�Building on Success � Charting the Future� by 4hRKVe0C

VIEWS: 3 PAGES: 7

									                               Executive Summary
In January 2005, Loyola University of Chicago President, Fr. Michael Garanzini,
established the Task Force on the Future of University Library Services and charged it
with developing a white paper to provide guidance to the University in its decision-
making concerning future library services, facilities and finances. Areas of consideration
included: 1) the learning environment of the library, 2) Loyola's research agenda as
related to library resources and services, 3) the influence of information technologies on
our library facilities and services, 4) library financial support, 5) library staffing and
policies, and 6) a learning resource annex to the Cudahy Library

The Task Force has met monthly to discuss the six specific charges and explore others. It
conducted surveys to assess student, faculty, library staff, and other library users’ needs
and to reach greater consensus on critical issues; consulted with local and national library
leaders; reviewed national library statistics; and several Task Force members visited
recently constructed academic and public libraries to gain greater awareness of trends in
library design.

A Value Based Approach to Envisioning the Future
The Task Force believes that libraries and their staff must be committed to being user-
centric, service oriented, and highly collaborative and it believes in the centrality of
knowledge to all academic missions. The Task Force Report is based on these filters and
upon a set of ten guiding principles related to a better understanding of library design,
what users want and how they use the library, and how the library’s ownership and access
to materials paradigm is and must continue to rapidly change to serve the needs of
scholarship, teaching, learning, and public inquiry.

The Task Force also believes that the library should serve as the principal building on
campus where one can truly experience and benefit from the centrality of an institution’s
intellectual community. Accordingly, the University Libraries must bring resources to
the user rather than hiding them and in the process create a one-stop shopping experience,
and librarians must be more entrepreneurial in outlook.

To that end, the Task Force holds that the University Libraries occupy a unique position
on campus since no other building can so symbolically and physically represent the
academic heart of an institution. The library of the future remains irreplaceable.

The Task Force believes that library facilities and services are most successful when they
are conceived to be an integral part of the institution as a whole rather than as stand-alone
facilities or departments. Achieving this goal requires a collaborative planning process.
This white paper is only the beginning of this process that must include the library dean,
members of the administration, trustees, students, and faculty and which will lead to a
more detailed planning for future library facilities and services.




                                              i
THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
Library experiences of undergraduates positively relate to select educationally purposeful
activities, such as using information technology and interacting with faculty members.
Libraries appear to be positive learning environments for all students, especially members
of historically underrepresented groups. Because students want to be part of the richness
of the tradition of scholarship as well as its expectation of the future, the character of the
study environment matters immensely, and that environment must recognize several
attributes of learners and the learning environment.

Recommendations
Loyola now sees that its mission is not instruction but rather that of producing learning
with every student by whatever means work best and this shift changes everything . . . .
The library needs to join the institution in this paradigm shift and understand that its
success in the future will best be measured not by the number of books held or circulated
but by whether it ensures the circulation of knowledge that produces learning. To
enhance the learning environment and to expedite this paradigm shift, the Task Force
recommends that:
 The University Libraries provide more “domestic space” (space that is congenial to
    conversations that share knowledge gained in class) in balance with quiet study areas.
 Food and beverages are a part of these conversations and should be permitted in many
    library locations where they do not represent a danger to collections (e.g., rare books)
    as a means for creating community among learners.
 The University should undertake a study of the Lewis and Law Libraries to determine
    the adequacy of space and the appropriateness of their locations within the 25 E.
    Pearson building in juxtaposition to the academic programs served.
 In addition to a centrally located reference room or information commons, there is a
    need for distributed computing resources throughout the libraries.
 The addition or enhancement of “non-library” services should be considered (e.g., art
    galleries, cafés, auditoriums, seminar rooms, conference rooms, and writing labs).
 To preserve the possibilities for chance learning and discovery in the stacks, as a
    minimum standard, all University Libraries held materials whether stored in compact
    shelving within the libraries or at off-library sites on campus, should be accessible
    within 24 hours of request.

LIBRARY SUPPORT FOR RESEARCH
When we think of research libraries, we think, first of all, of books and journals—lots of
them. The fate of the research library, then, is closely tied to the fate of the book itself.
The real problem for libraries is not the death of the printed book but the profusion of
new titles, reissues of old titles, and new editions of scholarly books by living authors.
Additionally, the explosion in the supply of and demand for information has been set
against a decrease in the resources available to acquire and to manage that information.
The growth of published output, continuing price increases, reduction in real terms of
library acquisition budgets, and the need to fund the additional cost of electronic
resources, combine to result in library budgets stretching less far and, in consequence,
diminishing institutional and overall collection building.




                                              ii
Moreover, the pace of research has increased exponentially; power users of devices such
as personal digital assistants (PDAs) overwhelmingly say that they prefer printed books
to books online; and we are unlikely to have digital versions of every last obscure text
and document for a long time, if ever. Consequently, University Libraries are likely to be
special in the digital age not so much because of the quantity of information they can
offer the user but because of the quality of the experience in which that information is
presented; because digital products tend to be more fragile than printed publications; and
because library facilities that communicate and foster a sense of awe will be a centripetal
force on our silo-ridden campuses, drawing people in and facilitating contact between
faculty and students and between colleagues in different fields and locations.

Recommendations:
Perhaps most critical to the support of research activities at both the undergraduate and
graduate levels will be the provision of instruction in how to locate knowledge resources.
As more and more information is available electronically, more instruction will be
needed, partially because many electronic databases require different searching strategies.
Also, as more information is available on the web in general, the more students and
researchers will need help to identify credible and useful information. Thus, the Task
Force recommends that:
 With appropriate input from users, the University Libraries begin work on the
    development of a new generation of Websites.
 The University Libraries should consider becoming the primary place on campus that
    offers workspace where researchers could find special digital work environments with
    multiple screens and multiple log-ins.
 The University Libraries should provide space for products made possible by digital
    technologies that are immersive and interactive (QuickTime VR, IPIX, Reality
    Studio, etc), 3D technologies (VRML, QuickDraw 3D, etc.), and 3D modeling tools.
 The University Libraries must use technology to facilitate information gathering by
    creating hybrid workstations where students and scholars can work and interact as
    individuals and as parts of larger collaborative work groups.
 The University Libraries should consider the establishment of an “Excellence Fund”
    to cover the purchase of material for special areas of research excellence in the
    University.
 The University Libraries should consider developing a web research portal to help
    researchers on both the university and medical center campuses to discover who is
    working on a particular research topic; what they've taught or published recently;
    where the facilities might be and what online tools are available to expedite the
    research.

LIBRARY USE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES
The University Libraries recognize that information technology is an integral part of the
learning process. The Task Force examined the University Libraries use of information
technologies and concluded that the libraries are well positioned in its basic (network,
desktop, and server) computing infrastructure, though space constraints limit the number
of workstations available. The Libraries use of information technology is on a par with
what should be expected; staff computing capabilities are generally appropriate; the



                                            iii
University Libraries web sites are well designed, heavily used, and provide access to off-
campus users. However, the need for collaborative space outfitted with the appropriate
technology to enhance the learning experience is evident as existing rooms are seldom
available and those that are available have only power outlets and lack network
connections. Further, as more and more research materials are available electronically,
library connectivity will become increasingly indispensable, and sufficient bandwidth is
critical to let students fulfill electronic course assignments.

Recommendations:
The University Libraries lack a comprehensive technology plan that is consistent with
and an integral part of University Libraries long-range planning. This lack of a
comprehensive technology plan contributes to several information technology concerns
regarding replacement and upgrading of public computers, increased costs, heterogeneity
of technology mix, and ability to provide staff with obtaining skill sets to support future
technologies. The Task Force recommends that:
 The University Libraries undertake a review of its information technology application
    environment as a first step towards developing a comprehensive technology plan
    giving particular attention to legacy systems, interfaces, public access systems, ILS
    systems, office software, and web browsers.
 As “laboratories that learn,” the University Libraries must increase the number of
    technology –infused group study rooms and project-development spaces and design
    them to be easily reconfigured.
 While the University Libraries have made considerable investment in its technology
    network, continued funding and upgrading of these resources are required.
 Wireless access must be expanded and additional laptop connections provided.
 With the advent of the Information Commons a focused partnership with the Library
    and Information Technology Services is needed to create collaboration for system
    support, new learning initiatives, and future technology planning.
 The LUC PC Replacement Program should be expanded to include user machines on
    a regular basis.

LIBRARY RESOURCE ALLOCATION
Today, library budgets are under intense budgetary pressures regardless of institution size
or type. Most of this pressure is directly or indirectly related to the rising cost of
information access. Coupled with the issue of rising materials expenses is the large,
unanswered question of how much to spend on access versus ownership. That is, how
much to spend on mechanisms for getting access to materials not owned or leased
(through ILL, document delivery, bibliographic utilities) and how much to spend on
acquiring and maintaining materials (print and electronic purchases, binding, etc.). Thus,
determining what to collect and/or how to access information or what is the “right size”
for collections and access to information is one of the library’s greatest resource
allocation challenges.

The “right size” for library collections and access to information is a combination of
several functions including the University vision and goals and the ways in which
research is conducted. Loyola University’s aspirations are high for academic excellence



                                            iv
and these expectations also have implications for the University’s need to support
University Libraries services and resources.

Recommendations:
The Task Force examined benchmarking data from several sources including ACRL
service trends and expenditure statistics, and developed additional comparative data for
fifteen (15) institutions that University administration have previously identified as
“middle weight” peer institutions and eleven (11) “heavy weight” doctoral-/research
extensive private institutions. [Refer to Appendix II & III] These data have helped the
Task Force develop a sharper picture of where University Libraries are positioned
relative to these other institutions, but because of common benchmarking difficulties,
conclusions derived from this data are limited.

The University Libraries have shepherded their limited funds well, but a commitment to
on-going increased investment in the library is required if Loyola wishes to remain in the
top 25 percent of private universities ranked by US News and World Report. Choices on
funding levels and programs should be based on University goals and programs,
including a gross target of maintaining library parity with schools ranked in our peer
group because to do less would endanger ranking and national prestige. The University
Libraries must:
  Develop a more systematic means to allocate acquisition resources,
  Identify one-time funding needs on a five-year basis,
  Create an on-going gift funding program, and
  The University Administration must articulate a commitment to library resources.

LIBRARY STAFFING
It is anticipated that within the next decade labor shortages will occur within the library
and information sciences field. Five library-staffing issues that will be of critical
importance within the next decade are: staffing mix, recruitment and retention, staff
development and training, library organizational structures, and the changing
constituencies or communities served by our academic libraries.

Recommendations:
A shift in the duties of University Libraries professional staff from traditional “in the
library” duties, such as reference desk time and collection development time, to “out of
the library” liaison activities, such as curriculum development and faculty instructional
support also has many implications for how the University Libraries will be staffed in the
future and the University Libraries also face challenges associated with providing critical
staff training/development, with determining the primary barriers to supporting currency
in staff knowledge and skills, and with finding new ways to deliver training and learning
in the future. Thus, the Task Force believes that:
 The University Libraries need to reassess roles and the workforce to better realign
    staff effort in growth areas such as portal development, web support, and the
    changing relationship of various library units.
 Library technology staffing constantly need to update their skills and staffing in other
    library areas may need additional technology skills. It is critical that additional



                                              v
    staffing be added in this area and that plans be developed to assist current staff with
    obtaining skill sets to support future technologies.
   It is important to support the current work to more clearly define librarian status as
    faculty and provide for upward mobility within the library’s administrative structure
    and to support inclusion of recommended revisions in the faculty handbook.

LIBRARY ACQUISITION & RETENTION POLICIES
Over the last decade the revolution in information methodologies and technologies has
greatly impacted information acquisition, access and retention procedures and policies, is
modifying behavior and permanently changing cultural paradigms. Many universities
recognize that the resource gap cannot be solved simply by transferring information to
computers; but that it involves a close examination of the way in which information is
discovered, received, collected, processed and disseminated and they recognize the even
greater need to exchange information and to collaborate with outside bodies, including
other higher education institutions, funding agencies, and national bodies.

Of particular importance is: 1) the need to integrate paper and electronic information
resources to provide the right information to the right person at the right time in the right
place, 2) the need to facilitate Open and Flexible learning environments, thereby enabling
the University to cater to a more diverse range of learning and learners, 3) the need to
emphasize Learning to Use Information More Effectively, rather than installing
increasingly complex systems, and 4) the need to reduce bureaucracy, increase efficiency,
and reduce frustration as paper work is reduced and information for regularly recurring
reports is made much easier to gather.

Recommendations:
Library acquisition and retention policy statements need to embrace the multi-
disciplinary nature of research, and interpret the collection in the widest possible sense by
including access to remote information sources as well as local holdings. Collection
development statements need to identify key strengths to be maintained and developed in
the light of the University research strategy and an overall University information
strategy. The "tipping point" for many disciplines in the move from print to online
content has passed and the University Libraries need to be campus leaders in the move to
digital content since they have the expertise in this area. If the University Libraries are
not purchasing important monographs in areas of strength, as is currently reported by
faculty and students in the Humanities, its acquisitions policy is failing. Clearly, the
University Libraries need to revisit its information acquisition and access policies. The
Task Force recommends that:
 The University Libraries undertake a review of its collection acquisition and retention
    policies to develop a strongly worded, theoretically based, collection development
    policy with well-thought out criteria that identify key strengths to be maintained and
    developed in the light of the University research strategy and an overall University
    information strategy.
 The University Libraries administration must work closely with other University
    administration to develop an "Information Culture" whereby the whole University
    community will understand more clearly the issues and opportunities involved in the



                                             vi
   creation and discovery, processing and analysis, and retention and disposal of
   information at all levels of the University.

SPACE: Cudahy, Lewis, Law Library and LSC Library Annex
There is not agreed-on paradigm for the library of the future and it is likely that libraries
of the future will become less homogeneous as each begin to more closely reflect the
culture of the parent organization. Certainly, changes in the delivery of scholarly
communications, technology, curriculum, and economics will continue to be major
drivers of library design. All libraries will continue to have strengths and weaknesses
that reflect the library’s role and their perceived value to the communities they serve.
Strengths and weakness of the Cudahy, Lewis and Law libraries are identified in detail in
the complete Task Force Report.

In the information age, formal collaboration among those responsible for pedagogy,
technology and information resources will become increasingly important to move the
University ahead. Such collaboration will also increase the speed with which technology
transfer occurs in the University. One of the keys to increased technology transfer and
use is an integrated support service or “information commons” for individuals who need
help in obtaining access to information resources, particularly in electronic form. If the
proposed Library Annex is to capitalize on the “information commons” concept
implemented at many academic libraries three key questions must be answered: How
much of the traditional library program must remain in a centralized facility? Do we
bring together library staff in a central information commons, or should they remain with
specific collections or services? What configuration of services is most flexible?

Recommendations:
The Task Force recommends that the proposed Information Commons include:
 An Information Desk to provide general information for all library services,
 Instructional Services to provide user instruction for use of library informational
    resources for academic research purposes,
 Presentation Support Services to provide user support for public computer hardware
    and software, including scanning and multimedia labs,
 Reference Services to provide information resource assistance with all levels of
    research for all formats (paper, electronic, microforms, etc.), and
 Group Study Space to provide collaborative space for multiple uses and quiet work
    practices.

Prepared by the Task Force on the Future of University Library Services
Fred Barnhart, Law Library              Robert Bucholz, History
Asim Gangopadhyaya, Physics             Adriaan Peperzak, Philosophy
Therese Pigott, Education               Mark Van Oyen, Business
Pauline Viviano, Theology               Dan Vonder Heide, Information Services
Logan Ludwig, Chair                     John Pelissero
Karla Petersen,

                                      November 2005



                                             vii

								
To top