Go to:
Discussion
Online Doc
File
Poll
Event
Meeting Request
Suggestion
Allison Payne-IL (staff)'s picture

Pre-vote discussion: 2/3-2/9 Communities of Practice Transition Policy for Sections

The Board is invited to review the attached Board action form regarding the Communities of Practice Transition Policy for Sections. Online discussion of the recommended action will occur Wednesday, February 3, 2016 through Tuesday, February 9, 2016. Please use the below comment section for discussion.     

We anticipate a virtual vote to be held from Wednesday, February 10, 2016 through Wednesday, February 17, 2016. Confirmation of the virtual vote will take place at Annual Conference 2016 in Orlando.

John Culshaw's picture

It seems like we are fixing something that was missed three years ago so I don’t have any problems with this.  Perhaps those who were on the Board at that time
can confirm this? 

John

om: ALA Connect [mailto:connect@ala.org]

Mary Ellen Davis's picture

Hi John,

Your assessment is correct. The Board inadvertently did not approve this statement in the policy, "Sections that have been in existence for at least 10 years as of August 2012 would be exempt from the requirement to petition for IG continuance every three years." But the Board and task force had circulated this statement as part of the transition plan and it seems fair to honor these statements by adopting the policy now. 

Mary Ellen

Mary Ellen Davis Executive Director Association of College & Research Libraries mdavis@ala.org

Kim Leeder Reed's picture

Could someone post a copy or share a link to the document that was approved? I'm a little confused about what exactly we're changing. Do we need to add Recommendation #1 text to the document as well, or just the line exempting grandfathered sections from the 3-year rule?

 

Allison Payne-IL (staff)'s picture

Hi Kim, the March 2013 discussion and document on CoPA can be found here: http://connect.ala.org/node/203399.

Kim Leeder Reed's picture

Thanks for the link!

I don't understand why the Background section of our current document says Rec #1 was never approved, yet it is in the document that was approved in 2013. Our current recommended action sounds fine, but it doesn't seem to be in agreement with what's written in the Background. Am I missing something?

 

 

 

Mary Ellen Davis's picture

Hi Kim,

I think I see the source of confusion--a misplaced colon! The Board action item background intends to refer to the following sentence being inadvertently omitted from the approved policy:

"Sections that have been in existence for at least 10 years as of August 2012 would be exempt from the requirement to petition for IG continuance every three years."

However a colon after the sentence, "The recommendation that the Board approved did not include this text:" implies that the language following the colon was the policy that was not approved. As you correctly point out  the language starting with "Recommendation #1" was approved.

We can post a revised Board action form tomorrow; but the answer tonight is that the following language is the addition to the policy we are asking the Board to approve: "Sections that have been in existence for at least 10 years as of August 2012 would be exempt from the requirement to petition for IG continuance every three years."

Sorry for the confusion and thanks for pointing it out. Hope this helps! Let me know if you have further questions.

Thanks!

Mary Ellen

Mary Ellen Davis Executive Director Association of College & Research Libraries mdavis@ala.org

Kim Leeder Reed's picture

 

Mary Ellen Davis's picture

No seals were harmed (or reprimanded) for this Board action!

Mary Ellen Davis Executive Director Association of College & Research Libraries mdavis@ala.org

Irene Herold's picture

As someone who served on the Task Force, I concur that this language was circulated and the intent to include it in the original action was supported.  It was just an oversight.

Irene Herold

ACRL Board, Past President 2017-2018

Allison Payne-IL (staff)'s picture

I've attached to this post a revised form (ACRL_BoardActionForm - Virtual Vote-rev 2-10-16.docx) that clarifies the Board action.

Please comment if you have further questions. I'll plan to start the virtual vote at the end of the day.