I understand the need for the appropriate transmittal form but wanted to register my concern that the high threshold for administrative compliance around these kinds of things works against a desire to engage the processes we're asking folks to engage in. From my time on the ILFSC I know that they've been working on getting these guidelines done for literally years. Asking for yet another form is surely procedurally important (I defer to folks with more experience!), but I sometimes wonder if we get in our own way when we ask for even more administrative work from each other.
ACRL or ACRL committees and sections may wish to collaborate with outside organizations and groups to develop and/or revise standards, guidelines, or frameworks.
In the case of ACRL itself, the ACRL Board or the ACRL Executive Director initiates the connection with the other organization or group. An ACRL committee or section wishing to develop standards, guidelines, or frameworks in concert with another organization or group must first contact the ACRL Executive Director in order to seek approval from the ACRL Board before formalizing a collaboration with an outside organization or group. In such cases, the ACRL Board refers the process to the SC chair, who will designate a SC liaison to work with both parties. For new standards, guidelines, or frameworks, relevant procedures from Section 14.5 will apply.
Thank you all for weighing in on this. I would like to backtrack, because I think that RBMS used a correct version of the transmittal form.The Transmittal Form for Draft ACRL Standards, Guidelines, and Frameworks is available in two places:1. In a list of ACRL related forms here: http://www.ala.org/acrl/resources/forms 2. Also, as an HTML version here: http://www.ala.org/acrl/resources/policies/draftform The two forms have the same question prompts and sections. It appears that RBMS used the 2nd version of the form and put it into a Word document. I have attached their document to this message for reference. Looking between the documents and the original forms, as far as I can see, they have addressed all of the sections of the form.For those who think we should delay vote, what are the specific areas that are unaddressed?Thanks,Willie
Hi all,Just checking back in on this. Are we ready to vote on the Guidelines up for discussion? Or should we discuss further?Thanks,
I agree that verification of ACRL agreement for the joint statement could be important.
5700 College Road
Lisle, Il 60532
225 N Michigan Ave, Suite 1300 | Chicago, IL | 60601 | USA
© 2009-2020 American Library Association
Request a New Community