No Shelf Required
Here’s an interesting tidbit from a session that I attended at ALA in snowy Chicago: Harvard Library Lab
This initiative resulted in a collection of technical and non-technical projects designed to create better service for students and faculty. Many of the projects are designed to be implementable at other institutions.
This was a very interesting presentation from CNI’s Fall 2013 Membership Meeting about research on college students’ internet skills:
One of the challenges that we face when seeking feedback from students: Want Data? Ask Students. Again and Again.
(post transferred from the Management Forum wiki)
The UC Learning & Development Consortium and Chief Human Resources Officers have published a model of core competencies to serve as a foundational tool for the development of staff, managers and leaders in the UC. A variety of free online courses related to each of these competencies is available on the UC Learning Center website (go to http://www.uclc.uci.edu, click on ‘Learn’ in the upper left hand side of the screen, and select “Catalog.” Core competency classes are listed under the “UC Core Competencies” heading.
(post transferred from Management Forum Wiki)
Think Like A Startup: a white paper to inspire library entrepreneurialism (by Brian Matthews): http://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/18649
(post transferred from the Management Forum wiki)
I just returned from a great program that used concepts from Reframing Academic Leadership by Lee Bolman and Joan Gallos to encourage the analysis of complex organizational situations using multiple perspectives or “frames”:
We all have our typical or preferred frames that we instinctively use to understand our organizational environment. However, if we rely only on our preferred frame(s), we can easily misunderstand or misinterpret the situation and miss the big picture. “Reframing” involves purposefully examining situations using all four frames to make sure that we are getting the full picture and identifying solutions that address the most important issues.
While targeted at leaders, I think that these frames are useful for understanding your organizational context regardless of where you are in the organizational hierarchy.
With summer thunderstorms, meetings dispersed between the convention center and far away hotels, and the Blackhawk’s Stanley Cup victory celebration & parade, travel to and around Chicago was a little challenging, but this still was an enjoyable conference. Here are a few tidbits from a few sessions that I attended at ALA 2013:
ARL Assessment Forum
Paula Kaufman, Tina Chrzastowski, & Lynn Wiley presented on a study of the value of E-books to academic libraries and users, very similar to this one:
As part of the study, Humanities faculty were surveyed about their preference for e-books or print books, and for those that preferred print, one of the major reasons they cited was that it was not possible, or much more cumbersome, to highlight and make notes directly on e-books compared to their ability to do so on print books. However, as one audience member noted, the survey respondents seemed to be comparing their use of print books that they owned (and could make notations on) to e-books (either purchased, or accessed through the library). From a library perspective, it seems like it would be much more interesting to compare preference for print books borrowed from the library (which faculty should not be marking up) and e-books accessed through the library (which in the right format or platform, they potentially could mark up electronically). It would be interesting to see if preferences would shift towards e-books in this context, given how important highlighting and note-taking appear to be for the way that Humanities faculty use books.
ARL Survey Coordinators & SPEC Liaisons meeting
Good news for those that help with the ARL Statistics! There will be no changes to the survey this year, following the major changes that we dealt with last year (If you are curious, here is an item by item comparison between the old and the new ARL statistics questions).
However, two new ARL surveys are likely on the horizon. The first potential survey will focus more deeply on Special Collections. In the past, ARL collected data on linear feet of archival material, and more recently, they have collected info on staffing and expenditures in Special Collections. However, there is a recognition that much more interesting, relevant, and useful data could be collected in this area. There was no hint yet at what this might be, so stay tuned…
The other area of future interest is some sort of survey about library buildings. Again, there were no details about what might be included, and the frequency of the survey could range from once, to every 3-5 years, to an inventory that is updated as needed. Again, stay tuned….
Organization Theory & Practice Discussion Group
This was a wide ranging discussion, but one of the more interesting themes was a comparison between the way that many of us are currently experiencing constant change in our organizations and the way that change is described in theories of organizational change and change management. These theories usually are articulated as having a clear starting point, mid-points, and a definite end point. However, with the pace of change in current library and higher education environment, it seems like we are just digesting one change when another one comes along. In this context, change feels more like an evolutionary process, or perhaps an ongoing series of waves, rather than something that you bring to completion.