the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) project. CRediT (http://casrai.org/credit) is a simple taxonomy of research contributions developed by CASRAI (Consortia Advancing Standards in Research Administration Information) and NISO. The taxonomy includes fourteen different contribution terms like conceptualization, methodology, software, validation, formal analysis, project administration, funding acquisitions, and others. The implementation of CRediT as part of the submission process for all PLOS journals improved the display of various contributor roles in the published articles, allowed the connection of this information to contributors’ ORCID IDs, and allowed the information to be ported back to faculty profiles and other systems. presentation by citing existing research that showed both the need for researchers to obtain other people’s data and the difficulty in obtaining it.ii The research also showed that data availability declined significantly over time with almost all research data being lost ten to fifteen years after publication.iii The above conclusions contributed to PLOS adopting a new policy that required authors to make all data underlining findings described in the manuscripts fully available. All authors must provide a “Data Availability Statement” describing compliance with PLOS’ policy. To encourage compliance, PLOS developed some guidelines and recommendations (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/dataavailability#loc-recommended-repositories) including a list of recommended repositories that adhere to a set of standards such as accessibility, sustainability, archiving, licensing and persistent identifiers. Ganley shared some anecdotal evidence that compliance with the new policy actually increased data availability and that the persistent identifiers are being used for data sets. Ganley mentioned PLOS’ involvement with a number of other data-citation related projects including the Data Citation Implementation Pilot developed by FORCE11 (The Future of Research Communications and eScholarship - https://www.force11.org/) and Project THOR (Technical and Human infrastructure for Open Research - https://project-thor.eu/). Both projects aim to establish seamless integration and coordination among articles, data, and research across the research lifecycle. The final presentation of the event, “How Libraries Can Support Identification and Discovery of Scholarly Output,” was delivered by a group of librarians from the North Carolina State University led by William Cross, the director of the Copyright and Digital Scholarship Center at the NCSU library. He was joined by two NCSU library fellows, Eka Grguric and Madison Sullivan. The focus of their talk was the libraries’ role in helping researchers identify useful tools for creating and controlling their scholarly identity. Presenters described a series of Ganley spent the majority of her time discussing PLOS’ open data policy and projects involving data citation and crediting data creation. She started this part of her 18 NASIG Newsletter workshops that took place as part of the NCSU Libraries’ Summer of Open Science program. WordPress was selected as a website creation tool due to NCSU institutional support. Cross talked about using ORCID as a perfect starting point for introducing research identifiers. According to him, the workshop participants easily understood the advantages of ORCID IDs such as ease of set up and auto-update features that allowed automatic populating of a variety of other related services (CrossRef, DataCite, etc.) Researchers also knew that ORCID IDs were required by many funding agencies. Cross felt that creating ORCID IDs and ORCID profiles provided a good introduction to explaining altmetrics and scholarly impact. Sullivan covered creating scholarly identity using social media. Her part of the workshop included a discussion about various social media channels and the importance of finding a channel that was the most relevant and useful for a particular discipline or subject. Sullivan cited a number of studies on researchers’ use of Twitter, listing an ease of getting feedback, finding similar research, and discovering peers.iv v The workshop offered hands-on experience with Twitter but also discussed advantages and pitfalls of other tools such as ResearchGate, Reddit, and Academia.edu, and it touched on analytics and privacy concerns. Sullivan suggested that if participants wanted more control over their scholarly identity, they should consider disseminating their work on a personal website. Grguric’s part of the workshop emphasized both website creation and search engine optimization (SEO) as tools for controlling one’s digital footprint. Attendees Executive Board: Anna Creech, President Carol Ann Borchert, Past-President 19 Grguric concluded the presentation by offering some general comments about the program’s success. The program was very well attended by graduate students (70%) and faculty (16%), representing twenty-one different departments across eleven colleges. It also resulted in many follow-up consultations. Overall, the presenters felt that there is a need for this type of interdisciplinary support, and the library is well positioned to offer it. More information about the NCSU program can be found at http://go.ncsu.edu/nisosos. i Smith-Yoshima K., Altman, M., Cristan, A.L., Dawson, L., Dunham, J., Hickey, T., Hook, D., Horstmann, W., MacEwan, A., Schreur, P. and Smart, L (2014). Registering researchers in authority files. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. ii Challenges and Opportunities (2011). Science 331: 692–693. iii Vines, T.H., Albert, A.Y., Andrew, R.L., Débarre, F., Bock, D.G., Franklin, M.T., Gilbert, K.J., Moore, J.S., Renaut, S. and Rennison, D.J., 2014. The availability of research data declines rapidly with article age. Current Biology, 24(1), pp.94-97. iv Mandavilli, A. (2011). Trial by Twitter. Nature, 469(7330), 20. v Van Noorden, R. (2014). Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network. Nature, 512(7513), 126-129. Executive Board Minutes NASIG Board Conference Call July 25, 2016 Steve Oberg, Vice President/President-Elect Kelli Getz, Secretary Members at Large: Betsy Appleton Chris Bulock Christian Burris Angela Dresselhaus Ex Officio: Kate Moore Regrets: Michael Hanson, Treasurer 1.0 Welcome (Creech) The meeting was called to order at 1:05 pm. 2.0 Secretary’s Report (Getz) Board Activity Report: July 22, 2016: Board approves the minutes from the Board meeting on 6/8, the Business Meeting on 6/11, and the 6/12 Board meeting. 3.0 Publicist Discussion (Creech) There was a discussion surrounding the role of the Publicist. In the Publicist’s Manual, there are a number of inconsistencies regarding the Publicist’s duties. ACTION ITEM: Remind committees about the publicity guidelines. Additionally, committees should identify one member to send newsworthy items to the Publicist for distribution (All). ACTION ITEM: The Board should look at the Publicist’s Manual and identify areas for the Publicist to rework. Bulock will pass along suggested changes to the Publicist (All; Bulock) 4.0 Committee Updates (All) Archivist: The Photo Historians are working with the Archivist on identifying people from the 2016 conference. The banners are currently being photographed for inclusion in the Archives. ACTION ITEM: Tarango will work with E&A to make sure that they send the ratings data from the conference surveys to PPC and CPC. Additionally, they will send CEC sessions that they think would work as webinars. MDC: Nothing to report. Mentoring: Mentoring is working with SOC to develop the student mentoring program. Mentoring and SOC will have a draft of the student mentoring program ready for the Board to review at the Fall Board Meeting in October.           Archives Task Force: They are wondering what to do with the video from the 25th Annual Conference party. A&R: A&R is busy gathering essays from the award winner to send to the Archivist. A&R is also pleased with the flat $600 reimbursement model. They are working on organizing student award winners to be recorders for conference sessions. Bylaws: Nothing to report. CMC: CMC is done updating webpages and email lists with the current list of committee members. CMC is also working on short video trainings for new committee chairs. ACTION ITEM: Bulock will follow up with CMC to see where the recordings of the 2016 vision speakers are located. CPC: They are working on identifying conference themes for the 2017 conference. CEC: They have finalized 3 presentations for NISO webinars. D&D: Nothing to report. E&A: They are ready to get started on the evaluation process. Conference Financials Albuquerque 2016 Conference Financials DC 2015 Conference Financials Hotel Albuquerque at Old Town 392 Attendees Expenses/Income Hotel Expenses Opening Reception Speaker Travel/Fees AV Conference Expenses Expenses Total Conference Registration Sponsors Café Press Income Total Total $65,575.58 $22,312.80 $6,279.37 $20,637.44 $3,902.52 $118,707.71 $104,482.50 $37,675.00 $26.70 $142,184.20 $23,476.49 398 Attendees Conference Contingency Fund Conference Expenses Hotel Conference Expenses Other Conference Speakers SSP (227@$100) 30th Anniversary T-Shirts Sub-total Expenses Exp/Income Totals $39,000.00 Amount $ 3,000.00 $ 3,040.00 $ 500.00 $ 3,325.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,540.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,540.00 $ 500.00 $ 2,040.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 3,325.00 1,825.00 2,000.00 3,500.00 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,540.00 $ 37,675.00 Committee Budgets NASIG Committee A&R Administration Archives Bylaws CEC CMC CPC D&D Evaluation Mentoring Membership Development N&E NASIG Sponsorships Newsletter $0.00 $117.90 $1,000.00 $0.00 2016 Budget $23,000.00 $25,000.00 $100.00 $100.00 $1,500.00 $21,000.00 $2,000.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $2,500.00 $100.00 2016 Expenditures to 2017 Budget Date Proposal $9,956.56 $24,350.00 $31,127.75 $28,000.00 $0.00 $350.00 $0.00 $100.00 $1,520.33 $1,600.00 $17,607.25 $21,100.00 $2,973.20 $3,000.00 $0.00 $100.00 $50.00 $100.00 $0.00 $100.00 $0.00 $68.41 $5,822.25 $0.00 $100.00 $100.00 $4,000.00 $100.00 NASIG Committee Proceedings PPC Site Selection Standards Student Outreach Treasurer Digital Preservation TF Financial Planning TF SC Core Comp TF Strategic Planning TF Joint SSP 30th Anniversary Total 2015 Expenditures $2,000.00 $804.27 $1,141.75 N/A $0.00 $11,769.20 N/A $41.78 $0.00 N/A $243.60 $495.68 $75,610.15 Committee Reports & Updates The Archivist is preparing to transfer records to the University of Illinois Archives. The process for transferring digital records has been initiated by submitting a description of the types of materials and technical information. Awaiting the go-ahead to email the digital files. No paper files will be submitted for this round. The Photo Historians and Archivist and Archivist-intraining will continue culling photos from Yahoo and Flickr to transfer to the Archives and to upload to the NASIG website. Once uploaded, the Yahoo account should be cleaned up by removing duplicates and organizing the photos that are left into groups according to the annual conference they are from. It will need to be decided among the Photo Historians, Archivist and Archivist-in-training who will take group pictures (Award Winners, Board, Committees and AllTimers) as well as informal shots at the next conference. The NASIG Flickr account is open for anyone to add pictures. However, our Yahoo account (for organizing and storing pictures) requires an invitation from the Archivist. The Archivist will send the location of the Flickr account to NASIG-L preceding the next conference. The Board appointed Peter Whiting to serve as Archivist-in-training until the next conference, after which he will become the Archivist. The deposit account at UIUC currently has $350 which is sufficient for paying to process the next records transfer. This will probably carry us through the next year. Submitted on: October 11, 2016 Awards and Recognition Committee Submitted by: Mary Bailey Mary Bailey, chair (Kansas State University) Delphia Williams, vice chair (California State University Northridge) Lori Duggan, member (Indiana University) Karen Ross, member (ProQuest) Tiffany LeMaistre, member (Nevada State College) Jennifer Leffler, member (University of Northern Colorado) Elaine McCracken, member (University of California) Ted Westervelt, member (Library of Congress) Joe Hinger, Mexican Student award liaison (St. John’s University) Chris Bulock, board liaison (California State University, Northridge) Continuing Activities All committee members are contacting LIS programs to confirm contact information for distributing awards announcements. All committee members are reviewing the award descriptions for any corrections or edits. Mary Bailey updated the Past Awards web pages with the 2016 winners. Del Williams interviewed the Birdie MacLennan Award winner, Christopher Bulock. Jen Leffler interviewed the John Merriman winner, Clint Chamberlain, and both reports were submitted for the September 2016 newsletter. Lori Duggan and Karen Ross surveyed all award winners and compiled the responses for inclusion in the September 2016 newsletter. Budget BUDGET Category - A&R Brandon's plaques Conference calls Hotel nights Monetary awards Postage/shipping Travel Other TOTAL 2017 estimated $1,750.00 $0.00 $4,500.00 $10,500.00 $300.00 $7,000.00 $300.00 $24,350.00 This budget assumes:  We will have 2 student award winners  Those receiving travel will be given $600 each ($75 stipend included). An extra $1000 was added in travel to cover overages. Questions for Board Award announcements are scheduled to be distributed in early November. Revisions to the announcements, because of changes in travel expenses, have been discussed with our board liaison. Will this need to be reviewed by the board before they are posted? Bylaws Committee Submitted by: Kate Seago Kate Seago, chair (University of Kentucky) Valerie Bross, vice-chair (University of California, Los Angeles) – resigned August 2016 Maria Hatfield, member (WT Cox Information Services) Sofia Slutskaya, member (Georgia Tech Library) Tessa Minchew, member (North Carolina State University) Angela Dresselhaus, board liaison (East Carolina University) The Bylaws Committee is finishing the draft of changes to include the new standing committee on Standards. We anticipate having the draft of changes out for a vote shortly. Completed Activities Bylaws were updated with the most recent changes approved by the membership and the website was updated accordingly. None at this time. Most of the committee’s work can be handled via email. Actions Required by Board To submit the proposed changes for the Standards Committee to the NASIG community for a vote. Questions for Board Who should designate an interim vice chair for the committee? And should we add another committee member to fill the vacancy left by Valerie’s resignation? Communications and Marketing Committee Submitted by: David Macaulay and Jessica Ireland Members Jessica Ireland, co-chair (Radford University) [Listmanager] David Macaulay, co-chair (University of Wyoming) [Webspinner] Melissa Higgins, vice co-chair (University of Colorado Denver) [Webspinner] Charles McElroy, vice co-chair (Florida State University) [Listmanager] Beth Ashmore, SERIALST Moderator (Samford University) Leigh Ann DePope, Publicist (University of Maryland College Park) Eugenia Beh, Publicist-in-Training (MIT) Michael Fernandez, member (American University) Smita Joshipura, member (Arizona State University) Melissa Randall, member (Clemson University) Paoshan Yue, member (University of Nevada, Reno) Chris Bulock, board liaison (California State University, Northridge) Continuing Activities     Committee members are rotating regular duties (blog, jobs blog, spam filter and SERIALST monitoring). Committee is reviewing and updating documentation in the CMC wiki. Publicist consults with and sends announcements from committee chairs or the board as requested to external lists. Publicist schedules tweets and re-tweets of items of interest, including events (with repeated reminders of deadlines), availability of presentations, proceedings, etc.; advertises the Jobs Blog; and scans the Newsletter for individual items to highlight; posts items of interest to Facebook and/or LinkedIn. Completed Activities Web  Updated committee public pages with new chair, member, and board liaison information for 2016/17. Created new public web pages for the Standards committee, the Digital Preservation Task Force, and the Strategic Plan Implementation Task Force. Archived the 2016 Conference Website. Assisted Nominations & Elections committee in uploading new elections calendar and creating new Call for Nominations form. Updated Conference Proceedings webpages to reflect Open Access status of material 6 months after publication date. Listserv  All committee listservs and forwarding email addresses were updated for 2016/17 in July.  Created new listservs for the Standards committee, the Digital Preservation Task Force, and the Strategic Plan Implementation Task Force; created a new forwarding email address for the Standards committee.  Non-member conference attendees were removed from NASIG-L by September 22. Miscellaneous  Worked with audio-visual service provider to set up web delivery of 2016 conference Vision session streaming videos.  Uploaded presentations from 2016 conference to SlideShare.  Assisted the Evaluation & Assessment committee with publicizing the 2016 conference survey.  Uploaded videos of Vision sessions from the 2016 conference to the NASIG YouTube channel. SERIALST Manager approves posts, collects posts for weekly commercial digest, and assists list members with subscription issues. Uploaded member interview videos from 2010 conference (provided by the Archives Task Force) to the NASIG YouTube channel. Budget Conference calls Contracted services Bee.Net ($500 per month – email and listservs) ArcStone (NASIG website and association management - $300 per month + contingency amount of $1450 for 10 hours of programming if needed) SERIALST maintenance Survey Monkey (online surveys) SlideShare Pro (conference presentations) UKSG Newsletter Google Custom Search for nasig.org website Contingency TOTAL Statistical Information 2016/2017 Estimate $0.00 $0.00 2017 (Jan-Dec) Recommend ation $0.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $5,050.00 $5,050.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $204.00 $204.00 $114.00 $750.00 $100.00 $114.00 $750.00 $100.00 $882.00 $21,100.00 $882.00 $21,100.00 NASIG-L  NASIG has 30 listservs.  NASIG has 25 active @nasig.org email addresses.  As of 09/22/2016, there are 779 subscribed members to NASIG-L and 99 unsubscribed members. SlideShare  22 presentations/posters were uploaded from the 2016 conference.  As of 9/20/2016. 199 presentations/posters are available on the NASIG SlideShare channel.  As of 9/20/2016, NASIG on SlideShare has 95 followers. Views  April 2016-September 18, 2016 – 27,727  Total (since March 2012) – 61,643 Top Content (Views) (October 2014–September 18, 2016) 1. The impact of reorganization on staff: using the core competencies as a framework for staff training and development (2,533) 2. Why the Internet is more attractive than the library (1,098) 3. RDA and serials - Webliography (970) 4. Wrangling metadata from hathi trust and pubmed to provide full text linking to the cornell veterinarian (942) 5. The Path of Least Resistance: Using Available Tools to Support the E-Resources Lifecycle (881) Blog (April 2016 –September 20, 2016)  NASIG Blog views – 3,471  Jobs Blog views – 5,253 Website Sessions (Google Analytics) (April 2016-September 20, 2016) 3,113 3,510 3,793 1,616 1,566 Total 14,548 Top Ten Landing Pages ("Entrances" in Google Analytics) (April 2016-September 20, 2016) www.nasig.org and /site_home.cfm 7,249 /site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_me 2,649 nu=700 And /site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_me nu=700&pk_association_webpage=1228 (Both go to main page for annual conference) /site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_me 776 nu=310&pk_association_webpage=1225 (Core Competencies) /site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_me 507 nu=308&pk_association_webpage=4955 (SERIALST) /site_event_detail.cfm?pk_association_event 319 =12690 (Event page for annual conference) /site_event_detail.cfm?pk_association_event 191 =12830 (Event page for "Analyzing a Copyright Question: A How-to Guide" webinar) /site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_me 165 nu=310&pk_association_webpage=7802 (Core Competencies for E-Resources Librarians) /site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_me 161 nu=700&pk_association_webpage=1234 (Travel/Hotel Information for annual conference) /site_signin.cfm (Site login page) 139 /site_survey2.cfm (Annual conference evaluation) Facebook As of 9/20/2016, NASIG on FB has 374 members. LinkedIn As of 9/20/2016, NASIG on LinkedIn has 449 members. SERIALST 2388 subscribers (as of 9/26/2016) 590 messages sent to subscribers from April 2016September 2016 Submitted on: September 28, 2016 Conference Planning Committee Submitted by: Danielle Williams & Sue Wiegand Danielle Williams (co-chair), University of Evansville Sue Wiegand (co-chair), Saint Mary’s College Stephanie Adams, Tennessee Technological University Stacy Baggett, Shenandoah University Sheree Crosby, Cabell’s International Iris Garcia, UCLA School of Law Beverly Geckle, Middle Tennessee State University Richard Guajardo, University of Houston Julia Hess, University of San Diego Betsy Hughes, Abbott Marsha Seamans, University of Kentucky Karen Davidson, Mississippi State University Continuing Activities Special Venue Negotiations: Danielle and Sue met in Indianapolis on August 10, 2016. Preliminary Budget Projections: The preliminary budget is based on last year’s budget plus a few projected costs for catering and venue options General Conference Issues: The listserv has been set up, and communication within the committee is ongoing. The CPC submitted the conference theme to the board, which was approved in August. We are moving ahead on developing a logo, and should have something to share with the board before the meeting in October. The website coordinator will be Betsy Hughes. Questions for Board None Members Conference Proceedings Submitted by: Angela Dresselhaus Angela Dresselhaus, production editor (East Carolina University) Leigh Ann DePope, production assistant (University of Maryland) Lila A. Ohler, editor (University of Maryland) Kristen Wilson, editor (North Carolina State University) Angela Dresselhaus, board liaison (East Carolina University) Continuing Activities 2016 Proceedings:  Editing of submitted papers  Working with authors to improve quality of papers  Compiling front and back matter  Training of new editors continues 2016 Proceedings:  Two conference calls were held to discuss editing workflow  A Trello board was setup to improve workflow management  All but two papers were received as of 10-3-16, editors assigned  Two new editors were onboarded since the last report  Editing deadlines assigned to receive papers No budget requests for this FY. Submitted on: October 3, 2016 Continuing Education Committee Submitted by: Kevin Balster Kevin Balster, co-chair (UCLA) Adele Fitzgerald, co-chair (St. Joseph’s College) Barbara Albee, vice co-chair (EBSCO) Xiaoyan Song, vice co-chair (North Carolina State University) Rachel Becker, member (University of Wisconsin) David Bynog, member (Rice University) Amanda Echterling, member (Virginia Commonwealth University) Mandy Hurt, member (Duke University Libraries) Rachel Miles, member (Kansas State University) Catherine Nelson, member (University of California, Santa Barbara) Shoko Tokoro, member (University of North Carolina at Charlotte) Lori Terrill, member (University of Wyoming) Betsy Appleton, board liaison (St. Edward’s University) Upcoming NASIG Webinar: October 20, 2016: “An Introduction to COUNTER Usage Reports for Librarians” by Lorraine Estelle, COUNTER Project Director. Xiaoyan Song is investigating the possibility of implementing a student rate for NASIG webinars, and is looking at other membership organizations such as ALCTS and NISO for more information. David Bynog is in touch with ALCTS to schedule discussions about collaborating on future events. Completed Activities The Continuing Education Committee hosted a webinar on May 19, 2016 entitled “Analyzing a Copyright Question: A How-to-Guide.” Speaker was Lisa Macklin, Director, Scholarly Communications Office, Emory University. The committee partnered with NISO on a webinar held August 10, 2016 entitled “How Librarians Use, Implement and Can Support Researcher Identifiers.” Speakers were Micah Altman, Head/Scientist of MIT Librarians Program on Information Science; Emma Ganley, Chief Editor, PLOS Biology; Ekatarina (Eka) Grguric, Fellow, North Carolina State University Libraries; Madison Sullivan, Fellow, North Carolina State University Libraries; and William Cross, Director, Copyright and Digital Scholarship Center, North Carolina State University Libraries The committee finished contacting the copyright holders for existing NASIGuides and added Creative Commons licenses to all of the guides. The committee held conference calls on July 18 and September 27. Using feedback from the Annual Conference, the committee determined two webinar topics to investigate further. Database & Directory Committee Submitted by Kathryn Wesley Kathryn Wesley, chair (Clemson University) Rebecca Culbertson, vice-chair (University of California, San Diego) Elizabeth Jones, member (University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center) Char Simser, member (Kansas State University) Stephanie Spratt, member (University of Colorado at Colorado Springs) Michael Hanson, board liaison (Sam Houston State University) Sending new member reports monthly to Membership Development Committee, Communication and Marketing Committee, and Newsletter. Sending edited reports (names and emails only) of new members to NISO contacts. Sending non-renewing member reports monthly to Membership Development. Deactivating members who have not renewed two months past last expiration, and sending those reports to CMC for removal from NASIG-L. Completed Activities Worked with CMC chair David Macaulay to settle whether which committee (D&D or CMC) should be responsible for checking committee/group membership boxes in member database. We decided it would be logical for D&D to handle. Confirmed that D&D member had AMO logins, divided up committees among D&D members, and completed project to update committee/group affiliations for the year. This annual project will be added to the D&D manual as it is revised this year to avoid future confusion. Added new committees not previously listed in AMO to the member management section and removed any no longer extant (e.g. 30th Anniversary Committee). Budget No expenses anticipated. Submitted on: October 10, 2016 Evaluation and Assessment Committee Submitted by: Derek Marshall Members Derek Marshall, chair (Mississippi State University) Melody Dale, vice-chair (Mississippi State University) Clinton Chamberlain, member (Dallas County Community College) Deberah England, member (Wright State University) Michael Fernandez, member (American University) Kathryn Johns-Masten, member (SUNY Oswego) Trina Nolen, member (Lamar University) Adolfo Tarango, board liaison (University of British Columbia) Continuing Activities Completed Activities Review the Committee Manual for possible updating. In January, Melody Dale accepted the position of vicechair. In March, the chair solicited feedback on new questions for the conference evaluation form from the Program Planning Committee and Conference Planning Committee chairs as well as from then-Board Liaison Steve Oberg. A mid-year committee report was submitted March 31, 2016. In May, the chair sent a draft of the conference evaluation survey to committee members for comment. The survey was finalized and sent to the Communications and Marketing Committee on May 20, 2016. Reminders to NASIG members were sent out before, during, and after the conference to encourage participation. As an incentive to participate, a $50 Amazon gift card was awarded by random drawing. The gift card recipient was Laura Secord from Macalester College. The Committee received 16 requests for individual conference evaluation results, all of which were sent by August 2016. In July, a final report of the conference evaluation results was provided for the NASIG Newsletter. A separate confidential report with a confidential link to the raw survey data was sent to the Executive Board, as well as the chairs of the Conference Planning Committee, Continuing Education Committee, and Program Planning Committee. In August, the committee began work on preparing a NASIG Committees Self Evaluation survey to submit to all current committee members as well as previous chairs/co-chairs. The survey was finalized and distributed in September. $50 for Amazon gift card for conference evaluation drawing Membership Development Committee Submitted by: Rachel Erb Rachel Erb, chair (Colorado State University) Alice Rhoades, vice-chair (Rice University) Pat Adams (YBP Library Services) Bob Boissy (Springer Nature) Stephanie Bernard (Robert Woodruff Library - Atlanta University Center) Alejandra Nann (University of San Diego) Christine Radcliff (Texas A&M University-Kingsville) Laurie Kaplan, board liaison (ProQuest)   New members welcome letter/non-renewals reminder letter. Email is sent monthly to new members who joined NASIG or members who have not renewed membership. In the process of setting up meeting for October. Chair has been tending to an ill family member out of state for most of the summer and was sent overseas for her work at CSU. Completed Activities   We are up to date in sending welcome and nonrenewal letters. Doodle poll to set up October meeting was sent. Budget Requesting $100 for conference calls. Action Required by Board Direction on creating strategy to promote NASIG to institutions/organizations that are no longer a member of NASIG (former members retired by current colleagues did not join). Would it be a good idea to provide a brief survey for incoming members to find out why they joined NASIG and how they expect NASIG will contribute to their professional growth? Conversely, should we also survey those who do not renew to find out why? What does the Board want us to address this year? Submitted on: October 4, 2016 NASIG Mentoring Group Submitted by Sandy Folsom Sandy Folsom, chair (Central Michigan University) Trina Holloway, vice-chair (Georgia State University) Rachel Lundberg (Duke University) Adolfo Tarango, board liaison (University of British Columbia) Continuing Activities The Mentoring Group is continuing to work with the Student Outreach Committee on a proposal to create a year-long mentoring program for student members of NASIG. A second conference call for members of both groups and board liaisons took place on September 15. During this call, the draft proposal was discussed and some modifications were made. The proposal will be submitted to the Executive Board prior to the fall meeting. Completed Activities The Mentoring Group was charged with drafting mentor/mentee application forms for the student mentoring proposal. The committee created draft forms that were discussed at the September 15 conference call. The forms were amended as a result of the discussion. The updated forms were incorporated into the overall proposal. No funds were expended during this quarter. Submitted on: September 29, 2016 Newsletter Submitted by: Kate Moore Kate Moore, editor-in-chief (Indiana University Southeast) Stephanie Rosenblatt, copy editor (Cerritos College) Tina Herman Buck, copy editor (University of Central Florida) Kurt Blythe, columns editor (University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill) Christian Burris, profiles editor (Wake Forest University) Rachel A. Erb, conference editor (Colorado State University) Gail Julian, submissions editor (Clemson University) Nancy Hampton, advertising editor (Xavier University of Louisiana) Christian Burris, board liaison (Wake Forest University) The December issue is currently in production. The deadline for CPC Updates, PPC Updates, and the President’s Corner is November 1st. The deadline for columns, profiles, and other submissions is November 15th. The full PDF issues of September 2015 and September 2016 are on hold until a new layout editor is appointed. Completed Activities Published issues  May 2016  September 2016 Personnel Updates  Appointments o Christian Burris took over as Profiles Editor for the September 2016 issue. o Gail Julian took over as Submissions Editor for the September 2016 issue.  Resignations o Sharon Dyas-Correria stepped down as Profiles Editor after the May 2016 issue. o Rachel Erb stepped down as Submission Editor after the May 2016 issue (she will continue a conference editor for the 2017 conference). o Andy Wesolek stepped down as layout editor after the September 2016. None requested Statistical Information  100,958 Total full-text downloads from bepress site (May 2010 – August 2016)  7,778 Full-Text downloads for the past year (September 2015 – August 2016)  1,895 Full-text downloads since last report (May – August 2016). Breakdown by Month of Downloads (Since migration to Bepress, May 2010-August 2016) Breakdown by Month of Downloads (Past Year, September 2015 – August 2016) Breakdown by Month of Downloads (Since last report, May 2016 – August 2016) Submitted on: September 29, 2016 Nominations & Elections Committee Submitted by: Patrick Carr Patrick Carr, chair (University of Connecticut) Erika Ripley, vice-chair (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) Joe Badics (Eastern Michigan University) Eleanor Cook (East Carolina University) Marcella Lesher (St. Mary's University) Buddy Pennington (University of Missouri--Kansas City) Marsha Seamans (University of Kentucky) Laurie Kaplan, board liaison (ProQuest) Accepting nominations for NASIG office through November 1, 2016. Completed Activities Held committee meeting at 2016 NASIG Annual Conference. Scheduled time for the fall 2016 committee conference call. Made minor revisions and updates to the N&E committee manual. Drafted a timetable for the 2016/17 nomination cycle, received NASIG Board approval for the draft timetable, and posted the timetable on the NASIG website. Updated the nomination form for the 2016/17 cycle. Sent out a call for nominations to the NASIG membership. Budget $100 Submitted on: September 27, 2016 Program Planning Committee Submitted by: Steve Kelley & Violeta Ilik Steve Kelley, chair (Wake Forest University) Violeta Ilik, vice-chair (Northwestern University) Marsha Aucoin, member (EBSCO Information Services) David Burke, member (Villanova University) Maria Collins, member (North Carolina State University) Christie Degener, member (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) Emily Farrell, member (De Gruyter) Gail Julian, member (Clemson University) Betty Landesman, member (none) Corrie Marsh, ex officio (Old Dominion University) Lisa Martincik, member (University of Iowa) Apryl Price, member (Florida State University) Wendy Robertson, member (University of Iowa) Steve Oberg, board liaison (Wheaton College) Call for Proposals: The call for proposals will be open from September 30 - November 15, 2015, continuing the practice of the past several years of having one long call for proposals, with the option of extending the call if necessary. Reducing the number of call for proposals has helped PPC make better selections, since we can look at the pool of proposals as a whole, and not divided between two calls. While October/November may seem rather early for a mid-June conference, it is not as early as calls in the past, and it would be logistically challenging to move the call later in the year. Once again, this year’s call for proposals will continue to target the core competencies, however, we have added a project management category to encourage new types of proposals. Additionally, follow-up messages will be sent during the call period targeting topics in areas identified in the 2015 conference feedback forms. The PPC will once again be using the proposal collecting product called Proposal Space (www.proposalspace.com) to collect and review all of the proposals. Conference Schedule: The 2017 draft conference schedule accompanies this report. Vision Speakers: We have confirmed Vision Speakers and are awaiting signed MOUs. Preconferences: The selection and planning of preconferences is not as far along as the Chair would like, and the Chair takes full responsibility for this problem. The committee has expressed their preferences for preconference topic, but we still need to identify speakers to actually conduct the workshops. The PPC membership has been most favorable toward the following topics:  MARCEdit (repeating the very successful 2015 preconference)  Project Management/Management Tools  Research Data Management  Collection Assessment  Linked Data/BIBFRAME  COUNTER/other statistical tools The Chairs anticipates that there will be further developments in this area to discuss at the Board meeting on October 11th. Student Snapshot Sessions: For the first time, the Student Outreach Committee will solicit proposals from SILS students to conduct snapshot sessions at the conference. SOC will publicize the call for proposals and will select the presenters. PPC will provide a slot for these Student Snapshot Sessions on the program. At SOC’s request, this session will take place during other concurrent sessions, as they would prefer to lessen the pressure on the student presenters by not having their snapshot presentations be the only conference content available at a given time. Lightning Talks: PPC will once again schedule and provide time for Vendor Lightning Talks for vendors who have met the sponsorship requirement and are interested in giving a talk. A budget request for the 2016/2017 Program Planning Committee has been submitted. Questions for Board Does the Board want the PPC to leave presentation slots open in the schedule to allow for presentations on late-breaking/last minute topics? This will be important to know before we begin selecting presenters in January. Should the Student Snapshot Sessions be given a different name so as to differentiate them from the (regular non-student) Snapshot Sessions? One or more members of the Board suggested the idea of a preconference to explain the basics of the current cataloging environment to non-catalogers. This was not one of the preferred topics among the PPC, but does the Board wish for us to pursue this idea? Submitted on: October 3, 2016 Site Selection Committee Submitted by: Anne E. McKee Members Anne E. McKee, Conference Coordinator (GWLA) Anna Creech, President (University of Richmond) Steve Oberg, VP/Pres-elect (Wheaton College) Continuing Activities Site Selection Team has identified two cities to travel to for site visits. If neither of these cities pan out, McKee will send out the RFP again with different cities on the east coast. Creech and Oberg have decided that the food & beverage could be increased based on expenditures from recent conferences but we are still trying to hold steady on lodging room prices. Sent out 2018 Annual Conference RFP on Aug. 4th, 2016 with deadline of Noon on Sept. 13th to CVBs (Conference and Visitors Bureau) in six cities on the east coast. Received responses from three cities. No expenditures yet, but will include travel when dates have been arranged. Estimated $2,500. Actions Required by Board For lodging prices to remain the same, we might need to must look to 2nd and 3rd tier cities where travel to and from the location may be more difficult Submitted on: Sept. 19, 2016 Standards Committee Submitted by: Tessa Minchew Tessa Minchew, chair (North Carolina State University) Mark Hemhauser, vice chair (University of California, Berkeley) Jennifer Combs, member (Kansas City Public Library) Deberah England, member (Wright State University) Beverly Geckle, member (Middle Tennessee State University) Christina Geuther, member (Kansas State University) Maria Hatfield, member (WT Cox Information Services) Jie Li, member (Morgan State University) Corrie Marsh, member (Old Dominion University) Emily Ray, member (University of Arkansas, Little Rock) Angela Dresselhaus, board liaison (East Carolina University) Continuing Activities As a committee newly formed in early August 2016, much of Standards’ activities are continuing. The committee is in the process of finalizing its structure 43 and procedures, including the creation a committee manual which is still in the draft stage. Assignments and responsibilities are being fleshed out for the interactions with partner organizations, currently NISO and Project COUNTER. NISO workflows are almost completely solidified. Project COUNTER is still under review. NISO prohibits sharing of ballot information on an open listserv or in any other forum to which non-NASIG members might have access. As such, the committee is working with CMC to create a password-protected page on the NASIG website to be used for sharing information regarding upcoming ballots. Membership input regarding these ballots will be sent to the committee’s email address. The committee has agreed upon a monthly meeting schedule and has held its inaugural meeting to discuss the committee charge and other administrative details. A shared Google Drive folder structure has been created to store working and administrative documents. The committee calendar has been established and the initial committee duties assigned. Jie Li has been appointed to serve as web liaison. NISO requires partner organizations to select two official representatives who will receive information about upcoming ballots and who will shepherd the partner organization’s proposed standards through the approval process. Beverly Geckle and Christina Geuther have been appointed as NASIG’s official NISO representatives. Beverly has been selected as the primary representative, and will cast NASIG’s official vote in all ballots. Christina will be her back up if she is unable to vote. Budget $200.00 Review the proposal for term lengths for representatives to partner organizations, and approve or suggest revisions. Submitted on: October 3, 2016 Student Outreach Committee Katy DiVittorio, chair (University of Colorado Denver) Todd Enoch, vice-chair (University of North Texas) Christina Geuther, member (Kansas State University) Beth Guay, member (University of Maryland, College Park) Melissa Johnson, member (Georgia Regents University) Stephanie Miller, member (San Francisco Theological Seminary) Heylicken (Hayley) Moreno, member (University of Houston) Shannon Regan, member (New York Public Library) Steve Oberg, board liaison (Wheaton College) Completed Activities In the summer of 2015 a Membership Committee proposal to the Board was approved and free student membership was offered to students. Approximately 400 student members have now joined NASIG. At the request of the Board SOC conducted a survey of these new student members. The Summary of Results from the New Student Members Survey was published in the September 2016 Newsletter. Continuing Activities The SOC members and ambassadors reach out to the various library and information schools on an ongoing basis to make sure they know about the NASIG conference and scholarship opportunities. SOC continues to recruit new ambassadors which will make connections with individual library schools. In addition to SOC regular activities SOC has two initiatives for the 2016-17 year: 1) Formal Mentoring Program - The Mentoring Group & SOC are currently collaborating on creating a formal mentoring program between student NASIG members and professional NASIG members. A proposal to the Board will be submitted prior to the Fall Board Meeting. If approved the two committees with pilot this formal mentoring program which will start at the 2017 Conference. 2) Student Snapshot Sessions - A&R, PPS & SOC are collaborating to develop a Student Snapshot Session during the 2017 Conference. Modeled after the “Snapshot Sessions” at the 2014 NASIG Conference, these Snapshot Sessions would reserve an hour block during the conference for “Student Snapshot Sessions.” Current library school students will be invited to submit a snapshot session proposal, for a ten-minute presentation at the NASIG conference. Student award winners will be offered the chance to present first. An open call for proposals from students will go out if not enough of the award winners wish to present. The session topics would not be limited in subject, and students could present on their thesis topics, final projects, interesting class projects, or other individual and group ideas that are central to the NASIG mission. SOC will work with the ambassadors to distribute information regarding the awards, and to highlight any funding that library schools may provide for students that participate in a conference program. Budget The budget for the SOC is $100 covering the printing of SOC ambassador handouts for recruitment or for mentoring orientation documents if the pilot is approved. Submitted on: September 28, 2016 Archives Task Force Submitted by: Sara Bahnmaier Sara Bahnmaier, co-chair (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor) Peter Whiting, co-chair (University of Southern Indiana) Eleanor Cook, member (East Carolina University) Carol Ann Borchert, board liaison (University of South Florida) Continuing Activities Conference Calls: The Archives Task Force held monthly conference calls in July, August and September. Videos: In 2009, several NASIG members granted interviews that were recorded, edited by David Winchester (Wichita State) and shown as part of the 2010 25th anniversary celebration in Palm Springs. Twenty-seven video clips were obtained from the NASIG Digital Archives at the University of Illinois Archives. We asked the interviewees to view their clips before submitting to the Communications & Marketing Committee for posting on the NASIG Conferences YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVvnh_CzXS8Ygf tuvIypTiQ ) Several more interviews had been recorded but only recently discovered in the archives; however, there have been technical difficulties with transmitting and opening the MP4 files. The task force continues to work on posting all of the interviews available to YouTube. The project is nearly complete. History Update for the NASIG Website: The 30th Anniversary celebration webpage was added and the task force is working to complete the Board Rosters, Committees, Task Forces, Budget History, Membership Numbers, Annual Conferences, Student Grant Applicants and Awards, Student Grant Winners and Scholarship and Award Winners. Memorials and AllConference Attendees have been updated. Charge to Investigate Moving & Digitizing the Archives: Our goal is to investigate digital archiving services at the current location, UIUC. There, a digital archive has been created to contain audiovisual files. Their description is online and they can be downloaded upon request (the request is made at the UIUC Archives). We have PDFs and photos that could be deposited if UIUC Archives will create the schema. We will compare this option with the effort required to start and maintain a repository site of our own using a service like Digital Commons or the like. We also need a confidential (board-only) option for select materials. The task force is planning a conference call with the UIUC Archivist in October or November. Completed Activities Videos: Twenty-three video clips have been cleared to be posted on the NASIG Conferences YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVvnh_CzXS8Ygf tuvIypTiQ) Memorials: The task force sent a message to NASIG-L requesting names for the memorial webpage. The updates from 2009-2016 have been completed. All-Conference Attendees: A recent picture and caption listing the all-conference attendees was posted on the NASIG website. Budget The deposit account at UIUC to pay for hourly work contains $350. UIUC told us this is sufficient for routine addition and arrangement of deposits, in digital or paper format. Our investigation will look into the further expenses of digitizing the paper archives. Questions for Board Digitizing the paper archive is the kind of work that a graduate student might do and learn from. The task NASIG Newsletter December 2016 force would like to investigate whether the UIUC Archives would be willing to make a temporary arrangement for paid field work as a learning opportunity for a student. If we don't currently have an ambassador to UIUC - would we need one? Do we have an active NASIG member at UIUC who might be able to help with recruiting and supervising an internship? Submitted on: October 11, 2016 Digital Preservation Task Force Submitted by: Wendy Robertson Wendy Robertson, chair (University of Iowa) Liz Kupke, member (St. John's College) Shannon Regan, member (New York Public Library) Zach Van Stanley, member (University of Denver) Ted Westervelt, member (Library of Congress) Christian Burris, board liaison (Wake Forest University) Continuing Activities Completed Activities None $200 for conference calls [I have no idea how much this would cost] Financial Planning Task Force Submitted by: Peter Whiting Susan Davis, co-chair (State University of New York, Buffalo) Peter Whiting, co-chair (University of Southern Indiana) Virginia Martin, member (Duke University) Michael Hanson, board liaison (Sam Houston State University) Task Force continues to review financial aspects of NASIG including the reserve fund, conference revenue and vendor support. Conference call July 13, 2016 Conference call August 17, 2016 Conference call September 21, 2016 Expenses for conference calls. Questions for Board A Financial Reserve Plan is attached for the Board to discuss. Submitted on: September 21, 2016 Scholarly Communications Core Competencies Task Force Submitted by: Andrew Wesolek Members Andrew Wesolek, chair (Clemson University) Sara Bahnmaier (University of Michigan) Jason Boczar (University of South Florida) Rachel Miles (Kansas State University) Char Simser (Kansas State University) Stephanie Spratt (University of Colorado at Colorado Springs) Sarah Sutton (Emporia State University) William Joseph Thomas (East Carolina University) Betsy Appleton, board liaison (St. Edwards University) Continuing Activities The Task Force is awaiting feedback on the draft core competencies. Completed Activities The Task Force held weekly conference calls over the last quarter and completed a rough draft of the core competencies for scholarly communications librarians. The draft has been shared with the board and we await their feedback. Subsequently, the draft will be posted on the NASIG website and we will invite feedback from the membership. Action Required by Board Strategic Planning Task Force Submitted by: Joyce Tenney Joyce Tenney, chair (UMBC) Carol Ann Borchert, member and board liaison (University of South Florida) Kittie Henderson, member (EBSCO Information Services) Betsy Hughes, member (Abbott) Steve Kelley, member (Wake Forest University) Virginia Bacon Martin, member (Duke University) Angie Thorpe, member (Indiana University Kokomo) The committee continues to review and discuss the strategic planning documents supplied by the board from their planning meeting in January 2016. Possible actions to various proposed strategic actions to move NASIG forward into the next phase of growth and development have been reviewed and categorized as “consult with membership,” “move forward,” or “do not pursue.” The list is attached and as board feedback is supplied, the committee will continue to work toward a proposed comprehensive strategic action plan. The committee has completed initial review and discussion of the strategic planning documents. An initial designation as to possible action on each proposed action item has been assigned for board review. At this time, the only budget required for the committee is a conference call budget. Please review the attached listing of possible actions for each strategic planning proposed action item and supply feedback on broad concept of committee work and any specific items as needed. Submitted on: September 28, 2016 Request feedback on draft core competencies. Action(s) Required by Board Submitted on: September 27, 2016 The NASIG Newsletter is copyright by NASIG 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-forprofit. 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. 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: Kate B. Moore Indiana University Southeast Tina Buck University of Central Florida Stephanie Rosenblatt Cerritos College Kurt Blythe University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Rachel A. Erb Colorado State University Christian Burris Wake Forest University Faye O’Reilly Wichita State University Gail Julian Clemson University Nancy Hampton Xavier University of Louisiana Christian Burris Wake Forest University Send submissions and editorial comments to: Kate B. Moore Indiana University Southeast Library New Albany, Indiana Phone: 812-941-2189 Email: Send all items for “Checking In”, "Citations," & “Title Changes” to: 2015 Expenditures $ 13 , 250 .89 $ 25 , 916 .86 $ 293 .28 $ 0 .00 $ 1 , 188 .00 $ 17 , 009 .90 $ 187 .04 $ 0 .00 $ 50 .00 $ 100 . 00


This is a preview of a remote PDF: http://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1802&context=nasig

December 2016 Full Issue, NASIG Newsletter, 2016,