Vancouver, British Columbia
May 15-17, 1996

Leading the Agile Organization

APPENDIX IV

Report on Association Activities

October 1995-April 1996

Highlights Table of Contents

Highlights of ARL program activities since the October 1995 membership meeting include:

Mary Case to Direct New Office of Scholarly Communication

ARL Directory of Electronic Journals Tracks 150% Growth in Number of Titles

Communications Decency Act Challenged

Changes to Copyright Law Proposed

AAU/ARL Steering Committee Revisits Electronic Scholarly Publishing Strategy

Endorsed Research Collections Proposal for Global Resources Program

U.S. Implementation of ISO ILL Protocol Sponsored

CNI Studies Cost Centers and Measures for Networked Information

Erosion in Collections of Foreign Publications is Documented, ARL Response Proposed

ARL, Modern Language Association Examine the Significance of Primary Records

Diversity in Canadian Libraries Explored

OMS Supports Strategic Planning, Organizational Review & Design

SPEC Issues Kits:

• Non-Librarian Professionals

• Technical Services Workstations

• Digitizing Technologies for Preservation

ARL Career Resources Website Launched

New Training Institute on Facilitating Change Offered

VPO Develops a User Survey Initiative, Workshop Announced

Workshop Offered on the Role of Assessment in Advancing Diversity

OCLC Develops Linkages for AAU/ARL Latin American Research Resources Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ARL Capabilities

1. Scholarly Communication and Information Policies (Objective 1)

ARL Objective 1: To understand, contribute to, and improve the system of scholarly communication and the communication and information policies that affect the availability and usefulness of research resources.

1.1 Office of Scholarly Communication
1.1.1 Scholarly Communication Committee
1.1.2 Firm Subscription Prices Working Group

1.2 Federal Relations and Information Policy Development
1.2.1Committee on Information Policies

1.3 Intellectual Property and Copyright Issues
1.3.1 Working Group on Copyright Issues

1.4 AAU/ARL Action Agenda
1.4.1 AAU/ARL Research Libraries Steering Committee
1.4.2 AAU/ARL Intellectual Property Task Force

2. Access and Technology (Objectives 2 and 5)

ARL Objective 2: To make access to research resources more efficient and effective.
ARL Objective 5: To assist member libraries to exploit technology in fulfillment of their mission and assess the impact of educational technologies on scholarly communication and on the role of research libraries.

2.1 Access and Technology
2.1.1 Committee on Access to Information Resources
2.1.2 Work Group on Scientific and Technical Information

2.2 Coalition for Networked Information
2.2.1 Steering Committee for the Coalition

2.3 HEIRAlliance

3.Collection and Preservation (Objectives 3 and 4)

ARL Objective 3: To support member libraries’ efforts to develop and maintain research collections, both individually and in the aggregate.
ARL Objective 4: To support member libraries’ efforts to preserve research collections, both individually and in the aggregate.

3.1 Collection Services
3.1.1 Committee on Research Collections
3.1.2 Committee on Preservation of Research Library Materials

4. Staffing and Management (Objectives 6 and 7)

ARL Objective 6: To identify on an ongoing basis the capabilities and characteristics required for research library personnel to best serve their constituencies, and to assist member libraries and educational programs in the recruitment, development and effective use of staff.
ARL Objective 7: To assist member libraries in augmenting their management capabilities.

4.1 Diversity and Minority Recruitment/Retention
4.1.1 Committee on Minority Recruitment and Retention

4.2 Office of Management Services
4.2.1 OMS Organizational Development
4.2.2 OMS Information Services Program
4.2.3 OMS Training and Staff Development Program
4.2.4 Committee on the Management of Research Library Resources
4.2.5 Advisory Committee for the Office of Management Services

5. Performance Measures (Objective 8)

ARL Objective 8: To describe and measure the performance of research libraries and their contributions to teaching, research, scholarship, and community service.

5.1 Statistics and Measurements Program
5.1.1 Committee on Statistics and Measurements

6. Supporting Capabilities

6.1 Governance
Status Report on Committees and Selected Advisory and Project Groups

6.2 Communications and External Relations
6.2.1 ARL Publications Program
6.2.2 Electronic Communications and Technology

6.3 Membership Meetings
6.4 International Relations
6.5 General Administration

7. Research and Development

7.1 Office of Research and Development
Summary of 1995-1996 Grant Funded Activities

7.1.1 ARL Visiting Program Officer Program

Section 1: Scholarly Communication and Information Policies

1.1 Office of Scholarly Communication

This capability has undergone a name change to better reflect the interest of the Association in all facets of scholarly communication. The objective of the Office of Scholarly Communication is to maintain and improve scholars’ access to information. OSC undertakes activities to understand and influence the forces affecting the production, dissemination, and use of scholarly and scientific information. The Office seeks to promote innovative, creative, and alternative ways of sharing scholarly findings, particularly through championing new and evolving electronic methods of recording and disseminating academic and research scholarship.

The Office also maintains a continuing educational outreach to the scholarly community in order to encourage a shared “information conscience” among all participants in the scholarly publishing chain: academics, librarians, and information producers. The activities of this office build on the results of the ARL Serials Prices Project as well as interest and research ongoing in the profession. The capability is advanced and OSC receives guidance through the work of the ARL Committee on Scholarly Communication.

The first five-year phase of the Office reached a natural reexamination point with the departure of Ann Okerson, the founding director of OSAP, at the end of September 1995. After a thorough search process, Mary Case, Director of Program Review and Special Projects in the Office of the Vice President for Administration and Planning at Northwestern University, and formerly Head of Serials and Acquisitions in the Northwestern University Library, was chosen as the director of the newly renamed capability, the Office of Scholarly Communication. Nancy Cline, ARL President, Elaine Sloan, Chair, ARL Committee on Scholarly Communication, John Vaughn, Executive Officer, Association of American Universities, and Paul Evan Peters, Executive Director, Coalition for Networked Information, participated in the final interview process.

Summary of Activities

Activities between October 1995 and April 1996 were minimal in the interim between the departure of Ann Okerson and the selection and arrival of the new director, Mary Case. Susan Jurow, Director of ARL’s Office of Management Services, provided overall coordination and oversight of OSAP and the Scholarly Communications Committee activities while Dru Mogge, Electronic Services Coordinator, continued to operate the day-to-day components of the program. Mary Case assumes the position as Director of OSC on June 1.

Championing progress and innovation through publishing and key projects. Several ongoing projects were particularly effective in the ARL goal of championing new ideas in scholarly communication. These include:

• AAU/ARL Research Libraries Project. The AAU (now AAU/ARL) Research Libraries Project is an area of special emphasis for ARL. These projects are designed to collaboratively foster the transformation of the way libraries and universities do their business. The OSC is responsible for coordination of project reports. (See Section 1.4)

• The AAU/ARL Intellectual Property Task Force (IP-TF) held a meeting on March 25 to finalize the “call for proposals” for the Electronic Scholarly Publishing (ESP) Program, to complete a draft of “guiding principles” for licensing negotiations with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), and to prepare for the AAU/ARL Research Libraries Steering Committee Meeting on April 15.

• ARL Directory of Electronic Journals, Newsletters, and Academic Discussion Lists. This project advances electronic/Internet publishing of journals and has become the standard reference book in its area. The e-journal/newsletter directory has experienced enormous growth. The listings in the fifth annual edition, published in 1995, were 50% larger than the previous fourth edition of May 1994. As the 6th edition goes to press, there will be approximately 1,700 titles, more than a 150% increase.

The increase is attributable primarily to two factors. First, Netscape offers an exciting and easy way to present non-textual materials, such as images, and is widely available to producers and readers as well. More individuals and small organizations have been attracted to the e-medium for serial publications. Second, print publishers’ prototype projects for e-versions of their current journals are beginning to come online. The entire journals lists of a handful of publishers who are now or shortly will be making titles available through the WWW.

The majority of the actual research and keying for the e-journals sections is carried out by three interns from the Library and Information Science Program at Catholic University: Jennifer Page, Colleen Keller, and Ann Doty. The project was directed by Dru Mogge, Electronic Services Coordinator.

The Directory is by far the most heavily used resource on the ARL Gopher. It was updated in June 1995 following the publication of the 5th edition of the print version. Discussions are being held to develop a prototype license agreement to distribute the electronic database to the vendor and information community as an additional means of outreach and income.

• Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads: A Subversive Proposal for Electronic Publishing. Published in June 1995, this 242-page work, edited by Ann Okerson and James O’Donnell, captures an Internet discussion on scientific scholarly journals and their future, with an extensive organization, introduction, and conclusion. As an important snapshot of what different participants in the information chain think of the prospects of e-journals for the future of scholarly communication, this has been an extremely popular publication. It sold out of its first print run and was reprinted in March 1996.

• Quick SPEC Survey. A survey on cutbacks in library materials purchasing was conducted by the OMS Information Services Program for the OSC. An article on the findings is forthcoming in the ARL Newsletter.

Advancing Electronic Agenda through the Electronic Services Coordinator
(See Section 6.2.2)

1.1.1 Scholarly Communication Committee

This Committee was established in February 1991 by the ARL Board of Directors to help the Association understand, contribute to, and improve the system of scholarly communication. The Committee is charged to monitor developments, determine critical issues requiring ARL attention, inform members, and design strategic responses that can serve to influence the future of scholarly communication. The Committee also advises and guides the ARL staff on matters regarding the plans and strategies of the Office of Scholarly Communication.

Between the October 1995 and May 1996 ARL membership meetings, the committee has worked primarily on two issues: contributing to the work of the AAU/ARL IP Task Force, and providing advice and assistance to the ARL staff in the recruitment and hiring of a new director for the Office of Scholarly Communication.

Members:

Joe Boisse (1994-1996)
Scott Bennett (1996-1998)
Susan Brynteson (1996-1998)
Eileen Hitchingham (1996-1998)
Sharon Hogan (1996-1998)
Margot Montgomery (1995-1997)
Carole Moore (1995-1997)
Carlton Rochell (1995-1997)
Elaine Sloan, Chair (1996-1997)

Staff Liaison:

Susan Jurow/Mary Case (effective June 1)
Duane Webster

1.1.2 Firm Subscription Prices Working Group

To assist in efforts to obtaining firm serial subscription prices in a timely fashion, the Board approved formation of a working group under the aegis of the Scholarly Communications Committee. The group consists of volunteers who offered their services to ARL to work on this issue. Its objectives are 1) to establish a process of identifying firm price requirements by ARL libraries, and 2) to establish a dialogue with the vending and publishing community to attain prices for the subscription year by August or September of the previous calendar year. While actively sponsoring publisher and vendor meetings in its early years, for 1996, the Working Group is expected to monitor developments in a low-key activity mode.

Members:

Tony Angiletta
Robert Holley
Scott Bennett
Paula Kaufman
Sue Martin
Dale Canelas
Charles Miller
Lois Ann Colaianni
Emily Mobley
Merrily Taylor
Sheila Creth
Jim Neal
Fred Friend
Barbara Smith
Paul Gherman
Graham Hill
Carla Stoffle
Sharon Hogan

Staff Liaison: Susan Jurow/Mary Case (effective June 1)

1.2 Federal Relations and Information Policy Development

The Federal Relations and Information Policy Program is designed to: monitor activities resulting from legislative, regulatory, or operating practices of international and domestic government agencies and other relevant bodies on matters of concern to research libraries; prepare analyses of and responses to federal information policies; influence federal action on issues related to research libraries; examine issues of importance to the development of research libraries; and develop ARL positions on issues that reflect the needs and interests of its members. This capability is governed by the ARL Information Policies Committee. A Subcommittee on Government Information provided the Information Policies Committee with guidance on government information in an electronic environment in 1995. The ARL Working Group on Copyright Issues plays an advisory role with regard to Copyright and Intellectual Property Issues. In addition, a Task Force on Preservation of Copyrighted Materials was established to guide ARL staff as they pursue strategies to shape and influence copyright discussions on preservation of copyrighted materials. This Task Force completed its work in late 1995.

In 1995, the Federal Relations capability developed the Federal Relations Notebook (ARL/FRN). The ARL/FRN is intended to help ARL members keep abreast of the legislative landscape as well as of the rapidly changing issues, players, legislative vehicles, and priorities within the U.S. and Canadian federal governments. The ARL/FRN also provides a framework for the Federal Relations E-news distributed to the ARL Directors by the Executive Director on a monthly basis. These monthly Federal Relations E-news are written by Prue Adler and edited by Patricia Brennan. They are posted on the ARL Gopher (arl.cni.org) under the heading Information Policy/ARL Federal Relations Notebook Updates. These E-news complement occasional action alerts to members on different topics. Plans are underway to make this service available via the WWW in 1996. (UPDATE: Access the Federal Relations Notebook E-news updates: http://www.arl.org/info/frn/info.html

Summary of Activities
The priorities of the capability are:

• copyright and intellectual property issues;

• government information issues;

• telecommunications, networking, and digital library issues; and

• other issues of importance to research libraries such as appropriations of selected federal agencies.

Copyright and Intellectual Property (See Section 1.3)

Information Policy Legislation and Related Activities

Government Information Dissemination. Several bills have been introduced that propose significant changes to government information dissemination programs. ARL staff met with congressional and executive branch staff to discuss these proposals. ARL, with others in the library community, has responded to numerous GPO proposals, including the Government Printing Office Transition Plan. Prue Adler is a member of the advisory committee assisting GPO on how the agency could move to a more electronically-based program. Additionally, ARL, AALL, and ALA wrote in support of continued online access to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s EDGAR database. Under the auspices of the Information Policies Committee, a meeting is scheduled for May 1 to develop a strategic plan for the Association on these issues.

Influencing Agency Information Programs. ARL continues to collaborate with others in the public interest community and with agencies in implementing the Government Information Locator Service (GILS) proposal. GILS provides a framework and common approach for federal agencies to make their information resources publicly available. ARL staff worked with NTIS on implementing their dissemination program, with a particular focus on depository library issues. NITS has proposed a pilot project for 20 federal depository libraries to receive NTIS resources electronically. ARL wrote in support of NTIS and in opposition to the privatization of NTIS (see ARL Gopher). Legislation regarding NTIS’ future is still pending before Congress.

ARL GIS Literacy Project. The project seeks to educate librarians and users about GIS, as well as to develop GIS capabilities in research libraries. Background materials related to this project are now available on the ARL Gopher, including a database of all project participants. The number of libraries participating in the ARL Project continues to grow.

ARL staff participates in numerous discussions and conferences related to the development of a national spatial data standard. The increasing reliance upon GIS by multiple communities, including government agencies and members of the academic and research communities, indicates the need for research librarians to be well situated to provide access to the growing array of digital cartographic and spatial information. Prue Adler is a member of the Board of the National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA), an NSF sponsored consortium.

Telecommunications, Networking, Digital Libraries, and Related Activities

Telecommunications. Promoting the restructuring of the telecommunications infrastructure was a priority of both the Congress and the Administration. ARL’s focus in this area has been to: influence specific legislative proposals, including those regarding restructuring the telecommunications infrastructure and networking; working with agencies to implement NII programs and responding to NII proposals; and collaborating with others in the education, library, and public interest communities to promote common positions.

On February 8, the President signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which includes provisions that promote:

• massive deregulation for differing industries and in particular, cable;

• reduced restrictions on concentration of media ownership;

• reliance on marketplace solutions to ensure access to telecommunications services; and

• differing approaches to regulation of the Internet with regards to content.

ARL staff conducted congressional visits and worked with others in the library and education communities in support of an amendment to provide discounted rates for schools and libraries. The amendment was included in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. ARL endorsed an ALA filing before the FCC on this topic.

Of particular importance to ARL were the provisions regarding restrictive access to selected information resources. ARL actively opposed provisions included in Title V, the Communications Decency Act (CDA), of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which sought to prohibit access to indecent or patently offensive materials via the Internet. These provisions would impose fines and criminal penalties for transmitting and/or providing access to these resources. ARL, as a member of the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition (CIEC), is challenging the CDA in court.

Networking and Digital Libraries. ARL staff worked with agencies in designing and proposing network applications programs, such as the NASA Information Infrastructure Technology and Applications Program, the NSF/ARPA/NASA digital library initiative (DLI), and the NTIA TIIAP program. This included working with staff of Appropriations Committees in support of these programs. Prue Adler participated in the EOSDIS Users Report, an evaluation of user information needs for global change data, a NSF/ARPA/NASA Project Alexandria Design Review, the six-month review of the DLI, and was a member of a Committee of Visitors for NSF.

ARL with others in the higher education community, including CNI and EDUCOM, published the proceedings of Monterey 1995, “Higher Education and the NII—from Vision to Reality.” The conference explored the steps required over the next few years to turn the potential of the advanced information infrastructure into reality for higher education. Prue Adler and Paul Peters are members of the steering committee.

Appropriations

At the end of March, Congress passed the 12th continuing resolution to fund on a temporary basis nine cabinet departments and many agencies. Thus, Congress and the Administration are considering both FY 1996 and FY 1997 appropriations. ARL staff have worked in support of selected agencies’ FY 1996 and FY 1997 appropriations during the last six months, including those of the Library of Congress, GPO, NEH, NTIA, NSF, and the Department of Education.

• LC/GPO. In 1995, ARL, ALA, and AALL submitted statements to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees on behalf of the Library of Congress and the Government Printing Office FY 1996 budget requests. ARL was very active on this appropriations bill. Restoring GPO appropriations and the congressional mandate that the Federal Depository Library Program shift to a more electronically-based program were the focus of GPO related appropriations effort. Ensuring a sufficient level of funding for the Library of Congress in the extremely contentious budget discussions was ARL’s other focus. The Library of Congress fared well in the very difficult budget environment.

In February 1996, ARL, AALL, and ALA testified in support of the LC and GPO FY 1997 budget request before the House Appropriations Subcommittee, Committee on Legislative. Betty Turock, ALA President and Rutgers University, testified on behalf of the associations.

• National Endowment for the Humanities. NEH continues to operate without a FY 1996 approved budget. Letters and calls from ARL directors were particularly helpful in the House and Senate deliberations on the NEH budget. ARL, with NHA and CPA, submitted a statement for the record in support of NEH’s FY 1997 budget request.

• National Telecommunications Information Administration, Department of Commerce. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved deep cuts to FY 1995 and FY 1996 funding of the Department of Commerce. ARL’s efforts focused on the NTIA/TIIAP, a program that supports library, education, non-profit, and state and local government information technology projects. The program survived elimination, though the FY 1996 funding was significantly reduced.

• National Science Foundation. ARL worked with others in the higher education community in support of the NSF FY 1996 budget request and reauthorization of the agency. As with many other agencies, NSF does not have a final FY 1996 budget nor a completed reauthorization bill. ARL, as a member of the Consortium of Social Science Associations, submitted a statement in support of the FY 1997 NSF budget request. ARL is now a member of the Science Coalition and of the Coalition for National Science Funding (CNSF).

• HEA. ARL worked with a coalition of higher education groups and associations in support of HEA Title VI FY 1996 and FY 1997 appropriations.

• Non-Profit Advocacy. ARL joined a coalition of over 800 non-profit groups to oppose language in House appropriations bills that would severely restrict the ability of non-profits to work with others in the executive and congressional branches of government. Activities such as filing the amicus brief on the Texaco decision would be prohibited if such provisions were enacted. Action on the appropriations bill is not complete and restrictive amendments continue to be included in appropriations measures.

1.2.1 Committee on Information Policies

At the Committee’s meeting in October 1995, members discussed FY96 priorities and requested that staff continue to focus on and respond to these ongoing issues, respectively: copyright and intellectual property; government information dissemination programs, with the understanding that an investment in maintaining more government information in the public domain will, in the long-term, have an impact on ARL’s needed investment in copyright and intellectual property issues; telecommunications and networking issues, with a particular focus on digital library applications; and support of agency programs that are of direct importance to research libraries, including those that promote the digitizing of research library resources.

1996 Agenda of Issues:

• Advise on the development of ARL positions

• Monitor and assess other government policies that may have an impact on research libraries

• Advise on efforts to strengthen ARL’s capability to communicate with policymakers

Meetings planned in 1996:

Meeting in conjunction with the ARL membership meetings in May and October 1996. Telephone consultations and email conferences will continue as needed.

Members

Jerry Campbell (1996-1998)
Sheila Creth (1996-1998)
Kenneth Frazier (1996-1998)
Fred Heath (1994-1996)
Ernie Ingles (1995-1997)
Paula Kaufman (1996-1998)
Gerald Lowell (1995-1997)
Susan K. Martin (1995-1997)
Tom Shaughnessy (1994-1996)
Robert Wedgeworth (1996-1998)
James F. Williams (1995-1997)
James Neal, Chair (1995-1996)

Staff Liaison: Prue Adler

1.3 Intellectual Property and Copyright Issues

The ARL Board of Directors has identified intellectual property and copyright as a defining set of issues for the future of scholarly communication. All programs were urged to identify ways to advance the ARL agenda in these areas. As a result, many programs contributed recent activities.

Last fall and winter, the ARL Working Group on Copyright developed a set of strategies for expanded research library leadership and impact on proposed copyright legislation. The strategies were reviewed by the ARL membership and changes were proposed and incorporated to produce the following list.

• Implement tactics to slow down the legislative process so that key issues can be identified and debated, including use of institutional legislative liaisons

• Advocate for appropriate change or improvements in the current copyright law

• Affirm and articulate our intellectual property principles as well as important professional tenets in such areas as intellectual freedom and privacy

• Evaluate the proposed legislation against these principles to identify key conflicts and gaps

• Identify and resolve critical philosophical and practical differences and varied interpretations in our own community

• Propose new or alternative legislative language which addresses the needs of the scholarly and higher education communities

• Shape specific programs of library service that maximize the value for readers of the fair use and other limitations on copyright provided by the law

• Improve understanding of the international dimensions of the issues

• Expand awareness of the increased legal vulnerability for libraries and parent institutions under the proposed legislation

• Expand coalition building with the higher education, not-for-profit and technology communities

• Launch an effective and broad-based education and advocacy program on our campuses and in our regions

Summary of Activities

• Reviewed and responded to the Administration’s recommended revisions to the 1976 Copyright Act and related NII efforts

• Developed strategies in response to specific legislative proposals such as the NII Copyright Protection Act and the Copyright Term Extension Bill

• Provide background information to the membership on new copyright proposals and progress with development of fair use guidelines

• Distribute regular updates via the federal relations monthly e-notes

Shared Legal Capability for Intellectual Property. ARL is collaborating very closely with others in the library community on copyright and NII issues through the formation of the shared legal capability (SLC).

• Five library associations (ALA, AALL, ARL, MLA, and SLA) are members of the SLC. Since October, members of the SLC met with members of the Administration and congressional staff to discuss many proposed changes to the Copyright Act.

• The SLC submitted statements to both the House and Senate regarding the proposed extension of copyright term and is participating in negotiations with other interested stakeholders on these bills. The Register of Copyright is the facilitator of these negotiations.

• The SLC submitted statements to the House and Senate regarding H.R. 2441 and S. 1284, the NII Copyright Protection Act of 1995. Members of the SLC drafted alternative legislative proposals concerning section 107 and section 108 of the Copyright Act and endorsed proposals by the Digital Future Coalition regarding first sale and ephemeral copying. Other proposals regarding distance education and copyright management information are under consideration.

• The SLC is a participant in the negotiations with online service providers and content owners on online service liability issues. Rep. Goodlatte (R-VA) has convened these sessions to try to find a common ground among these stakeholders. Arnie Lutzker, attorney with Fish and Richardson and SLC legal counsel, is representing the SLC in these discussions.

• Prue Adler and Duane Webster are the ARL representatives to the SLC.

Intellectual Property and NII. During the last six months, ARL staff have been extremely active in intellectual property and copyright debates and discussions. Members of the copyright team have made numerous presentations on these issues. Hearings in the House and Senate in the fall and winter were conducted on H.R. 2441 and S. 1284, the NII Copyright Protection Act of 1995. ARL, with others in the SLC, submitted statements for the record. In addition, ARL staff conducted numerous visits to House and Senate offices to discuss this legislation and H.R. 989, the legislation seeking to extend copyright term.

With others in the public and private sectors, ARL formed the Digital Future Coalition (DFC). This Coalition is comprised of a diverse constituency of library, education, legal, scholarly, consumer, public interest, hardware and software manufacturers, and telecommunications providers, each of which has concerns regarding both the White Paper produced by the Administration and with provisions in H.R. 2441 and S. 1284. The DFC was formed to provide constructive alternative proposals to the White Paper and the legislation. Prue Adler is a member of the DFC steering committee. The DFC has:

• submitted testimony to both the House and Senate on H.R. 2441 and S. 1284;

• conducted numerous visits to meet with Members of Congress, Congressional staff, and members of the Administration on these issues;

• developed alternative proposals to those included in the legislation; and

• commenced a public awareness campaign regarding the critical importance of this legislation.

Conference on Fair Use. The Conference on Fair Use (CONFU) continues to focus on the possible development of guidelines for electronic reserves, distance learning, visual images, and interlibrary loan. At the February 1996 CONFU meeting, the 60+ participants agreed to a November 1996 goal for the development of guidelines. A series of small Working Group meetings have been scheduled that will up to the next plenary CONFU session at the end of May.

At the end of 1995, the Working Group on Electronic Reserves agreed that reaching consensus on a set of guidelines would not be possible. The Working Group consisted of representatives from publishers, users, and library associations. In early January, an informal group representing scholarly societies, university presses, and library associations began a process to revitalize the draft guidelines. A small group of individuals used the earlier drafts and developed a draft with some important changes and modifications. Most of the individuals in that review panel were able to support personally and recommend formal endorsement of these guidelines by their organizations. The March 5, 1996 draft guidelines for e-reserves was distributed to ARL members in April, and to other interested organizations and associations. Feedback from organizations on this draft will be discussed at the May 30, 1996 CONFU plenary meeting.

The Distance Learning Working Group has just begun to meet. Work-to-date has centered on drafting language that would cover live, interactive programs and asynchronous taped programs for later transmission. The Working Group expects to address computer network and WWW delivery of distance learning courses in its next meetings.

The Visual Images Working Group was established in early January to comment on a draft prepared by the College Art Association. The Working Group did forward comments on the CAA draft, but decided to develop a second draft that better reflects the needs of holders of copyrighted images and the users of those works. A draft is expected to be presented at the May 30, 1996 CONFU meeting.

The Interlibrary Loan Working Group met in late March. At that meeting, representatives of both copyright proprietors and user communities agreed that it was premature to develop guidelines for digital transmission of a digital document. The Working Group will meet in early May to discuss the feasibility of developing guidelines for the digital transmission of print materials.

Draft guidelines for multimedia are being developed outside the CONFU process by the Consortium of College and University Media Centers (CCUMC). Participants expect to agree on a set of guidelines within the next several months.

Mary Jackson represents ARL in CONFU and CCUMC meetings.

Copyright Education Initiative. In 1995, the H.W. Wilson Foundation awarded ARL funding to develop an educational initiative on copyright compliance. The proposal includes funding to sponsor a series of workshops for librarians who have a training or spokesperson role in copyright compliance. The first workshop was held in the Fall of 1995. Three additional workshops are scheduled for 1996. Two are planned for a U. S. audience and a third is targeted for Canadians.

For the U.S. audience, “Copyright and Libraries: A Leadership Workshop” will be held in Washington, DC (April 26-27) and in Seattle, WA (September 19-20). The needs of institutions governed by Canadian copyright law will be addressed in “Copyright in Canada,” to be held in Ottawa, Ontario (October 3-4). ARL collaborated with the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) in the design of the workshop; it is co-sponsored by ARL, CARL, and the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.

MDS Decision and Fair Use. ARL closely monitored reaction to a fair use decision passed down by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on February 12. The court held that an off-campus, for-profit photocopy shop may, as a matter of fair use, make coursepacks that include substantial portions of copyright-protected books and sell them to students (Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services, Inc.). ARL joined with law professors in filing an amicus brief in this case that made an argument for the Constitutional basis of copyright. An assessment of this recent ruling was prepared for ARL by Kenneth D. Crews, Associate Professor of Law and of Library and Information Science at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. The Crews analysis “The MDS Decision and Fair Use for Coursepacks,” was distributed to the ARL directors and posted to the ARL Server. Susan Kornfield, the attorney representing MDS, will speak to ARL members about the case at the May 1996 membership meeting.

Copyright Publications. In May ARL published Copyright and the NII: Resources for the Library and Education Community. This briefing packet was designed to assist libraries and educators to understand and become aware of the current copyright legislative reform and to encourage involvement in the debate. To date, over 800 copies have been distributed. Segments of the publication are also available on the ARL Server.

In preparation for the ARL Copyright Workshop in Seattle, ARL staff prepared A Copyright Handbook: An ARL Compilation of Key Resources for Librarians. This publication contains a range of materials designed to acquaint librarians with copyright and its application in the library. This publication will be revised in the fall of 1996 and made available for sale at that time.

A draft pamphlet on licensing electronic resources has been prepared and is available for review. It outlines strategic and practical considerations one should take before signing electronic resource agreements or contracts. Karen Hersey, Intellectual Property Counsel, MIT, assisted ARL in the preparation of this document.

The ARL Focus Flier on Copyright has been available since 1994 and is continuously updated. Most recently, it was distributed at the ARL copyright workshop in Seattle and at the IFLA conference in Beijing. It was also available at a Copyright Conferences held at the University of Tennessee in September, and in Bangkok in October.

Copyright materials are continuously being added to the ARL website and links are also in place to other relevant copyright and intellectual property sites.

1.3.1 Working Group on Copyright Issues

At the request of the ARL Board of Directors, the Working Group on Copyright Issues was asked to continue to coordinate ARL activities on intellectual property and copyright issues. The Committee is comprised of members from four standing committees of the Association and the Executive Committee. Members of the Group serve as liaisons to their respective Committees on these issues.

Members:

Scott Bennett (Scholarly Communication, AAU/ARL IP Task Force)
Betty Bengtson (Board, AAU/ARL Steering)
Nancy Cline (Board)
Ken Frazier (Information Policies)
Ernie Ingles (Information Policies)
Paula Kaufman (Information Policies)
Peter Lyman (At Large, AAU/ARL Steering)
Susan Nutter (At Large, AAU/ARL Steering)
Martin Runkle (Preservation)
George Shipman (Access)
Elaine Sloan (Scholarly Communication, AAU/ARL Steering)
Robert Wedgeworth (Information Policies, AAU/ARL Steering)
Jim Neal, Chair (Board, Information Policies)

Staff Resources:

Prue Adler
Mary Jackson
Patricia Brennan

Staff Liaison: Duane Webster

1.4 AAU/ARL Action Agenda

Three related, but distinct, initiatives were addressed during 1995: (1) an initiative to promote electronic scholarly publishing; (2) discussions concerning the desirability of a comprehensive university license for the reproduction of copyrighted materials; and (3) a program to build a distributed collection of global research resources to ensure North American access to foreign publications.

In April and October 1995, the AAU presidents and chancellors were briefed on these initiatives, as well as on the AAU/ARL Steering Committee recommendations for the initiatives’ further development. These projects and the Steering Committee’s deliberations were also reviewed and discussed by ARL directors during the two ARL membership meetings this year. The outcome of the 1995 discussions was agreement to move forward on developing the concept of an electronic scholarly publishing initiative and on the development of a global resources plan. On the subject of a university license for reproduction of copyrighted materials, there was agreement that the terms of reference and preconditions for such discussions needed further definition.

AAU/ARL Steering Committee Activities

On April 15, 1996, the AAU/ARL Steering Committee met to review updated documents prepared during the winter and spring by the AAU/ARL Intellectual Property Task Force and by the ARL Research Collections Committee. At this meeting, the Steering Committee made the following decisions:

(1) To revisit the type of AAU/ARL collective action that is needed to promote electronic scholarly publishing, and to consider doing so in the context of parallel discussions underway in AAU about network capacity. In addition, there was a preliminary discussion of a consortial structure to provide a new stable base of support for electronic scholarly publishing.

(2) It is premature to enter into formal communications with the CCC on university licensing, but informal discussions with AAUP on inter-institutional licenses may be instructive.

(3) To endorse in principle the proposal for a Global Resources Program.

The following review presents the status of the major topics emerging from the Steering Committee discussion.

Electronic Scholarly Publishing. In the spring of 1995, the AAU/ARL Steering Committee reconstituted an Intellectual Property Task Force (see 1.4.2 for membership) to carry on the agenda defined by the initial AAU project work. A key agenda item directed to the new Task Force was to define an entrepreneurial venture in electronic publishing responsive to the needs and interests of the academic and scholarly community. The Task Force’s response was to draft a “call for proposals” for an Electronic Scholarly Publishing (ESP) Program that advocates a cooperative action by AAU and ARL institutions to fund, monitor, and disseminate findings from innovative scholarly publications projects that are intended to test both the (1) ability of new forms of electronic communications and information distribution to help universities better manage their intellectual property and lower the costs and prices for scholarly journals and related publications, and (2) the willingness and ability of academic research universities to work together on such a concept. The concept was tested successfully with the Steering Committee last fall and, during the winter, the IP-TF developed criteria for successful proposals and outlined an implementation plan.

At the April 1996 meeting of the Steering Committee, there was agreement that the ESP proposal described very well the kinds of activities that AAU and ARL institutions should pursue to promote electronic scholarly publishing. Given the number of such projects that are already underway, however, the Steering Committee concluded that a call for more proposals for discreet projects was not the kind of collective action that they were seeking. The discussion confirmed that collective action on the part of AAU and ARL institutions would be supported, but only if it could be shown to advance and complement, rather than replicate or compete with, other initiatives already underway (e.g., Project Muse, HighWire Press, JSTOR, etc.).

The Steering Committee discussed revisiting a definition of collective action for electronic scholarly publishing in the context of other discussions underway within AAU about higher education’s need for expanded network capacity. The AAU Committee on Information Technology has proposed a discussion for AAU presidents and chancellors next October to address the shortcomings of the Internet status quo and to discuss a proposal for collective action to establish a new network to serve better the needs of higher education. The similarity of the two agendas was noted; discussions between the two groups will take place over the summer to coordinate next steps. In addition, the Steering Committee discussed possible collective actions that would enable innovation and contain the costs of scholarly communication. There was a preliminary discussion of a consortial structure to provide a stable base of support for electronic scholarly publishing.

University Blanket Licensing. The AAU/ARL Intellectual Property Task Force updated its report to the Steering Committee about the nature and extent of the need for universities to pursue negotiations with the Copyright Clearance Center for blanket licensing of copyrighted materials. The IP-TF report concluded that the greatest need was in the area of licensing for electronic resources and proposed a formal communication to CCC asking if that agency was in a position to discuss this dimension of the issue. The IP-TF report also proposed an educational effort within universities about copyright, particularly as it impacts digital works, and the beginning of discussions on blanket licensing arrangements within the AAU/ARL university community (for example, inter-institutional licenses might be discussed with members of the American Association of University Presses). The Steering Committee concluded it was premature to formalize discussions with the CCC, but agreed that informal discussions within the academic community, including with university presses, could be instructive.

The Global Resources Program. The Steering Committee received a draft report prepared by the ARL Research Collections Committee (Tactical Plan for the AAU/ARL Global Resources Program) and a proposal for a process of consultation with chief academic officers and scholarly/area studies societies to secure agreement on both the Global Resources Plan and on the financial strategy for pursuing it. The tactical plan outlines the vision of a network-based, distributed collection of global information resources for North American teaching and research, as well as the benefits it will provide in improved access to global resources. The plan recommends a way to expand the demonstration projects by discipline, geography, and types of materials, and a way to engage larger numbers of university constituencies in discussions around this set of issues.

On April 15, the Steering Committee endorsed the proposal in principle, including the consultation process and a commitment to recommend that AAU presidents and chancellors provide some level of funding for implementation of the Global Resources Program. In May, the ARL Research Collections Committee will discuss implementation of the consultation process and the ARL Membership will discuss the plan during the Business Meeting.

AAU/ARL Global Resources Demonstration Projects: Status Report

A key goal of the AAU/ARL common action agenda is to improve access to and delivery of international research resources. Implementation efforts of a network-based, distributed program for the coordinated development of foreign acquisitions continue. During the initial phase, three demonstration projects target research materials that originate in Latin America, Japan, and Germany. The ARL Research Collections Committee provides overall guidance for these projects. Jutta Reed-Scott is primary staff liaison.

Tactical Plan for Scaling Up the Demonstration Projects.

The AAU/ARL Research Libraries Project Steering Committee at its October 15, 1995 meeting urged ARL to develop strategies for scaling up the three demonstration projects and for overcoming existing barriers. The Research Collections Committee at its October 18 meeting outlined a tactical plan for moving to a larger, comprehensive program. The Committee identified six actions that should be taken to meet this mandate. Sustaining the momentum of the three demonstration projects and scaling up to a comprehensive program will require many organizations and North American research libraries with strong global holdings to work in concert and build strong links with the scholarly community. To move forward with more comprehensive efforts, the Committee recommended the following immediate steps:

1. The creation of a Global Resources Program with a federated management structure and hosted by ARL in cooperation with AAU.

2. The appointment of a full-time coordinator for an initial three-year term with responsibilities for continued development, growth and improvement of the Program.

3. The design of an educational effort to inform campus faculty about the Global Resources Program and to build consensus on the proposed strategies for addressing needs for global resources.

4. Working with the research library community to strengthen and advance area librarianship.

5. Adoption of a proposal for a strategic investment of $300,000 by AAU and ARL institutions to fund program start-up and operation in 1996-1998.

6. The establishment of an advisory committee made up of chief academic officers from AAU and ARL institutions to guide the development of the program.

The Committee’s Tactical Plan was distributed to ARL directors in April and a discussion is on the agenda of the Business Meeting, May 17.

Latin Americanist Research Resources Pilot Project

Overview. The aim of this project is to make available a broader array of resources to Latin American students and scholars, to restructure access to these collections on a comprehensive scale, and to assist research libraries in containing costs. The start-up project funding was received from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and thirty-two participating ARL libraries. In October 1995, The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation awarded ARL a $125,000 grant for the second phase of the project. Mark Grover, Latin American Studies Bibliographer at Brigham Young University Library, holds the position of Project Coordinator for the Latin Americanist Resources Pilot Project. An Advisory Committee oversees the project’s implementation. The Advisory Committee is chaired by Deborah Jakubs, Head, International and Area Studies, Perkins Library, Duke University.

Project Activity. The initial phase of the project is a cooperative library effort focusing on three categories of Argentine and Mexican scholarly resources: serials, government documents, and the publications of non-governmental organizations (NGO’s).

Significant progress has been accomplished in all three arenas. An easily accessible Internet database hosted by the University of Texas’ Latin American Networked Information Center (UT-LANIC) offers access to the tables of contents of 300 academic journals from Argentina and Mexico. A pilot interlibrary loan feature is now operational. This will streamline the process of obtaining specific articles that are included in the Project’s table of contents database. For the past three months, staff at UT-LANIC and OCLC have worked together to develop the new ILL service. The ILL enhancement allows users searching the UT-LANIC database to submit an online ILL request for any of the articles in the database to be sent to their home institutions’ PRISM ILL Review File. All 32 ARL libraries participating in the AAU/ARL Latin Americanist Resources Project are automatically included in this new service.

To implement the new ILL feature, UT-LANIC restructured the table of contents database. The Project Coordinator is working with staff at UT-LANIC to transfer table of contents information from the previous text database to the new structured database. At present, only recently received journal titles are available for the new ILL ordering service. The transfer is scheduled to be completed in late spring. The URL for the pilot ILL service is: .

The key strategy for improving access to Latin American government documents is utilizing electronic technology. The Advisory Committee selected presidential messages from Argentina and Mexico for the initial digitization effort. The Library of Congress is making available most of the volumes, with Brigham Young, Harvard University and Yale University providing additional volumes. In December, ARL awarded Preservation Resources the contract for digitally scanning and indexing these presidential messages. The materials were filmed prior to scanning. The scanning began in March 1996 and is expected to conclude in June 1996. The scanned images will be available on UT-LANIC at the University of Texas.

The participating libraries have also assumed collecting responsibilities for publications of major non-governmental organizations, research institutes, and other non-commercial producers of research reports and discussion papers in Mexico and Argentina.

During the next phase of the project (November 1995–December 1996), the implementation of the three-part phase now underway will be completed. Mark Grover will continue as Project Coordinator on a half-time basis. Since the project has only recently become “fully operational,” we have not yet collected the data necessary for a solid evaluation. This analysis of project costs and benefits will be completed during the coming year. The project’s current activities and structure will also be refined and the distributed collecting assignments will be extended and explanded. In March, a questionnaire was sent to the Latin American bibliographers at the participating libraries seeking their feedback and advice on project activities.

A complementary activity is the institutional studies undertaken by five libraries participating in the project. The studies are investigating ways to lower document delivery costs and to increase access to the universe of Latin American research materials by selecting, creating and distributing electronic versions of research materials.

Next Steps. The Advisory Committee has outlined four distinct strategies for scaling up the Project. These are:

• expanding the Mexican and Argentine table of contents database on UT-LANIC, and streamlining the article request process through the interlibrary loan link;

• expanding coverage beyond Argentina and Mexico to other Latin American countries, with Brazil and Peru as the immediate priorities;

• exploring a two-pronged approach to employ advanced communication technologies to share and supply digital source materials—one predicated on networked access to electronic resources created in Latin America, and the other predicated on digitizing print resources under the auspices of the project; and

• building partnerships with Latin American institutions.

German Demonstration Project

Overview. The primary goals of the German Demonstration Project are (1) to assure effective and timely access to and delivery of German language research materials through electronic resource sharing and improved interlibrary document delivery services; and (2) to test linking between North American and German libraries to expand access to specialized research resources. This is a cooperative library effort among United States, Canadian, and German research institutions with strong German library collections and demonstrated institutional commitment to research in German political science and history. The Library of Congress, under the umbrella of ARL and AAU, is providing organizational support for this project.

The project will focus on four specific activities:

1. We will cooperate with the Deutsche Bibliothek and German government agencies in locating or encouraging the development of digital versions of federal government documents.

2. We will collaborate with German research libraries to test network access to regional government documents.

3. We will develop complementary systems for cataloging.

4. We will identify serials published in Germany that are critical for furthering scholarship, but are not widely held in North America, and devise effective document delivery strategies.

Project Activity. For the past year, the Working Group for the German Demonstration Project, chaired by Winston Tabb, has developed work plans for this demonstration project. The initial planning phase concluded in fall 1995. In November 1995, Duane E. Webster sent out an e-announcement inviting participation by ARL libraries in this project. Follow-up letters were mailed out in March 1996. ARL is now launching this AAU/ARL Demonstration Project.

As a first step, the Library of Congress has made special arrangements to allow libraries in the Project to have access to the cataloging records prepared by the Deutsche Bibliothek through the files mounted at the Library of Congress. Access to these records will be available to libraries on a subscription basis via Z39.50.

Next Steps. The highest priority is to test linking between ARL and German research libraries in order to expand access to specialized research resources. Preliminary discussions with library leaders in Germany have identified commitment to pursue electronic resource sharing. We plan to cooperate with the Deutsche Bibliothek and German government agencies in locating or encouraging development of digital versions of federal government documents. As the next step, we will determine the availability of selected government documents from Germany in digitized form and work with colleagues in Germany on expanding the list of publications that are available electronically. The Working Group will consult with staff at the participating libraries concerning categories of documents for which electronic access will be particularly important. Additional and more specific requests will be invited from both librarians and scholars as the project unfolds.

Although funding for a project coordinator has not yet been obtained, we are guardedly optimistic that we will obtain funding from a German foundation.

Japan Journal Access Project

Overview. Those readers who have followed the Japanese Scientific and Technical Information Project will note a change in title, which denotes a change in focus for the Project. Although there is a continuing need to improve access to Japanese scientific and technical information for North American users, there is also a need to improve access to Japanese journal literature across all disciplines. In response to the AAU/ARL Steering Committee’s urging that the foreign acquisitions projects be “scaled up” immediately, the Project was redefined to include access to all Japanese journal literature—not just sci-tech. The interest and support of the National Coordinating Committee on Japanese Library Resources was also instrumental in broadening the Project’s scope.

Project Activity. During February 4-10, Don Simpson, President of the Center for Research Libraries and Project Manager, and Dorothy Gregor, Project Coordinator, traveled to Tokyo at the invitation of NACSIS (National Center for Science Information Systems). The focus of the trip was access to Japanese journal literature, both bibliographic and interlibrary loan/document delivery/e-text access. The trip included meetings with NACSIS staff, with staff of the National Diet Library, and with the JS-Net Study Group. NACSIS is a government-supported bibliographic utility that provides cataloging, interlibrary lending and reference services for Japanese university libraries. Many of the NACSIS databases are of interest to North American researchers and students. The JS-Net Study Group was organized by the Japan Foundation as a fact-finding body to find ways of coordinating various efforts among institutions and organizations that could or do provide information for overseas researchers and librarians. The Study Group’s goal is to recommend new Internet- and World Wide We- based services that would be responsive to the information needs of those studying Japan outside of Japan.

OSU’s East Asian Libraries Cooperative World Wide Web site continues to serve as a focal point for the Project; users will note the addition of several useful links for those interested in journal literature, including a site for a new translation service http://pears.lib.ohio-state.edu.

Next Steps. The February meetings suggested several potential projects that would extend the availability of Japanese resources and identified groups and individuals with whom the AAU/ARL Project can work.

1.4.1 AAU/ARL Research Libraries Steering Committee

The AAU/ARL Research Libraries Steering Committee plays an active role in the integration of the separate initiatives and their ramifications for the way universities conduct their business. Even if a greater proportion of scholarly communications come under university control, universities may find it useful to develop new contractual arrangements with components of the commercial sector—thus, the importance of the discussions on licensing. To the extent that electronic publishing permits greater inter-institutional cooperation, the cooperative, networked collections management arrangements developed by the Global Research Resources program can serve as prototypes for broader resource sharing. The impact of these new arrangements will likely affect how universities recognize and reward scholarship through tenure and promotion criteria and other institutional actions.

The AAU/ARL Steering Committee will meet during the next AAU meeting scheduled for October 20-22 in Los Angeles.

Members:

AAU:
Myles Brand, Indiana, Co-chair
Donald Langenburg, Maryland
Robert McPherson, Michigan State
Robert Pritchard, Toronto
Harold Shapiro, Princeton

ARL:
Jerry Campbell, Southern California, Co-chair
Betty Bengtson, Washington
Susan Nutter, North Carolina State
Elaine Sloan, Columbia
Robert Wedgworth, Illinois

Staff Liaisons: John Vaughn, AAU; Duane Webster, ARL

1.4.2 AAU/ARL Intellectual Property Task Force

The Steering Committee reconstituted an Intellectual Property Task Force to pursue the AAU/ARL action agenda on intellectual property. A subgroup of the Task Force met in January 1996. The Task Force met in March 1996.

Members:

Peter Nathan, Iowa, Co-chair
Ann Okerson, Yale, Co-chair
Scott Bennett, Yale
Colin Day, University of Michigan Press
Laura Gasaway, North Carolina
Jane Ginsburg, Columbia
Georgia Harper, University of Texas System
Kent Hendrickson, Nebraska
James O’Donnell, Pennsylvania
Bernard Rous, ACM
Pamela Samuelson, Pittsburgh
Robert Shirell, University of Chicago Press
Dieter Soll, Yale
Hal Varian, California-Berkeley

Members:

John Vaughn, AAU, ex-officio
Duane Webster, ARL, ex-officio
Karen Hersey, MIT, consultant
Lynn Brindley, London, consultant
Charles Oppenheim, Strathclyde, consultant

Section 2 Access and Technology

2.1 Access to Information Resources

Summary of Activities

(See also Sections 2.2 Coalition for Networked Information and 2.3 HEIRAlliance)

NAILDD Project.

A centerpiece of the ARL Access capability is the North American Interlibrary Loan and Document Delivery (NAILDD) Project. Established in 1993, the NAILDD Project promotes developments to maximize access to research resources while minimizing the costs associated with such activities. The operating philosophy is to seek practical technical developments that enable libraries to redesign their ILL/DD services for a networked environment. The strategy is to seek actions on the part of private sector developers that will respond to the priority needs of the library community.

Collaboration with the Private Sector: the DIG. The Developers/Implementors Group (DIG) seeks to accelerate collaboration between libraries and a broad constituency of private sector players to advance the NAILDD Project’s priority technical developments. Now representing 50 organizations, the DIG continues to serve as a source of information and a forum for the major players in ILL/DD services. In response to requests from commercial members of the DIG, a special effort is underway to recruit to the DIG representatives of a broad range of library types.

The full DIG convened in January 1996, as did the Director’s Forum on Managing ILL/DD Operations. Held on the Friday morning of ALA conferences, the Forum features informal presentations from DIG members and discussions about new products and services. A report describing the January 1996 NAILDD Project meetings is available on the ARL gopher; the next series of meetings will begin July 5, in New York City.

Highlights recently reported by DIG members include:

• A large number of DIG members prepared to participate in the IPIG (see below);

• OCLC’s successful testing of a link between UT-LANIC and Prism ILL (see below);

• TKM’s introduction to the U.S. market of InterLend, an ILL management software developed for Canadian libraries, and

• FedEx’s expansion of the agreement for discounted prices for libraries.

IPIG. The ILL Protocol Implementors Group (IPIG) was formed as a subset of the DIG to facilitate the use of the international ILL standard (ISO 10160 & 10161) by U.S. vendors and service providers. On November 1, 1995, an invitational meeting was held in Portland, Oregon. Participants agreed to a two-phased implementation strategy. The first phase is to implement the portion of the Protocol that permits an ILL request to be passed from one system to another (for example, from Innovative Interfaces, Inc. into OCLC Prism ILL). The longer term goal is to implement the complete functionality of the Protocol.

Following the November 1st meeting, a formal call for participation in the Protocol testbed was issued; 17 organizations have agreed to participate in Phase 1. The IPIG met again in February in Washington, DC and set Summer 1996 as the date for final testing and implementation of Phase 1. The National Library of Canada provides technical support for the implementation; North Carolina State University/TRLN hosts an IPIG list-serv that has been very active as a communication device among implementors.

AAU/ARL Demonstration Projects for Global Research Resources. The Access capability and the NAILDD Project advise on access and delivery issues that emerge in the AAU/ARL foreign publications demonstration projects. Since last fall, this included, with support from OCLC, developing a standards-based approach to streamline user-initiated ILL requests and services from the database for the Latin Americanist Project.

The University of Texas Latin American Network Information Center (UT-LANIC) hosts the electronic database of tables of contents of 300 academic and research periodicals from Argentina and Mexico. In order to facilitate user-generated electronic ordering of articles highlighted in the UT-LANIC database, OCLC agreed to participate in a pilot project to build a link between UT-LANIC and Prism ILL.

ILL/DD Performance Measures Study. The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation awarded ARL a grant to measure the performance of interlibrary loan and document delivery services in research and academic libraries. The two-year study, undertaken in collaboration with the Council on Library Resources (CLR), will build on the earlier ARL/RLG ILL cost study by measuring fill rate, turnaround time, and user satisfaction as well as costs.

Phase One began last fall with site visits to six libraries that reported high or low costs from the original cost study. The goal was to identify any characteristics that may contribute to their costs. Phase Two will collect data from both research and academic libraries. The Greater Midwest Research Library Consortium agreed to test the revised instrument during the spring of 1996; a planning meeting with GMRLC was held April 19-20. This summer, research and academic libraries will be invited to collect data on the several measures. A list of data elements to be collected is posted on the ARL Gopher. ILL librarians are encouraged to review the list and begin planning how the data will be collected locally.

Reconceptualize ILL/DD Training Institutes. To complement the introduction of new technical developments, NAILDD pursues two kinds of training institutes that assist libraries in reconceptualizing their ILL/DD operations: a “redesigning” institute for library teams and a “rethinking” institute for individual librarians. Teams from nearly 50 libraries have participated in five Redesigning Institutes since early 1994. The next two Redesigning Institutes are planned for the fall of 1996; tentatively to be held in Boston and in Arizona.

A one-day Rethinking ILL/DD Institute, designed for individuals rather than institutional teams, took place in Stockholm in April 1996; over 50 individuals from libraries in Sweden participated.

Other NAILDD Activities

FedEx: Establishment of an agreement with Federal Express for two-day shipments of ILL materials for ARL member libraries, and establishment of a partnership with the Urban Libraries Council to offer the same service to their member libraries. Nearly 30 members are now shipping and receiving ILL materials via the two-day delivery. FedEx has extended the discounted rates to all types of libraries. AMIGOS was the first new group of libraries to enter into this expanded agreement.

Characteristics of ILL Requests: A study of the characteristics of ILL transactions (what kind of materials are being requested) using data from the OCLC ILL messaging system.

Electronic Reserve Services: The transformation of reserve room functions was promoted through an analysis of characteristics of the materials put on reserve in libraries (a report on the findings will be issued in 1996), and development of draft guidelines for managing copyrighted materials in electronic reserves (see below).

Copyright. The Access capability also contributes to ARL’s initiatives associated with copyright and intellectual property. Since the fall of 1995, this has included:

• participation in the monthly Conference on Fair Use (CONFU) to develop guidelines for ILL/DD, electronic reserves in the NII; and

• organization of two Copyright Awareness Leadership Workshops for the U.S. in April and September 1996, and one for Canadian institutions in October 1996 (see Section 1.3, Intellectual Property and Copyright Issues, for a fuller description).

Economics of Information Conference: Challenging Marketplace Solutions. ARL collaborated with the SUNY University Center Libraries, the Council on Library Resources, the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges, and the Coalition for Networked Information to conduct a national conference on issues related to the development of the knowledge infrastructure and the consequent economic impact on higher education. Over 200 people from a range of positions within universities, societies, and publishing attended the two-day conference. Conference proceedings, edited by Meredith Butler and Bruce Kingma, SUNY-Albany, will be published by ARL in 1996.

2.1.1 Committee on Access to Information Resources

The ARL Committee on Access to Information Resources is established to help the Association make access to research information resources more effective. In order to maintain and improve access to research information resources, ARL will undertake activities to strengthen bibliographic, abstracting, and indexing tools; user access; and physical and electronic access to information.

This Committee is charged to monitor developments, determine critical issues requiring ARL attention, inform members, and design strategic responses to influence the access to research information resources. The Committee also advises and guides the ARL staff on matters regarding the plans and strategies of the ARL Access and Technology program capability.

The current Committee focuses on an agenda in support of resource sharing in an electronic environment. Issues identified as key to this agenda are the reconceptualization of ILL in an electronic environment and the articulation of the principles and values that support resource sharing among research libraries. A working plan was developed around the issues identified in the white paper Maximizing Access, Minimizing Costs, which critiqued the current ILL system and outlined the elements of an “ideal” system. Building on ARL and ALA discussions about the white paper, the Access Committee adopted a three-point priority agenda aimed at bringing about short-term improvements to ILL/DD systems and operations, including a comprehensive management software, a financial management system, and establishment of interconnectivity and linkages among different systems. The North American ILL/DD (NAILDD) Project was launched to promote these priority developments.

1996 Agenda of Issues:

• Promote and support NAILDD to advance priority developments

• Monitor the Network Information Resources and Discovery initiative underway within the Coalition for Networked Information

• Contribute to AAU-ARL initiatives that demonstrate and evaluate the concept of a distributed, multi-institutional research library collection that is linked together and made accessible to users via networked services

Members:

Pamela André (1995-1997)
Meredith Butler (1994-1996)
Ellen Hoffman (1996-1998)
C. Lee Jones 1994-1996)
Paul Mosher (1996-1998)
Michael Ridley (1996-1998)
Marianne Scott (1995-1997)
George Shipman (1995-1997)
GladysAnn Wells (1996-1998)
Karin Wittenborg (1994-1996)
Shirley Baker, Chair (1995-1996)

Sarah Thomas, Library of Congress Liaison
Mary Jackson, Consultant on Access & Delivery Services

Staff Liaison: Jaia Barrett

2.1.2 Work Group on Scientific and Technical Information

The Work Group was formed in 1991 to follow up the 1991 report of the ARL Task Force on a National Plan for Science and Technology Information Needs. The Work Group monitors STI developments and functions as an advisor to the Board in order to help shape ARL activities in this area.

Status as of April 1996:

The Group met twice at the October 1995 ARL Membership Meeting. First, the Work Group participated in a conversation with the ARL Board and Paul Uhlir, National Research Council, concerning two NRC studies: a recently concluded one on preserving scientific data, and a new study of issues associated with the transborder flow of scientific data. The Work Group also met to discuss developments at the National Agricultural Library, CISTI, and Linda Hall.

Work Group meetings are planned in conjunction with the ARL Membership Meetings, supplemented with occasional e-list communications. The group functions as an informal communications and response network.

Members:

Pamela André
Betty G. Bengtson
Joe Boisse
C. Lee Jones
Margot Montgomery
Susan K. Nutter
James Wyatt

Marilyn J. Sharrow, Chair

Staff Liaison: Jaia Barrett

2.2 Coalition for Networked Information

Program Overview, July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996

Background

The Coalition for Networked Information was founded in March 1990 to help realize the promise of high performance networks and computers for the advancement of scholarship and the enrichment of intellectual productivity. The Coalition is a partnership of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), CAUSE, and Educom.

The Coalition accomplishes its objectives by: focusing on key enablers and obstacles, providing assistance to, promoting communication among, and fostering partnerships with Coalition members; synthesizing progress being made on key initiatives, capturing the experience of Coalition members, and others, in a coherent, actionable manner; and disseminating lessons learned by those initiatives, amplifying the experience of Coalition members by informing the efforts of others.

The Coalition pursues its mission with the assistance of a task force of over two hundred institutions and organizations that provides focus and resources which are crucial to the ability of the Coalition to articulate and explore shared visions of how information management must change in the 1990s to meet the social and economic opportunities and challenges of the 21st century. Members of the Coalition Task Force include higher education institutions, publishers, network service providers, computer hardware, software, and systems companies, library networks and organizations, and public and state libraries.

Initiatives

• Economic studies and models

• Produce a white paper on cost centers and measures in the networked information value-chain, and formulate next steps in that area.

• Start up an effort to explore the role of mediation and arbitration as conflict resolution strategies in the marketplace for networked intellectual property.

• Navigation and interoperability

• Produce a white paper on networked information discovery and retrieval, and formulate next steps.

• Support the Z39.50 v3 Test Bed, and related Z39.50 development and implementation priorities and activities.

• Institutional networked information readiness, policies, and strategies

• Expand the “University Presses in the Networked Information Environment” joint initiative with the Association of American University Presses

• Hold two “Working Together” retreats that help encourage the building of collaborative, networked information projects within institutions.

• Update the information policy compilation.

• Take the first steps in developing a program to assist administrators of navigational systems and services with keeping abreast of relevant issues and tools.

• Start up an effort to explore institutional policies addressing rights and responsibilities in the networked environment, and measures for enforcing them.

• Transformation of Research and Education

• Assist the start-up of the American Arts and Letters Network, facilitating access to existing networked resources and services and communication among developers an users in the networked, international arts, humanities, and culture communities.

• Hold the second “new learning communities” workshop, and produce a workbook to guide regional or campus versions of this experience.

• Support the AAU/ARL scientific and technological information management activities.

• Support the Educom National Learning Infrastructure Initiative (NLII).

• Public Policies and Agencies

• Expand the “National Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage (NINCH)” joint initiative with the American Council of Learned Societies and the Getty Art History Information Program.

• Promote the development of the Federal Government Information Locator Service (GILS) effort.

• Produce a white paper on service issues and strategies in a networked public information environment, promote collaborative strategies for gaining access to such information, and formulate next steps in these areas.

• Support ARL and Educom intellectual property strategies and activities.

Capabilities

• Hold the Fall 1995 Task Force meeting in conjunction with the Educom Annual Meeting, and the Spring 1995 Task Force meeting in the Washington, D.C. area.

• Hold two or more regional conferences with CAUSE.

• Contribute to ARL, CAUSE, EDUCOM, and other publications, and speak on the Coalition and on networked information resources and services to a wide range of audiences.

• Increase the capabilities of the Coalition’s Internet server in order to make additional resources available and to make non-textual materials available, and improve the security of the server’s resources and services.

For further information, contact Joan K. Lippincott, Assistant Executive Director joan@cni.org.

2.2.1 Steering Committee for the Coalition for Networked Information

As part of the governance structure of the Coalition for Networked Information, each of the three founding organizations (ARL, CAUSE, EDUCOM) has three seats on the CNI Steering Committee. ARL representatives to the Committee have been given staggered terms in order to achieve consistency with other ARL Committee assignments. The members of the committee meet with the ARL Board to review communication and advisory processes between ARL and CNI.

Status as of April 1996:

The ARL Board meets regularly with Paul Peters, CNI Executive Director, to discuss the Coalition’s program priorities. On each occasion, the Board recognized the extraordinary success of the CNI program and the importance of the Coalition for institutions of higher education. In February 1996, the Board endorsed another three-year term for the Coalition and asked for a meeting with ARL’s representatives to the CNI Steering Committee to review CNI program priorities.

Meetings Planned for 1996:

The Coalition Steering Committee meets in conjunction with CNI.

Members:

David Bishop (1995-1998)
Sheila Creth (1994-1997)
Sharon Hogan (1996-1999)

Staff Liaison: Duane Webster

2.3 HEIRAlliance

In May 1991, the ARL Board received an invitation from CAUSE and EDUCOM to form an alliance to identify cooperative ventures in information resources management. The Higher Education Information Resources Alliance (HEIRAlliance) was approved in concept by all three boards as a device to further project-based cooperation.

The Board approved an initial phase of The HEIRAlliance Report, covering information technology and information resources targeted at chief executives and academic officers in the 3,000 academic institutions in the U.S. and Canada.

The initial product of this alliance is a series of four-page briefing papers called “What Presidents Need to Know.” The reports are the work of teams that consist of library directors, heads of information technology, and presidents.

Status as of April 1996:

In late 1995, one briefing paper in the series was prepared and distributed, HEIRAlliance Executive StrategiesReport #6, What Presidents Need to Know … about Evaluating Institutional Information Resources. Accompanying the report is a six-page brochure, Evaluation Guidelines for Institutional Information Resources.

The full series of HEIRAlliance reports is available through the CAUSE office in Boulder, Colorado, or through the ARL or CAUSE gophers.

Agenda of Issues:

Two reports are anticipated in 1996. The topic for the next report has been discussed but not determined. Options considered are: transforming higher education, intellectual property, economics of information, cost centers and measures, digital library innovations, and licensing (READI project).

Staff Liaison: Duane Webster

Section 3 Collection and Preservation

3.1 Collection Services

This capability addresses the broad issues facing research libraries in the areas of collection management and preservation. The work of two ARL committees is covered by this capability: Research Collections and Preservation of Research Library Materials.

ARL’s collection development efforts are directed toward the program objective of supporting member libraries efforts to develop and maintain research collections, both individually and in the aggregate. Strategies to accomplish the objective include: efforts toward improving the structures and processes needed for effective cooperative collection development programs; promotion of needed government and foundation support for collections of national importance in the United States and Canada; provision of collection management consulting through the Collection Analysis Program; and development and operation of collection management training programs.

ARL’s preservation efforts support the strategic program objective of promoting and coordinating member libraries programs to preserve their collections. Strategies in pursuit of this objective include: advocacy for strengthening and encouraging broad-based participation in national preservation efforts in the U.S. and Canada; support for development of preservation programs within member libraries; support for effective bibliographic control of preservation-related records; strengthening copyright legislation to support preservation activities in the electronic environment; encouragement for development of preservation information resources; and monitoring technological developments that may have an impact on preservation goals.

Summary of Activities

Many of the activities related to this capability are closely connected to other program capabilities or supported by grants, and therefore, several projects are described in other sections. (See especially Section 1.4: AAU-ARL Action Agenda, and Section 7: Research and Development.)

3.1.1 ARL Committee on Research Collections

In December, the Foreign Acquisitions Project was completed and, in March, ARL published Scholarship, Research Libraries, and Global Publishing. The report documents the fragile state of global resources collections within North American research libraries. The Research Collections Committee provided oversight for this four-year study of trends in global resources, funded by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. This study contributed to and benefited from the separate but closely linked work of the Association of American Universities’ (AAU) Acquisition and Distribution of Foreign Language and Area Studies Materials Task Force. Building on the work of the AAU Task Force, ARL, in partnership with AAU, has launched three demonstration projects to test the viability of implementing a distributed, networked, coordinated collection management program for global research materials. The Committee is providing oversight for the implementation of the three demonstration projects focused on German language, Latin American, and Japanese science and technology acquisitions.

ARL’s Research Collections Committee has also charted the directions of a larger program in the Strategic Plan for Improving Access to Global Information Resources in U.S. and Canadian Research Libraries. The goals outlined in the Plan aim to restore the range of significant foreign publications to the North American collections of books, serials, and other forms of scholarly information adequate for the support of research, teaching, and scholarship. As envisioned in this strategic plan, the three AAU/ARL demonstration projects will serve as the start-up phase. They will provide experience in planning for the medium-term phase that will focus on enhancing the distributed North American collection of global resources. The long-term goal would be to move toward a worldwide effort.

The AAU/ARL Research Libraries Project Steering Committee recommended at its April 1995 meeting the development of plans for scaling up the three demonstration projects. The Research Collections Committee members prepared a report on plans and options for scaling up the AAU/ARL demonstration projects. The initial draft was discussed at the AAU/ARL Research Libraries Steering Committee’s October 15, 1995 meeting. The Steering Committee agreed with the need to evaluate progress and experience of the three demonstration projects to address the issues raised in the report. They urged, however, that this be pursued simultaneously with expansion to a larger, more comprehensive program.

In discussions at its October 18, 1995 meeting, the Research Collections Committee outlined a tactical plan for scaling up the demonstration projects and for realizing the AAU/ARL Global Resources Program. This tactical plan outlines the vision and goals for the Global Resources Program, summarizes the context, identifies a set of issues, proposes a funding strategy, and describes actions that should be taken by AAU and ARL on those areas where immediate results can be achieved. The AAU/ARL Steering Committee reviewed the Tactical Plan at its April 1996 meeting. (See Section 1.4)

Discussions at the 1995 Committee meetings also highlighted concern about the implications of electronic information resources and the need to develop innovative approaches and structures aimed at facilitating electronic resource sharing. The Committee will further explore the implications of electronic information in developing research collections.

Members:

Betty Bengtson (1996-98)
Claude Bonnelly (1995-97)
Joe A. Hewitt (1994-96)
Robert Miller (1995-97)
William G. Potter (1994-96)
Donald Simpson (1995-97)
George Terry (1995-97)
Barbara von Wahlde (1996-98)

Dale B. Canelas, Chair (1995-96)
Winston Tabb, Library of Congress Liaison

Staff Liaison: Jutta Reed-Scott

3.1.2 ARL Committee on Preservation of Research Library Materials

At its last two meetings, the Preservation Committee addressed the development of a new five-year preservation action plan. In preparing the plan, the Committee has focused on activities that complement ARL’s capacities, support the broader missions of member libraries, and acknowledge current trends and issues in North American research libraries. The Committee completed work on the ARL preservation action plan in May 1995, and the ARL Board endorsed the plan at its July 25, 1995 meeting.

The plan lists an array of ongoing ARL preservation program strategies and identifies six new preservation initiatives. These center on strengthening copyright legislation to support preservation activities in the electronic environment, investigating the feasibility of establishing a national coordinated serials preservation project, developing cost models for preservation decision making, and advancing preservation-related digitizing projects, standards, and science research.

The Committee also coordinated ARL’s response to the CPA/RLG Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information, and its members participated in the discussions with the Modern Language Association in New York on December 15, 1995. The meeting was held at ARL’s suggestion in order to discuss important preservation issues raised in the MLA Statement on the Significance of Primary Records. The aim of the meeting was to determine collaborative strategies and to plan next steps. It was agreed that MLA and ARL should create both a joint working group to pursue the statement’s recommendations and an action agenda for education, preservation, and lobbying. Meredith Butler, a member of the Preservation Committee, served as Co-Chair. Other members included Scott Bennett, Yale University; Peter Graham, Rutgers University; Merrily Taylor, Brown University; and Jan Merrill-Oldham, Consultant to the Preservation Committee. At a follow-up meeting on March 18, 1996, the American Historical Association joined MLA and ARL in sponsoring the joint working group.

Members:

David Kohl (1995-97)
Martin Runkle (1994-96)
Barbara J. Smith (1996-98)
William Walker (1996-98)
Meredith Butler, Chair (1995-97)

Diane Kresh, Library of Congress Liaison
Jan Merrill-Oldham, Harvard (Consultant)

Staff Liaison: Jutta Reed-Scott

Section 4 Staffing and Management

4.1 Diversity and Minority Recruitment/Retention Programs

The Minority Recruitment and Retention Program is charged with increasing the number of minorities recruited and retained by ARL libraries. To this end, program staff work closely with a broad range of libraries, graduate library education programs, and other library associations to promote minority student awareness of opportunities that are presented by research library careers to support their academic success.

The Diversity Program assists ARL libraries in addressing a multitude of diversity-related issues. The major responsibility of the Diversity Program is to generate interest in and a focus on diversity within the library community, as well as to support the information needs of ARL libraries. Its primary concern is the development of workplace climates in ARL libraries that welcome, develop, foster, and support diversity. The Diversity Program seeks to develop an awareness of human differences and an acknowledgment of the value of and respect for these differences. The program focuses on issues surrounding work relationships in libraries, while considering the impact of diversity on library services, interactions with library users, and the development of collections.

To meet the program’s goals, the Program Officer for Diversity and Minority Recruitment: provides on-site staff development seminars and presentations, and email and telephone consultation; facilitates staff discussions; conducts research via literature reviews and site visits to institutions; prepares articles and publications to share the Program’s findings; seeks to identify strategies for adaptation by libraries and library schools; identifies issues and strategies relating to diversity and promotes them within ARL as well as to other national library-affiliated groups; and fosters partnerships on behalf of ARL with natural allies in the profession.

Summary of Activities

Promoting the ARL Agenda for Minority Recruitment. The Program Officer made a presentation to the ALA Executive Board in Chicago, Illinois on November 2 to share information about the ARL initiatives and the findings of the program. The ALA Executive Board determined in a Board retreat held November 16-18 to commit up to $250,000 to a diversity plan proposed by the ALA Executive Director. Part of the proposed plan will include the hiring of an ALA diversity officer.

In the February issue of American Libraries, an article entitled “Intimate World, Intimate Workplace” describes how ARL and ALA are strengthening their commitment to diversity.

Partnerships Program. Three ARL libraries joined the partnerships program, Opportunities for Success, for 1996: Arizona State University, University of Kansas, and Johns Hopkins University. The other ARL libraries who have participated as partners include: University of Colorado, Kent State University, Library of Congress, University of Michigan, Michigan State University, University of Missouri, University of Oregon, Pennsylvania State University, and State University of New York at Buffalo. This program is designed to provide opportunities for libraries, library and information science programs, associations, state libraries and consortia to work with ARL on developing initiatives focused on diversity and minority recruitment.

Diversity Issues in Canadian Libraries. Toni Olshen was named a VPO with the ARL Diversity Program for November 1995 through May 1996. Ms. Olshen has concentrated her research on diversity issues in Canadian libraries, working with Kriza Jennings to incorporate the Canadian research library perspective into ARL’s Diversity Programs. To date, work completed includes: compiled four bibliographies, which will be available through the York University Library’s home page; presented at the November CARL meeting and surveyed CARL members on library diversity initiatives; organized site visits to four Canadian libraries (University of Guelph, York University, University of Toronto, and University of Victoria); and submission and acceptance of a proposal to present at the Ninth Annual Conference on Race and Ethnicity in American Higher Education to be held in San Antonio in June. Ms. Olshen will present a report on the findings on diversity in Canadian libraries at the spring meeting of the ARL Minority Recruitment and Retention Committee.

Personnel. Kriza Jennings, Program Officer for Diversity and Minority Recruitment, tendered her resignation effective June 30, 1996. A search for a new program officer is in progress under the guidance of Susan Jurow, Director of OMS.

On-site Consultations, Presentations, Facilitated Discussions and/or Seminars

American Library Association, Executive Board, IL
University of Colorado-Boulder Library, CO
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, School of Information and Library Science, NC
North Carolina Central University, School of Library and Information Sciences, NC
University of Kansas Library, KS
American Library Association, Council of LAMA affiliates, TX
New York University Libraries
New York Public Library, Human Resources Department, NY
Tulane University Library, LA
Louisiana State University Library, LA
University of Missouri-Columbia Library, MO
University of Missouri-Columbia, School of Library and Information Science, MO
Johns Hopkins University Library, MD
University of Michigan Library, MI
Detroit Public Library, MI
University of Detroit Mercy, University Administration, MI
Western New York Library Resources Council, NY
University of Oregon Library, OR
Washington State University Library, WA
University of California-Irvine, CA
University of California-Los Angeles, CA
University of California-Santa Barbara, CA
University of Guelph Library, Guelph, Ontario Canada
University of Toronto Library, Toronto, Ontario Canada
York University Library, North York, Ontario Canada

4.1.1 Committee on Minority Recruitment and Retention

A major focus of the 1995 Committee agenda was to foster relationships with library educators, particularly with the Association for Library and Information Science Educators (ALISE). This ALISE focus was previously identified in a membership survey conducted by the former ARL Task Force on Minority Recruitment.

The goal of the collaborations with ALISE is to increase minority representation in library and information graduate school programs, and to identify specifically how ARL libraries or the Association may best support or partner with the schools’ local efforts. The Committee is seeking to foster discussions with faculty and students from accredited graduate programs about strategies for advancing diversity and minority recruitment, as well as to encourage collaborative initiatives between individual ARL libraries and library schools.

The fall meeting focused on a discussion to prepare for joint initiatives with ALISE. Several ARL directors attended the ALISE January 1996 conference. ALISE allotted time for ARL’s Committee Chair, Nancy Baker, to talk with the ALISE Deans and Directors Council, to explain ARL’s objectives in attending the ALISE meeting, and to invite the deans/directors to join ARL directors at a meeting sponsored by ARL to be held at the ALISE conference. ARL hosted a one-hour early bird session with continental breakfast to discuss minority recruitment and retention agendas. ARL members and ALISE members met in small groups to identify and discuss issues and strategies for achieving a diverse workforce. In addition, ARL directors and staff attended several of the ALISE programs offered at the annual meeting. An update on the results from this meeting and the initiatives to be pursued will be discussed at the spring committee meeting.

The Committee is preparing to implement a program that will enable ARL libraries to voluntarily appoint a liaison from each library to serve as a contact point for this capability, to receive information, and to ensure it is shared widely among ARL library personnel. The Board was informed of this new initiative, and final drafts to invite participation will be reviewed at the spring meeting.

The Committee submitted an expansion of their committee charge to the ARL Board, with a goal of being more inclusive of the diversity aspects of the capability’s focus. The Board accepted this expanded charge, but requested the committee discuss if the committee title needed to be changed in any way to better reflect the more inclusive charge. A change in title was discussed, but with no resolution for a recommendation to present to the board. It was decided to revisit this discussion at the spring 1996 meeting, when more time could be devoted to exploring the options.

The Committee met with OMS staff Maureen Sullivan and Kathryn Deiss to learn how diversity is addressed and/or included in the OMS management training institutes. The Committee’s recommendation was that OMS identify ways to have the diversity elements of the training be more overt than covert. The discussion explored the need to expose ARL managers to the importance of diversity as a major focus for leaders in ARL libraries, and to make them aware of the ARL programs available to assist in the development of local library initiatives.

Participants from the Library of Congress’ new initiative, the Leadership Development Program (LDP), created in order to recruit minorities for mid-level managerial positions, met with the Committee to describe the Program participants’ experiences. Packets of information on ARL programs were shared with the LDP members prior to the meeting. An interesting dialogue was held after the presentation with a commitment to continue a relationship between ARL’s capability and the next class of participants. A photo of the LDP presentation was included in the December issue of the ARL newsletter within an OMS article on the LDP and the roles of ARL/OMS staff engaged with the development of the program’s participants.

Members:

Carol Armstrong (1996-98)
Ernie Ingles (1994-96)
John Haak (1996-98)
Edward Johnson (1996-98)
Charles E. Miller (1994-96)
Marilyn Sharrow (1996-98)
John Smith (1994-96)
James F. Williams (1996-98)

Nancy L. Baker, Chair(1996-97)

Staff Liaison: Kriza Jennings

4.2 Office of Management Services

Established to help research and academic libraries develop better ways of managing their human and material resources, the OMS has assisted library leaders in finding more efficient and effective ways of meeting user needs for over twenty-five years. Several personnel and organizational changes announced in the past six months herald the beginning of a new period for the OMS. The OMS Diversity Program was combined with the ARL Minority Recruitment Program under the oversight of the ARL Executive Office. Susan Jurow, Director of OMS since 1990, and Kriza Jennings, Program Officer for Diversity and Minority Recruitment, both announced their departure, effective June 1 and June 30, respectively. Maureen Sullivan, long-time OMS Organizational Development Consultant, moved to the Washington, DC area and was able to provide greater support to ARL and OMS operations and programs as the Office braced for the transition. In 1995, three programs were established under the OMS umbrella: the OMS Organizational Development Program, the OMS Leadership Development Program, and the OMS Information Services Program.

4.2.1 OMS Organizational Development Program

To assist libraries in making the transition from an archival role to that of an information gateway in a period of limited resources and digital transformation, the OMS Organizational Development Program provides a wide range of consulting services, incorporating new research on service delivery and marketing as well as on organizational effectiveness. Using an assisted self-study approach, the OMS Organizational Development Program provides academic and research libraries with programs to develop workable plans for improvement in such areas as public and technical services, planning, team building, and organizational review and design. The OMS provides on-site and telephone consultation, staff training, manuals, and other materials to aid participants in gathering information and in situation analysis.

Summary of Activities

Activities between October 1995 and May 1996 continue to focus primarily on support for strategic planning efforts and the facilitation of organizational team building and visioning efforts. Projects designed to assist in rethinking organizational structure and process were also a source of activity.

During this period, projects undertaken included:

Strategic Planning and Planning Retreats. At a time when user demands and expectations are changing, computers and communications technology are redefining library structure and services, and information is being made available in a multiplicity of formats, libraries must consider imaginative and resourceful ways of embracing change without being crushed by it. The Strategic Planning Program is designed to help establish a clearer understanding of the future course a library should take, including priorities, strategies, management philosophy, and ways of meeting new challenges.

Institutions served: UCLA (facilities consolidation); University of Connecticut; Emory University (transition to new library); Harvard Houghton Library; University of Missouri; National Agricultural Library; North Carolina State University (mission, vision, values); University of Pittsburgh; University of South Carolina

Organization Review and Design Program and Organizational Rethinking Retreats. The Organizational Review and Design Program has two primary goals: to ensure the optimal use of resources and to create a flexible organizational structure capable of renewing and redirecting itself as needed in the future. During the course of the project, members of the library staff examine the fit of the current structure to current programmatic needs. Careful attention is paid to horizontal and vertical design features, so that the structures developed during the project provide appropriate communication and decision-making mechanisms. The process includes implementation planning and project evaluation. OMS also provides support for libraries working on their own to develop new organizational structures.

Institutions served: University of Saskatchewan; University of Minnesota; Washington State University; Clark Art Institute

Team Building & Retreat Facilitation. Skilled facilitators are available to work with short- and long-term committees, work groups, and library-wide community efforts to build a strong foundation for group effectiveness. Issues such as group development, conflict management, interpersonal relations, idea generation, and process planning are explored. Action planning that supports ongoing efforts is a key component of this program.

Institutions served: Georgetown University (senior management team); Library of Congress Publications Division (process review and streamlining); Southeastern University Research Association (unblocking university information); University of North Texas (rethinking public services)

4.2.2. OMS Information Services Program

The OMS Information Services Program gathers, analyzes, and distributes information on contemporary management techniques, conducts surveys and analytical reviews, and answers inquiries on library issues and trends. The overall goals of the Program are identifying expertise and encouraging its exchange; promoting experimentation and innovation; improving performance; and facilitating the introduction of change. These are accomplished through an active publication and service program whose principal components are the Systems and Procedures Exchange Center (SPEC), the OMS Occasional Paper Series, the Quick-SPEC survey services, and the OMS Conferences Program. Through the OMS Collaborative Research and Writing Program, librarians work with OMS staff in joint research and writing projects that are then published by OMS. Participants and staff work together in survey design, writing, editing, and in seeking management perspectives on current academic concerns.

Summary of Activities

The Systems and Procedures Exchange Center (SPEC). SPEC Kits organize and collect selected library documents pertaining to a specific area of library management. Kits are designed to illustrate alternatives and innovations used in dealing with particular issues. Documents describing both the administrative and operational aspects of the issue are included. While this program was established to exchange useful information for strengthening library operations and programs among ARL members, a number of academic, public, and special libraries worldwide are among the more than 490 SPEC subscribers. In fact, more than 5,000 SPEC Kits are distributed annually.

Increased marketing efforts for the SPEC program are in the initial stages. Because the position of Program Officer for Information Services was vacant for a large portion of 1994, the program is currently behind in the production of SPEC Kits. This has impacted both distribution and revenue figures due to lack of product. This problem is further exacerbated by the recent problems with late survey responses. Solutions are under investigation to return the program to an appropriate production schedule.

Although e-mail distribution of SPEC Surveys began in early 1995, an e-mail distribution list has recently been created for one-way communication to the SPEC liaisons. Once this list is operational, considerable time will be saved in distributing surveys and other communications.

Efforts continue on updating and expanding the current SPEC Index. An electronic copy of the records pertaining to the SPEC Kits was obtained from the Education Resources Information Clearinghouse (ERIC), which indexes and abstracts all ARL publications. It is planned that this information will be imported into a separate and searchable electronic database that would also be used as the foundation for a printed subject, title, and author index.

The following SPEC Kits were produced between October 1995 and May 1996:

• #212 Non-Librarian Professionals, compiled by John Zenelis and Jean Dorrian, Temple University.

*#213 Technical Services Workstations, compiled by Michael Kaplan, Harvard University, Judy Brugger, Cornell University, and Joseph Kiegel, University of Washington.

*#214 Digitizing Technologies for Preservation, compiled by L. Suzanne Kellerman, Pennsylvania State University and Rebecca Wilson, Susquehanna University.

• #215 Library Reorganization and Restructuring, compiled by Joanne Eustis and Donald Kenney, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

SPEC Kits currently in progress:

Total Quality Management
Information Technology Policies
Distance Education
Onsite Internet training
Library Homepages
Improving the Reshelving Process
Library Reserves
Professional Development

Future SPEC topics under consideration:

Retrospective Conversion
Resource Sharing
Electronic Text Centers in ARL Libraries
Remote Storage
Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
Copyright

Occasional Paper Series. Occasional Paper #18, Benchmarking Interlibrary Loan, was published in October 1995. Video Collections and Multimedia in ARL Libraries, by Kris Brancolini, Indiana University, and Rick Provine, University of Virginia, is currently in progress. Future topics include Reorganization, with contributions from a number of sources; and Electronic Information Resources and Collection Development by Gordon Rowley, Iowa State University.

Quick SPEC Surveys. One Quick SPEC Survey was conducted by OMS for the Office of Scientific and Academic Publishing on cutbacks in library materials purchasing. The results of this survey will be published in a forthcoming article in the ARL newsletter.

Conferences. OMS showcased its programs and services at the ALA Mid-winter Conference in San Antonio. OMS also prepared several Special Focus Flyers (bibliographies of ARL/OMS publications on various programmatic topics).

Career Resources Website. In January, ARL developed a Career Resources Website that lists job vacancy announcements from ARL member libraries. This service, designed to alert prospective employees to job vacancies and career opportunities within ARL member libraries, provides members with a better forum for advertising their position openings. By April, over 60 job announcements were available from a wide array of library service areas. The site also links to other career resource pages. The service was designed and is maintained by Allyn Fitzgerald, Senior Research Analyst. The site address is https://db.arl.org/care