Left Menu Right Menu



1:00-2:00 p.m., October 9, 2015


Present: Gordon Aamot (University of Washington), Xan Arch (Reed College), Amy Coughenour (Concordia University), Kristi DeShazo (Oregon Health & Science University), Jill Emery (Portland State University), Kathi Carlisle Fountain (Program Manager, Orbis Cascade Alliance), Tina Hovekamp (Council Liaison, Central Oregon Community College), Corey Murata (University of Washington), Mike Olson (Chair, Western Washington University). Notes taken by Mike.


The meeting was called to order at 1:05 p.m. Members had earlier, via email, approved the minutes from the previous meeting. (BTW, meeting minutes up to but not including the October 9 meeting are complete and official; Kathi will load remaining minutes on the team’s home page.)


1. Results from the SCT Representative E-Book Survey (Kristi)

As chair of the SCT’s Ebook Working Group, Kristi summarized the ebook evidence-based collection survey as follows. The working group will discuss the survey further at its meeting on October 14.

28 responses

Online courses/programs

· Two-thirds of Alliance library institutions have high investment in online courses or programs

· 20 institutions have nursing or allied health programs

· Other course areas/programs besides nursing and allied health include – Social sciences, business, education

Evidence-based ebook collection

· Only two libraries are currently purchasing ebooks using evidence-based program

· Only one other had done so in the past

· Current ebook purchases (not evidence-based) by libraries favor EBSCO, Gale, Springer and Sage

Should Alliance investigate evidence-based ebook collection?

· More uncertainty than certainty (65-70% Maybe vs 30-35% Yes/No) about evidence-based collection with a single publisher

· More uncertainty than certainty about evidence based collection in conjunction with current DDA program

· Sage and Springer were favored above Gale; other vendors suggested included Elsevier, Project Muse, Ovid, major nursing publishers, Palgrave/McMillan, and some smaller publishers

SCT members thanked Kristi and her working group for having the completed survey, and looks forward to next steps.

2. Draft of Collection Development Guidelines for the Alliance (Gordon, Xan, Tina)

Gordon, Xan, and Tina led a review and discussion of this draft. Many good ideas were expressed. Key takeaways: (1) There was much discussion about the intent of the document: do we wish to convey, primarily: Principles? Priorities? Goals? Ideals? Policy? Guidelines? Plan? Strategic Directions? “Guidelines” and “Strategic directions” were thought to be potentially useful terms. There seemed to be general agreement that we wished to walk a tightrope with this document by on one hand encouraging members to adhere whenever possible to the consortial ideals ultimately to be expressed in our final document, while on the other hand acknowledging that the document will respect institutional discretion when applying the document locally. (2) The subgroup will create a Google Doc for the draft guidelines and ongoing revisions. (3) We will again progress at our next meeting. Many thanks to Gordon, Xan, and Tina for their ongoing leadership.

3. SCT Chair-elect (Kathi)

Kathi led a discussion about needing to elect the next SCT chair. Mike’s term as chair will end July of 2016. We would like to have a current SCT member, or members, volunteer to be considered as the team’s next chair, serving as chair-elect before the term goes into effect. Mike mentioned that the chair’s time commitment to date, though important, is relatively manageable, consisting mainly of communicating regularly with Kathi (and of course SCT and its reps), distributing meeting agendas and minutes, facilitating programming ideas for the Alliance annual meeting, serving ex officio as a member of the Alliance’s Policy and Coordination Team, and otherwise facilitating the team’s work as well as possible. Please do consider expressing your interest to Kathi - thanks!

4. Revision/Reframing of Threshold Policy

The group agreed to defer review and discussion to a later time.

Meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m.

Next meeting: October 23, 1:00-2:00 p.m.