In Attendance: Sherri Barnes (recorder), Sylvia Curtis, Sherry DeDecker, Jane Faulkner, Eric Forte, Ellen Kempf, Mary Larsgaard (Chair), Susan Moon, Sarah Pritchard (last 10 minutes), Eunice Schroeder, Lucia Snowhill, Sally Wilson Weimer

AGENDA
Respond to SOPAG's five questions regarding CMPG white papers on shared collections

The meeting convened at 11:30 a.m.

1) Do the Reports adequately articualte the purpose and rationale for collection management and coordination for UC Libraries and are the overall strategies reasonable?

The reports presented a broad outline of library collection management issues in the UC system. Librarians didn't feel as if they were the audience for the papers. More specifics about strategies in dealing with the issues is desirable. Some stated that the audience for the papers is external and internal, librarians and non-librarians.

2) Please describe any significant challenges, omisiions, problematic areas, or major implementation issues that you see in further developing shared collections.

For a more centralized shared collection to work, bibliographer groups will have to be a more formal part of the system wide collections infrastructure. Groups will need a charge, to meet regularly, and to be accountable. Groups will need to be established for areas where no groups currently exist, in any fashion.

Librarians' roles need to be better clarified; how will collection managers' roles change? Will we become approval plan and rights managers more than bibliographers and subject specialist? Note: No comments here from technical services librarians

Better bibliographic control to locate materials and understand records.

There is concern that our increased dependence on journal aggregators as a result of our commitment to increased/electronic access is undermining our support of independent scholarly publishing?

3) What do you believe to be the major benefits and drawbacks in further developing shared collections?

Benefits: electronic access and delivery of information; cost effectiveness

Concerns: An inadequate collections infrastructure at the moment; limited librarian selection role, especially in regard to titles in journal packages; dominance of system wide collection development (read CDL), where tier 1 acquisitions will limit funds for tier 3 acquisitions; additional system wide collections responsibilities amount to a significantly increased workload. The interdisciplinary nature of scholarship isn't conducive to centralized selection, de-selection, and collection management; limits browsing.

4) What are the charactteristics that make a body of material attractive to include ina ashared collection?

Low use; high cost (all formats)

5) In your estimation, what shared collections would be most profitable to pursue in the next three years and why?

Print copies off all current journal titles, or development of a system wide last copies agreement