SHARED CONTENT TEAM MEETING
September 11, 2015
In person meeting, UW Tacoma
Attendees: Mike Olson, Chair; Corey Murata; Gordon Aamot; Amy Coughenour; Jill Emery; Kristi DeShazo; Kathi Fountain, Xan Arch, Tina Hovenkamp
WEST: Discussed status of WEST in charge. Need to communicate ongoing obligations for DPR. Convert references to WEST to DPR. Consider DPR static.
Hathi Trust: seems too specific to call out this particular project. OERs are not on here, but we think its important. Could the goal be generalized to include a variety of possible avenues of opportunities for pursuing archival opportunities, in conjunction with CCD to identify solutions that address historically valuable published and unique collections? Is there still interest in Hathi Trust? Do we comment on our capacity to pursue this? Should this be a priority if the P&C Team decision was to elevate SILS activities. Pricing for Hathi is not cheap. The loss of WEST has been instructive on the political will to pursue Hathi.
If our goal is to provide leadership for sharing resources, can we provide guidance for collection development? Alliance priorities versus local decisions and priorities? Could the identification of Alliance priorities lead to the pursuit of strategic shared acquisitions.
Collaboration: Call out variety of collaborative possibilities in whatever goals we develop.
Discussion of feedback from SCT Institutional Representative
A number of suggestions from reps point to the desire for more collaborative collection development for print.
Idea: Collection Development Policy. If we created an Alliance CD policy, would we use it to identify varieties of thresholds based on subject? Could threshold be reading-level based? This gets into issues related to the loan policy across the Alliance, and its impact on local collection development practice.
Idea: revise Last Copy policy. Review, discuss, revise, and communicate final decisions out to the membership. Example: could limit scope to not obligate schools to offer up 2nd+ editions, heavily damaged, or obsolete technologies (i.e., VHS tapes).
Topic: assessment. Data is important to the members. The charge asks us to consider a collection analysis. What role does the Assessment Team play? They are assigned projects. Teams should take ownership of routine data collection that is important to them. The tool available to us, Alma Analytics, is simply not enough to do what we'd like. Colorado Alliance has a tool we could use, which comes with a cost that would need to be funded by all. How much can we expect from Alma Analytics, and how much can we push for improvement of that tool? What needs to be done by outside tools? What would the goal be? We can review the list of assessment goals currently being used for COE Analytics, confirm it is adequate, and add anything that should be addressed by a tool other than Alma Analytics. What are the outcomes of the COE Analytics project, such as developing policies about data standardization, such as vendor codes, in order to improve data analysis with Alma Analysis.
Topic: NZ licensing work. Just about to launch. Meets our assigned goals and works with COE initiative.
Topic: Ebooks. Currently in investigative stage to determine what to do with the DDA piece of the project. Continue as is, work with specific publishers to do evidence-based, or do something else. Just received the report from the Assessment Team to use as a piece of data to inform next steps. What are the E-book WG's goals? Is Occam's Reader on its radar? No. Limits to price increases for the project, so what about Occam's Reader as a solution to sharing ebooks?
SHORT TERM PRIORITIES – CONSENSUS LIST
1. Create a collection development policy
Goal: Articulate the collection values of the Alliance
Work: Consider how to define values, such as:
- What types of ebooks do we collect
- What do we rehome within the Alliance (last copy policy revision)
- Access/ownership priorities
- Sharing goals
- Value of Alliance ER work
- License negotiation priorities
- Role of YBP in local activities
- Reasonable maximum print copies (threshold policy revision)
Frame as part of the values for collection development that supports the Alliance Strategic Agenda:
- Design for Engagement
- Collect wisely, share freely, and enhance the teaching, learning, and research environment
- Collaborate for shared access and shared collection
- Environmental scan discussion at SCT Sept. 25th
- Review and discuss last copy policy, threshold policy on Sept. 25th.
- Good draft shared with reps in late fall, out by Thanksgiving and feedback due early January. [Include open call for feedback]
- Review by Board – Feb 11th.
- Review by Council at March 10th-11th meeting
ACTION: Tina and Xan will take the lead. Will do an environmental scan. Will create a Google Doc to draft ideas. Kathi will ask ICOLC for collection development statement; send Alliance Strategic Agenda section to Xan.
2. Communication with representatives
Goal: Foster strong communication with reps
- WG's report out activities
- Communicate whether we will hold open calls and when
- Share team activity information
Goal: Determine whether it is feasible to pursue
Work: Touch base with CCD, poll the reps to gauge interest and level of interest in the Alliance pursuing this work
ACTION: Mike and Kathi reach out to CCD; someone on team create small survey to send to reps
LONG TERM PRIORITIES – CONSENSUS
Need to submit to the Board in time for Feb. 11th meeting.
ACTION: draft recommendations for goals with justification, including reference to the strategic agenda.
1. Collection Analysis
- Develop road map
- Explore what we have (or not) w/ ExLibris to determine what to do outside from a third party (like Colorado Alliance tool)
- Survey reps needs v wants from Alliance (Alliance-level focus)
- Engage Assessment Team if/as needed
2. Improve sharing of individually acquired e-resources
- investigate opportunities
- survey reps on interest – OERs, ebooks, streaming, other?
- Highlight collaborative needs across teams, such as advocating for improved loan rules in sharing