Minutes from ALA 06-24-2012
American Library Association Conference
Meeting called to order by Danielle Plumer at 130pm – Anaheim Convention Center
Nik Honeysett (AAM)
SuKim Chung (SAA)
Gladys Bell (ALA)
Danielle Plumer (ALA)
Kim Durante (ALA)
Virtual via Skype
Sarah Demb (SAA)
Gregor Trinkaus-Randall (SAA)
Jamillah R. Gabriel
ALA Staff Liaison
Introductions of attendees
GTR notes that CALM focus has previously been on programming for the three meetings but he had been pushing heavily this year for collaboration and brought up the possible areas that were noted in the agenda: education, research, and advocacy. As an example GTR brought up the budget cuts in
NHPR (?) that SAA had been advocating against, and suggested how much stronger it could have been had the three organizations been working together.
General discussion on copyright and legislative issues in general that need the strength of joint advocacy behind them.
DP brought up issues relating to diversity and the future of the profession. GTR notes that diversity is a strategic priority for SAA.
The subject was opened up for discussion.
Sustainability across the board – how do institutions show their value, how do we speak in this new time where the business model is dominant? Would it be possible to slot this topic under advocacy?
DP suggests that it is broader – libraries need to identify more that they can do to respond to changes.
FS brought up the Sage Report which noted that academic libraries were failing – “How far do we go by being so nice and sharing everything?”
Someone remarks on increased Special Collections use, and notes that public library use has also gone up.
HB notes that perhaps it is more productive to move away from crisis thinking and focus our attention on things that won’t happen well if we don’t intervene.
As an example of education initiatives addressing digital preservation, GTR brings up SAA’s DAS Curriculum (Digital Archives Specialist) and asks how many people in the room know about it. Not many do – SK passes around fliers describing the program to the group. How do we get the word out to our respective organizations regarding this educational opportunities provided by one organization that are applicable to all of our fields?
Discussion regarding pricing of workshops and continuing education – DP mentioned that pricing was a significant issue – is there the possibility of reciprocal discounts between the organizations?
FS brings up an important point – the fact that there is a tension in the idea of credentialing people through this type of continuing education, bringing them in through the back door, so to speak.
DP & KM discuss idea of reciprocal discounts and sharing costs. KM points out that the division structure of ALA and its pricing may make giving discounts somewhat difficult.
HB suggests that it might make more sense to offer webinars for this type of continuing education.
GTR notes that we should consider educational offerings not only at conferences but also at stand-alone workshops and publicize it with the other organizations.
FS suggests that we should look to coordinate credentializing from the three organizations – CEUs?
GTR suggest that is a relatively simple concept to do
HB notes that the committee on Education at ALA must discuss this as would SAA
DP crosswalks between the three organizations – challenging to keep up the contact people
KM an online calendar is in the works for ALA to include national and regional conferences
Idea suggested of building it out – have a LAM listing that could appear elsewhere. Post press releases on the list? They can be forwarded . Challenges with ALA Connect as a communication mechanism as there is a slight functionality difference between those that are ALA members and those that aren’t.
GTR points out SAA’s Bi-Weekly In the Loop blast emails as a communication tool. He feels the calendar would be great as well – we could link to regionals as well.
It would definitely be good to move in the direction of linkage in terms of the communication of shared issues.
FS notes that given the legacy of this Committee, in order to operationalize we need two levels:
Presidential/leadership for the higher level discussions
Members 2nd level – to do some of the ground work
1) Identify the groups within the organization that could go back & forth
2) Education – what are the offerings? Tangible outcome could be a list of offerings of other calendars
FS asks if we should make a charge?
Should there be a shared set of standards across the coursework offered by the three organizations? We need to articulate it.
KM was wary of using words such as accreditation in the discussion of potential coursework and curriculum description
FS noted that he misspoke and he was referring to “certification” not accreditation
DP brought up the idea of continuing education units
FS noted that this idea could be very attractive to members across the organization – and then DP and HB brought up courses that would appeal across organizations.
NH noted that AAM certified institutions not individuals but wondered what they could do with regard to individuals.
KM talks about precedence in ALA using CPLA as an example and notes the process of such an undertaking, for instance the time needed to solicit certification, then identify coursework, etc.
FS wanted to know if ALA was out in front with regard to such a process?
DP suggested that we put together an Ad Hoc committee to talk to the right people at the three organizations and get them together at our conferences to speak to this issue (education).
GTR notes that we also need to publicize the offerings across the organizations
FS notes that if it is done correctly, your next step is getting college credit for it
GTR suggest three steps
1) Ad Hoc committee to have a conversation with the right education people at the three organizations
2) Calendar people - get together the events on the same page for all three organizations
3) Accreditation discussion but it may come of the individual discussions on education
FS adds topic of metrics to the category of research (one of the areas that we should be collaborating on) – they are important and need to be addressed. All three organizations need to say that want to
address research information on metrics
DP says that regarding upcoming areas of research – it would be useful for CALM to facilitate conversation.
HB brings up the idea of digital preservation and linked systems, CALM as a committee should highlight these issues for others. Digital curation recommendations are needed. The word is being hijacked by other institutions as there are different uses of the word by scientists, museums.
Topic of sharing knowledge about tools and technology
HS spoke about NEH grants
Cyns Nelson –a new member of group – spoke about a statewide oral history project they were doing in Colorado. It involved humanities, library science, history of Colorado - focusing on oral history as a type of information and creating a metadata standard for oral history – the standards around this could be a research topic.
DP noted that the discussion or consideration of joint metadata standards would be well within CALM’s scope.
KM brings up PARS list – and notes the absence of preservation data
FS asks what is the balance of LAM’s approach to this. What is our dialogue about preservation?
HB = group of people trying to define digital preservation. He spoke to the issue of what is going on with digital preservation and notes that the library world is dominating the conversation, not archives.
GTR notes that we need to make sure that all three organizations are award of the that they are working on and that they aren’t reinventing or addressing things that have already been dealt with.
Discussion re the linked data topic
DP notes that it has been driven by forces external to LAMs – i.e. the search engine industry.
FS with regard to CALM’s function as a clearing house – we need to define what are the areas of concern and create a grid for this.
GTR regarding Advocacy - how much is known about the issues that each organization is concerned with? For instance, within the museum community, changes in charitable giving laws are a huge issue.
NH says for AAM – advocacy is a huge issue, and he says that they would welcome working together.
ALA of course has their own office of Advocacy
GTR – notes advocacy issues such as copyright, donation, funding…
FS points out that joint advocacy energizes this Committee! Perhaps it is difficult to sustain the enthusiasm.
HB notes that there has been movement on working together in the last five years.
GTR notes that it shouldn’t be issue driven or hit and miss, we need to strategize and systematize our advocacy. He then provided a background on recent SAA work on drafting an advocacy agenda and suggested that it could be a building block to working with ALA and AAM. SKC read the issues from the recently drafted SAA Advocacy Agenda. Perhaps issue briefs could be jointly offered?
FS asks if an addendum could be added to the AA agenda – building in a point about the three groups working together on these issues.
KM asks if there is a way to find out from the respective groups about success stories/failures regarding advocacy as a presentation topic for the 2013 conference?
Regarding the idea of Ad Hoc Committee – should there be another one on advocacy? Can we get this on SAA’s meeting session agenda? Advocacy for the community? Could this be the spin on how to do it?
As regards a program for next year – can we formulate another Ad Hoc committee?
GTR notes that local level advocacy is also important.
SKC - remember to send out URL for the Advocacy Agenda (SAA) to the group
List of action steps needed:
Solicit members for Ad Hoc Committee on Education
1) Focused on determining who in the three orgs is charged with education issues and get them together
Solicit members for Ad Hoc Committee on Advocacy
2) Other actions
Maureen Sullivan – incoming ALA president – noted that she was going to be working on community building.
Brief reporting on old business – discussion on CALM sessions at ALA and AAM – dates given for SAA meeting in August. Publicize NA protocols/museum committees NAGPRA – encourage training in this area. It was noted that both linked data sessions were well-attended and successful.
It was noted that ALA was going to reduce the number of programs to fit all of them into the Convention center in the future.