James Madison UniversityLibraries & Educational TechnologiesSelf Study Report

December 2006

Executive Summary

Rapidly changing user expectations and the behaviors that accompany them have significant and far-reaching implications for L&ET services, content, and facilities. As our student population becomes more demographically diverse, they bring with them a variety of needs and expectations for support. Concerns about the preparation and readiness of incoming students have also begun to emerge. New faculty bring with them constantly changing expectations for teaching and research support. All of these factors have serious implications for almost all aspects of L&ET services, for both internal and external L&ET constituents.

Across the organization, L&ET is proud of the variety of services offered, even as it struggles to provide a clear picture of all possible services to users. The JMU community expresses high levels of satisfaction with L&ET services. Standard technology classroom systems are available in almost every classroom across campus. Blackboard is highly regarded as the university’s course management system. The library liaison program is widely recognized as an exemplary service. Faculty development opportunities in instructional technology and information literacy are taken advantage of by faculty from all academic departments. Web services enable L&ET staff and users to create content, provide access to services, and to play a vital role in promoting the organization. In addition to the library web site presence, L&ET supports the systems for accessing local collections, including LEO Library Catalog, the Madison Digital Image Database, and streaming servers to name a few.

A swiftly changing area of service is the provision of online education. Online education includes programs that require no physical attendance at JMU and “hybrid” programs that use web-based instruction in conjunction with traditional face-to-face instruction. Many instructors use online instruction simply to augment traditional face-to-face instruction. L&ET offers several virtual collaborative spaces and continues to explore new products and emerging technologies to enhance the online learning experience.

L&ET provides numerous types of trusted, authoritative content from the traditional books and journals to new forms such as digital images, streaming audio and video, and datasets. The activities related to managing content are critical to the organization’s ability to serve our patrons well; customer service is an important aspect of evaluating, selecting, and ordering materials; cataloging and preserving materials; and obtaining needed materials from other libraries.

More content is now available electronically and often requires mediation from librarians, staff, and programmers. Digital content also requires server space, bandwidth, and often licensing. Funding all aspects of digital content is a challenge. Open access content holds the potential to relieve some of the financial burdens that the new formats have brought, but it comes with its own set of maintenance requirements. Membership in and contributions to consortia, like the Virtual Library of Virginia (VIVA), will be essential to the provision of library services.

2

A new library building will be completed in March 2008. Designed following the information commons model, the new facility includes an integrated service desk for circulation, reference, reserves, and media; flexible and technology-enhanced study and production space; and a 24-hour study and computer lab with a coffee bar. The fifth floor of the new building houses both the Center for Instructional Technology and the Center for Faculty Innovation, a department in Academic Affairs, and includes a faculty seminar room that will be available for programs related to faculty development, teaching, and scholarship.

Even as plans are underway for the opening in 2008, L&ET staff and users yearn to redesign existing spaces and create more flexible spaces that are well-equipped with technology and conducive for collaboration. An increase in the use of the library’s virtual services has expanded, but this has not lead to a decrease in usage of the physical space. In addition to providing spaces for people, L&ET devotes a large amount of resources to housing and maintaining network infrastructure, computers, and applications, which make work in our facilities possible.

A significant issue for L&ET is staffing: obtaining the resources necessary to hire sufficient personnel to preserve successful existing services while providing for emerging needs. The professional skills required for the provision of high-quality services have also increased.

Libraries merged with Educational Technologies to form one organization in 1998. In the past five years, huge achievements have been made in both areas of the organization – and in some cases, with both units working together. However, L&ET still faces the challenge of understanding which of its structures truly span the organization and which are still tied to either the library or educational technologies area. Committee formation and membership and communication processes are obvious places for greater integration to occur.

Through numerous focus groups, interviews, and research efforts, the Strategic Planning Team identified key findings for many areas of the organization. Strategic goals have been drafted based on these findings; however, the opportunity for organizational feedback will likely not exist until the new year – and that feedback will be critical. The contributions of the External Review Team are also warmly welcomed as a means of identifying appropriate strategic goals.

Key Findings:

People: L&ET is understaffed, which limits opportunities to preserve successful existing

services while developing new services. Data reporting across the departments and divisions within L&ET is inconsistent. In

keeping with the move toward accountability, L&ET needs a more unified way of gathering, analyzing, and using data.

Central coordination of communications to L&ET’s external community is critical to inform our users about our services. 

New and emerging technologies mandate a more planned approach to staff development in order to keep skills current.

3

The identity of the Educational Technologies division within the L&ET organization and the relationships among the Ed Tech units are ambiguous and require clarification.

Physical Space: Users cite lack of group study space and lack of computers as major problems. The

new east campus library in early 2008 promises increased study spaces and services, but Carrier Library and the Music Library must also be redesigned to recreate a functional user space.

Media Resources Equipment Loans needs a suitable new location to provide optimal service.

More staff spaces are needed as new positions are created.

Systems and Applications: The need for data storage will continue to grow as content requires more space.

Larger content will also require greater bandwidth. The use of open source applications and operating systems within the organization is

growing. L&ET must stay informed of this emerging approach to integrating software systems into the organization’s computing infrastructure.

There is a growing demand for Mac machines and therefore Mac technical support.

Content: L&ET needs to make a commitment to open access. Recognizing that open access

does not mean “free,” L&ET must secure funding for open access publishing. Users have increasing expectations for online content. The desire for online content,

however, is highly discipline specific. While the sciences want predominantly online content, the humanities still desire ready access to print materials. The shift in user expectations will continue to challenge library budgets, staff, and services.

An awareness program must educate faculty on scholarly communication issues and provide assistance to faculty in publishing their research, perhaps in partnership with the Center for Faculty Innovation.

The increase in electronic resources puts an increased demand on the network infrastructure and on staff to negotiate licenses, design more intuitive web interfaces, and assist users in accessing library resources.

L&ET must provide support for emerging forms of content, such as blogs, podcasts, and wikis, and consider the implications of new devices for viewing content.

The Library needs a strategy for supporting a digital reference collection and promoting its usage.

The Library should use optimal methods for collection analysis and assessment. By partnering with larger institutions in the state, L&ET is able to subscribe to

packages of journals and databases that would otherwise be unaffordable. It is important to sustain current collections through cooperative licenses and look for future opportunities.

In order to successfully meet the special software and dataset needs of the University, designated funding must be allocated on a continuing basis with periodic adjustments for price increases and licensing changes.

Preservation of digital content, including purchased content and unique content held in Special Collections, is a major concern.

Services:

4

Students prefer to use virtual services and spaces for finding information. They also want easily navigable systems that delineate clear paths to information. L&ET must use the knowledge of users’ preference for services like Google and Yahoo to create intuitive search paths and consistent pages that provide point-of-need assistance.

Use of the Library’s virtual resources continues to increase. Staffing and maintenance of the virtual services must be adequately addressed.

The Library Liaison program faces some challenges: unified library communication, support for instruction and collection development, and assignment to academic departments. Librarians expressed a need for more coordination for this program in order to explore how to best serve the campus and the many ways students study and faculty teach.

With improvements in database technology and searching technologies, the functionality of the integrated library system (ILS) as a discovery tool must improve.

The complexity of library instruction competes with the scarcity of time each liaison has with students.

The Library will increase efforts to collaborate with faculty on developing information literacy assignments into coursework of majors.

Reference as a service must serve a growing non-traditional student population. Not only have user expectations and behaviors changed, but the information they need to access has also changed. The simplicity of the traditionally defined library reference service belies its complexity today.

5

6

I. AcknowledgementsThe Self Study and Strategic Planning Team thanks everyone who contributed to the development of this document. Their contributions were invaluable. We especially want to thank Ralph Alberico, Dean of Libraries & Educational Technologies, for his constant support, extraordinary leadership, and inspiring vision.

Strategic Planning Team Academic AffairsJody Fagan Douglas Brown, Vice PresidentKevin Hegg Jerry Benson, CISATJenne McCabe David Brakke, Science & MathematicsKaren Snively Linda Halpern, General EducationMelissa Van Vuuren David K. Jeffrey, Arts & LettersJim West Marilou Johnson, Visual & Performing ArtsSarah Cheverton, Co-Chair Robert Reid, BusinessSharon Gasser, Co-Chair Phillip Wishon, Education

Documentation Team Other ConsultantsCheri Duncan T. Dary Erwin, AVP, Assessment & Public PolicyPatricia Hardesty Dale Hulvey, AVP Information TechnologyRita Gentile Jim Schaeffer, Associate Dean, Outreach ProgramsReba Leiding, Chair Donna Sundre, Executive Director, CARS

Vicki Wise, Asst. Director of Institutional Research

L&ET Documentation Consultants L&ET and JMU Staff Assisting with Focus GroupsMary Ann Chatelain Brian Charette, AVP, HR Training & PerformanceEllen Defriece Dr. Karen Ford, Social WorkAlma Hale-Cooper Jennifer Testa, Training & DevelopmentBill Hartman Cathy Thomas, Human ResourcesClaudette Lee Diane Yerian, Training & DevelopmentSusan Thomas Kathy Clarke, L&ET

Claire Clemens, L&ETL&ET Leadership Brian Cockburn, L&ET Ralph Alberico, Dean Jody Hess, L&ETMary Ann Chappell Kristi Lee, L&ETSarah Cheverton Meris Mandernach, L&ETJeff ClarkBrian Cockburn L&ET Staff Assisting with Self Study DocumentSharon Gasser Craig BaugherJerry Gill Mary Ann ChatelainJennifer Keach Ellen Defriece Reba Leiding Alma Hale-CooperSandy Maxfield Bill HartmanJim Mazoué Cheryl LantzJohn McGehee Claudette Lee

Patrick StinnettSusan Thomas

Mission-Vision-Values TeamRalph Alberico Special ThanksMary Ann Chappell Phil DuBose, Associate Dean, College of BusinessSarah Cheverton Facilitator, Mission-Vision-Values Team

Jeff Clark Diane Foucar-Szocki, Department Head, Learning, Kathy Clarke Technology and Leadership EducationSharon Gasser Team Building ConsultantKevin Hegg Diane Yerian, Director of TrainingSusan Huffman Team Training FacilitatorJenne McCabe

7

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary...........................................................................................................2

Acknowledgements............................................................................................................6

I. Introduction...............................................................................................................9

II. Self-Study Methodology.........................................................................................11

III. Libraries & Educational Technologies Milestones..............................................13

IV. Mission, Vision, and Values...................................................................................17

V. Goals and Objectives..............................................................................................19

VI. Environmental Scan...............................................................................................21A. EXTERNAL TO JMU..........................................................................................................................21

1. Demographics.............................................................................................................................212. State and Federal Influences.......................................................................................................223. Technology..................................................................................................................................234. Scholarship and the Information Marketplace............................................................................25

B. INTERNAL TO JMU...........................................................................................................................261. Student Enrollment......................................................................................................................262. Programmatic Expansion............................................................................................................273. Funding.......................................................................................................................................274. Faculty and Instruction...............................................................................................................285. Lifelong Learning and Access.....................................................................................................28

VII. Organization and People........................................................................................29A. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE........................................................................................................29

1. Standing Committees...................................................................................................................362. Communication...........................................................................................................................363. Partnerships................................................................................................................................394. Advisory Councils.......................................................................................................................425. Data Reporting............................................................................................................................42

B. PEOPLE..............................................................................................................................................431. Employees and Positions.............................................................................................................432. Classified Staff.............................................................................................................................453. Library Faculty...........................................................................................................................464. Administrative/Professional Faculty...........................................................................................475. Student Employees.......................................................................................................................476. Faculty and Staff Credentials......................................................................................................487. Professional Development and Training.....................................................................................508. LibQual+ Survey Data................................................................................................................51

C. L&ET BUDGET.................................................................................................................................52D. KEY FINDINGS..................................................................................................................................54

VIII.Physical Spaces........................................................................................................55A. CARRIER LIBRARY............................................................................................................................55B. CISAT LIBRARY—HEALTH SCIENCES BUILDING............................................................................57C. MUSIC LIBRARY—MUSIC BUILDING...............................................................................................57D. EQUIPMENT LOANS—SPOTSWOOD AND CARRIER LIBRARY............................................................58E. COLLEGE OF EDUCATION SERVICES—MEMORIAL HALL.................................................................58F. NEW LIBRARY ON EAST CAMPUS.....................................................................................................58G. LIBQUAL+ SURVEY DATA..............................................................................................................59H. KEY FINDINGS..................................................................................................................................60

8

IX. Systems and Applications.......................................................................................61A. HARDWARE.......................................................................................................................................61B. COSTS FOR SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS........................................................................................64C. KEY FINDINGS..................................................................................................................................65

X. Content.....................................................................................................................66A. LIBRARY MATERIALS BUDGET.........................................................................................................66

1. Collection Development..............................................................................................................682. LibQUAL+ Survey Data..............................................................................................................68

B. CONTENT TYPES...............................................................................................................................691. Books...........................................................................................................................................712. Journals.......................................................................................................................................733. Research Databases and Resources............................................................................................754. Government Documents..............................................................................................................775. Video............................................................................................................................................786. Sound recordings and Streaming Audio......................................................................................797. Scores..........................................................................................................................................798. Images.........................................................................................................................................799. Special Collections Resources....................................................................................................8010. Software and Datasets.................................................................................................................81

C. KEY FINDINGS..................................................................................................................................82

XI. Services....................................................................................................................83A. LIAISON PROGRAM...........................................................................................................................83B. LIBQUAL+ SURVEY DATA..............................................................................................................84C. WEB SERVICES.................................................................................................................................85D. ACCESS TO COLLECTIONS................................................................................................................86

1. LEO Library Catalog..................................................................................................................862. Research Databases and Resources............................................................................................873. Reserves.......................................................................................................................................884. Periodical Locator and LinkFinderPlus.....................................................................................885. Proxy Server................................................................................................................................886. Special Collections......................................................................................................................887. Interlibrary Loan.........................................................................................................................898. Physical Delivery Service............................................................................................................909. Madison Digital Image Database...............................................................................................9110. Streaming Service........................................................................................................................91

E. VIRTUAL COLLABORATIVE SPACE...................................................................................................911. Blackboard..................................................................................................................................922. Centra Symposium.......................................................................................................................933. Video Conferencing.....................................................................................................................934. Technology Classrooms..............................................................................................................945. Media Equipment Services..........................................................................................................94

F. EDUCATIONAL SERVICES..................................................................................................................951. Information Literacy & Library Instruction................................................................................952. Instructional Technology Workshops..........................................................................................973. Reference Desk Service...............................................................................................................974. Reference Consultation...............................................................................................................995. Instructional Technology House Calls......................................................................................1006. DDLS Support...........................................................................................................................1007. Guides & Tutorials....................................................................................................................100

G. KEY FINDINGS................................................................................................................................101

XII. Glossary to Terms and Acronyms.......................................................................102

XIII. References...............................................................................................................112

9

II. Introduction

Libraries have a long history and tradition within academe. While educational technologies have been around for a considerable time as well, institutions have only recently envisioned an opportunity for their library and educational technology units to share the same mission. At James Madison University, both functions are seen as essential to the educational experience. This self-study identified numerous areas where the missions of the Libraries and of Educational Technologies are the same as well as areas where they are quite different.

One similarity across the Libraries & Educational Technologies (L&ET) organization is its dissimilarity from academic departments. Although an academic unit reporting to the Provost, the organization is not a credit producing entity, so output cannot be measured in the same way. Library collections and services must support existing areas of study while maintaining the flexibility to accommodate new programs. Educational technologies must provide for current pedagogy while testing new, cutting-edge ideas. Market forces dictate much of the technology needs that L&ET must support, while a large constituency of our users is constantly adopting new technologies. In a very real sense, L&ET is charged with protecting access to the past while paving access to the future.

Emerging forms of information, new avenues of dissemination, a changing information marketplace, and increasingly disparate expectations from users complicates this challenge. The professional skills required for the provision of high-quality services have also increased. Library skills considered essential 100 years ago are still vital; however, they keep company now with an ever-changing set of additional skills, which includes everything from providing expert research assistance to providing sustainable information architecture. Educational technology requires a similar responsiveness to the changing landscape, as it must preserve principles of pedagogy with deep roots in higher education. Measures of what happens in a modern academic library or in the areas of educational technologies are being developed.

When one compares the JMU L&ET organization of 2006 with that of 1998, the changes are quite apparent. The collections, staff, budget, physical spaces, and services have all grown substantially. There are over 350 individual databases from which to choose, over 10,000 electronic books in the collection, and over 1,000 streaming videos available in the classrooms and homes of our users. FY 2005 saw 2,639 Blackboard courses in use, an increase of over tenfold from FY 2001. FY 2006 saw a fourfold increase in the number of students enrolled in distance learning courses from FY 2001. Library users now have access to nearly 35,000 journals, and in 2006, over 652,000 articles were downloaded from these journals. Despite this progress, the 2006 LibQual+ survey revealed that the JMU faculty continues to experience moderate dissatisfaction with the collection. As JMU grows and becomes more diverse, proposed programs promise to require specialized resources and attention to be competitive. Additionally, current staff will continue to be pushed beyond their limits to provide core services.

10

The central challenge facing L&ET over the next five years will be to preserve its reputation for high-quality services and trusted resources while simultaneously meeting rapidly-evolving user expectations. This has significant and far-reaching implications for L&ET staff, facilities, content, and services.

11

III.Self-Study Methodology

The L&ET Dean determined that the academic program review and strategic planning process required two teams: a steering committee and a documentation committee. He also determined that because this program review and strategic planning process involved the entire organization, it was critical to involve representatives from both Libraries and from Educational Technologies. Thus, team members were selected from both divisions. One co-chair, three steering committee members, and two documentation team members were selected from Libraries. One co-chair, three steering committee members, and one documentation team member were selected from Educational Technologies. The two committees were created and given their charge in February 2006. The co-chairs decided to use the names Strategic Planning Team and Documentation Team to identify these groups.

In March 2006, the Strategic Planning Team participated in team training with Dr. Diane Foucar-Szocki and Diane Yerian. Team members created a short list of general operating procedures and elected to use Blackboard organization sites to share and store documents, use e-mail when necessary, and meet regularly. The team decided that every effort would be made to study the organization as one entity rather than two separate divisions under the direction of the same Dean, i.e., the team would look for commonalities across both parts of the organization instead of their differences. Over the next several weeks, the group created a project timetable, reviewed the 1998 Self Study Report, established a format for this self-study document, identified key stakeholders, and provided direction for the Documentation Team.

The Documentation Team collected data from annual reports, departmental records, system reports, and human resource records. Where appropriate, team members prepared charts and graphs. All data were stored in the Documentation Team’s Blackboard site, which was accessible to the Strategic Planning Team.

While the Documentation Team collected data, the Strategic Planning Team held formal and informal meetings with individuals from many areas of the University. For example, in June 2006, five internal focus groups took place, with audio tape recording and live transcription. A facilitator outside of the L&ET organization held a focus group with the leadership group. In fall 2006, focus groups were held with students and faculty. All focus group tapes were transcribed and analyzed by members of the Strategic Planning Team.

The Team also met with key informants internal and external to the organization. The purpose of these informational sessions was to conduct an environmental scan, i.e., to learn more about the future directions of select programs and services internal and external to L&ET and JMU. Internal key informants included the Educational Technologies Librarian, the Liaison Program Coordinator, the Coordinator of LibQual+, and the Interim Liaison General Education, Cluster One. External key informants included the College Deans, the Provost, the Associate Dean of Outreach Programs, the Director of Information Technology, the Associate Vice President of Assessment and Public Policy, the Executive Director of the Center for Assessment and Research Studies (CARS), and the Assistant Director of Institutional Research.

12

The information gathered through these meetings was used to identify trends and concerns internal and external to the organization. Results were shared in the aggregate with the L&ET organization at the opening meeting for the 2006 academic year and will be used to identify future strategic directions. In fact, strategic goals and objectives for the next six years are already in draft form based on this data and the results of the self-study.

The Dean also charged the Strategic Planning Team with the task of writing new mission, vision, and values statements that would reflect the entire L&ET organization. These new statements would replace the divisions’ separate statements created in earlier years. To accomplish this task, the co-chairs invited the Associate Dean of the College of Business, an expert in organizational development, to facilitate the process. Four members of the Strategic Planning Team and five other L&ET staff members were selected to participate in the process. The group met over a period of several weeks to discuss ideas and slowly craft statements that would reflect the core purpose of the entire organization and in some way distinguish it from the work of other University organizations. The group members came to agreement on mission and values statements; they are in the final stages of coming to agreement on a vision statement. These statements will be shared with the entire organization for review.

The final self-study document was written over several months starting in July 2006. Each member of the Strategic Planning Team and several members of the larger organization contributed to the final content. A draft was shared with the entire organization and feedback meetings were held in November. L&ET staff members were encouraged to provide written feedback. The team co-chairs also received feedback from the L&ET Leadership Team. Based on input from members of the organization, the team finalized the document for the External Review Team in early December.

The purpose of this document is to describe the L&ET organization and the major activities and accomplishments that occurred over the past five years. Thus, it includes and references a large body of information and documentation. To assist the reader with navigation, the electronic version of the report (available on the enclosed CD) includes active hyperlinks to the appendices and to external websites. The table of contents includes links to all sections of the document and the associated use of heading styles enables the reader to browse by those sections. A glossary is included at the end of the document and includes a clickable alphabetical index.

13

IV. Libraries & Educational Technologies Milestones

FY 2001 Budget crisis: rolled back over $20,000 in budget reversion. Offset by external funding: $20,000 from Class of 1999 and $41,000 from the Class of 1951.

Music Library launched Digital Orpheus (online streaming of audio reserves).

Classroom Technology Services becomes responsible for East Campus Technology Classrooms.

CISAT Library opens in new facility in Health & Human Services (HHS) Building.

New HHS building added 23 Technology Classrooms. Carrier Library hours extended to 2 a.m. in response to students’

requests. Library staff and services get 82.5% satisfaction ratings in Faculty

Morale Survey. Media Resources and Classroom Technology assumed responsibility

for procurement, management, and distribution of licensed software for campus-wide instructional use.

New director of the Center for Instructional Technology (CIT) holds joint position as Director, Library Public Services—a significant step towards closer integration of service across library and educational technology boundaries.

FY 2002 JMU L&ET awarded one-million dollar Small Business Administration grant.

Second year of budget crisis: rolled back over $90,000 in budget reversion. VIVA also forced to cut selected databases and online journals.

Library identified by ACRL as one of ten institutions or programs that exemplified best practices in information literacy programming for undergraduates.

Educational Technologies developed mission statement, goals, and objectives.

CIT released Madison Digital Image Database (MDID) as free resource for international community.

CIT began collaborative relationship with what is now called Center for Faculty Innovation (CFI).

Library purchased Endeavor EnCompass hardware and software and launched pilot project using LinkFinderPlus for linking to full-text journal articles from research databases.

Special Collections completed the digitization of JMU pre-1985 historical photo collection.

Began e-Reserves pilot program. Implemented pay-for-printing in Reference area. Classroom Technology redesigned classroom instruction system,

significantly reducing costs and allowing for more rapid expansion of

14

technology classrooms. Library participated in its first LibQUAL+ survey. Carrier Library implemented in-building checkout for wireless laptops. Library implemented online scheduling program for library classrooms

and meeting rooms. Minor renovations done to Carrier Library’s first and second floor

space (e.g., new open-stacks Periodicals Room, new office space).

FY 2003 CIT and Distributed and Distance Learning Services (DDLS) launched its annual Summer Institute for Online Learning.

Library instituted moratorium on book purchases (book purchases dropped by 20 percent)

Library implemented Liaison Annual Reports for reporting on collection development, library instruction, and other services to academic departments.

E-Reserves task force formed to move program from pilot to full service.

Periodical Locator implemented with Serial Solutions. Technical services continued work on EnCompass pilot projects for federated searching, database of databases, and SBA gateway.

Wireless network access implemented throughout Carrier Library. Virginia bond referendum passed designating a new library facility on

CISAT campus as a capital project. Cataloging enhanced bibliographic records for videotape contents and

Caldecott Award-winning juvenile books.

FY 2004 CIT hosted and organized first Teaching and Learning with Technology Conference for JMU faculty.

Materials base budget increased by $500,000. Purchased 37 new databases.

Library conducted its second LibQUAL+ survey. In the 2004 Faculty Morale Survey, the library staff and services

question received the highest score of any item on the questionnaire. Renovations in Carrier Library added two new offices on the first floor;

a recording studio, video editing area, and workspaces in the CIT; and Technical Services workspaces.

Began planning for new library facility on CISAT campus. Blackboard became a mission-critical system and an integral part of

teaching at JMU. Enterprise-level Blackboard software was purchased.

Fifty percent of general classrooms and classroom labs attain Technology Classroom status.

Library acquired streaming media services and licenses for c. 1,000 videos.

15

FY 2005 CIT released MDID2 as open source software, launching a large scale open source program to the international community.

Online streaming video project began, with access through MDID database and LEO.

Another $500,000 increase to materials budget. Monograph purchases increase 22 percent. 31 new databases added; databases account for 30 percent of materials budget.

Technical and Digital Services launched a major redesign of the LEO Library Catalog web interface.

Technical Services implemented Innovative Interfaces Electronic Resource Management.

Instituted round-the-clock library hours during finals week in fall 2004 semester.

Began usability testing for LEO and library web. Development of "InfoApp" and "StaffDir," ASP.NET database

applications for news announcements, featured connections, FAQs, and the staff directory.

The timetable for the new library facility updated to an estimated completion date of 2008.

L&ET staff partner with the IT unit on researching the purchase and development of a campus content management system and web portal.

Implementation of eVA, the new procurement system mandated statewide to track all purchases made within the Commonwealth of Virginia.

FY 2006 Classroom Technology increased staff support for technology classrooms during evening hours.

Seventy-three (73) summer online courses were generated from the Summer Online Institute.

The new library project went out for bid on construction. Digital Services launched comprehensive library web redesign with

new web applications facilitating contributions from staff. Materials budget increased 14% over the previous year; this was the

fourth consecutive year of budget increases. 50 new research databases added. Library conducted its third LibQUAL+ survey. Preparations were made to the Juvenile Collection for its move to

ETMC in Memorial Hall in July 2006. Library held first three-day Information Literacy Workshop pairing

librarians and teaching faculty on developing assignments. Established L&ET Diversity Council. Donations to the Library from alumni, Friends, and JMU parents,

increased by over $9,000 from the previous year; the Library received two gifts of $10,000.

Library received a grant in excess of $150,000 from the Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS) to develop an interactive game for teaching health information literacy skills to Health Sciences students.

West Campus is approaching “Technology Classroom saturation” with just over 30 rooms remaining without technology.

Memorial Hall technology installation begun for 18 full Technology

16

classrooms, one auditorium tech classroom system, and five classrooms for geology with data projection capability.

Seventy-five percent of general classrooms and classroom labs attain Technology Classroom status.

Implementation of the Small Purchase Charge Card (SPCC) for ordering goods and supplies.

17

V. Mission, Vision, and Values

The Libraries’ Mission, Vision, and Value statements were formulated in 1999 as a result of a recommendation outlined in the JMU Libraries Self Study, which was completed in October 1998. The 1998 Self Study directed JMU Libraries to “revise the Library mission statement to reflect the changing environment” (p. 14). The Library mission statement referenced in the 1998 Self Study had been revised in 1990 and was almost one page long. The 1999 task force, led by Ralph Alberico, approved the following mission, vision, and value statements:

1999 Libraries Mission We connect students and faculty to ideas.  We collect and deliver high quality information that reflects the richness of the curriculum and the many forms by which ideas are conveyed.  We organize and preserve ideas for current and future generations of scholars.  We teach members of our community to make intelligent use of information resources.  We create an environment that promotes intellectual inquiry, exchange of ideas and discovery of knowledge.  We collaborate with colleagues on campus and beyond to ensure open access to information. We participate actively in the intellectual life of the University.  We support academic excellence by offering exceptional services that reflect the mission of James Madison University.

1999 Libraries VisionOur vision is to be recognized as the center of intellectual and academic life at James Madison University. We aspire to be known throughout the region and nation as a responsive, effective, innovative library that is committed to quality.

1999 Libraries ValuesIn support of our mission, we are committed to the following values:

o Excellent service to our community;o Open access to information in pursuit of knowledge;o Flexibility and innovation in meeting challenges;o Effective stewardship of resources;o Commitment to learning and achievement;o Collaboration and open communication;o Diversity in our community, staff, and collection;o Integrity, fairness, humor, and mutual respect in interactions.

Educational Technologies independently wrote and published its mission statement in 2001. The mission statement reads as follows:

2001 Educational Technologies Mission

We promote technologies that enable a learning culture of academic excellence within the James Madison University community. We collaborate with faculty to creatively integrate technology, digital information collections, and educational software with teaching, learning, and the curriculum. Our programs focus on the following areas:

18

Instructional Environment . We plan, design, implement, maintain, support, and manage instructional technology facilities and systems such as technology classrooms, computer labs, media equipment, satellite linking facilities, campus-wide servers, testing services, and distance learning management systems.

Faculty Development Opportunities . We provide training materials, online resources, workshops, consulting, professional development programs, and individual hands-on technology assistance to faculty and instructional support staff. These services focus on the use of facilities, learning resources, and systems for the instructional environment.

Learning Resources . We manage, create, and license digital information collections, campus-wide educational software, and multimedia learning resources in support of academic programs.

Instructional Design and Production . We support the design, implementation, and assessment of creative, experimental, and pedagogically sound instructional modules, courses, and programs. We provide instructional design and instructional technology production support.

Planning, Advocacy and Leadership . We coordinate and participate in technology planning to improve the educational environment for the entire JMU community. We collaborate with campus colleagues to provide leadership for teaching and learning initiatives. We research and promote new educational technologies that will benefit the JMU community. We publicize and promote educational technology resources and support on campus.

New Mission, Vision and Values Statements

As part of the 2006-2007 Strategic Planning process, nine members of L&ET, working under the guidance of Dr. Philip Dubose, formed a focus group in September 2006 to review and revise L&ET’s Mission, Vision, and Value statements. Four members of the focus group were selected from the Strategic Planning Team; five members were selected from within L&ET but external to the Team. Dr. DuBose is a Professor of Management and the Associate Dean of the College of Business. As a member of the Madison Commission Steering Committee, Dr. DuBose helped review and modify JMU’s Mission, Vision, and Value statements.

In September and October, the focus group met several times with Dr. DuBose. The group agreed early in the process that L&ET should have a single mission, vision, and value statement. The group worked individually and as a group with Dr. DuBose’s guidance to select key concepts and words reflecting the organization.

To date, the Mission-Vision-Values group members have agreed on a mission statement and a values statement. They are in the final stages of coming to agreement on a vision statement. The group plans to complete this process in January, 2007 and review these statements with the entire organization and the External Review Team.

19

VI. Goals and Objectives

After developing the mission, vision, and values in 1999, the Library established its goals and objectives for its Strategic Plan. Developed around the mission of connecting students and faculty to ideas, ten goals reflected the importance of people, ideas, and the technologies of connection. The goals were edited to their present form in FY 2003 (Appendix A).

The Educational Technologies Strategic Plan was developed in 2001 with goals and objectives. Goals were established for the seven target areas of leadership, planning, marketing, coordination, instructional environment, customer service, and staff development (Appendix B).

For the 2004-2006 biennium, the Library objectives and Educational Technologies objectives were combined under the Library’s goals. Annually the L&ET Dean and Leadership, with participation by all staff and faculty, develop objectives to accomplish for the following fiscal year. Some are selected as priorities for inclusion in the JMU Planning Database. Each of the selected objectives is tied to a University Defining Characteristic (http://centennial.jmu.edu/portfolio/vision_and_goals.shtml). The twenty-nine characteristics are part of the long-range planning process begun in 1998 and expected to be completed by the Centennial Year 2008. The 5 Defining Characteristics that L&ET have pursued most consistently are:

Characteristic 1. The University will strategically select innovative and new academic programs for development and implementation.

Characteristic 5. The University’s strength is in its people and thus, we will invest in both professional development and instructional innovation and excellence.

Characteristic 12. The University will follow a planning process that emphasizes accountability and ties resource allocation and initiatives to the concepts of institutional effectiveness.

Characteristic 19. The University will provide technologies and laboratories that are widely accessible to the entire campus community.

Characteristic 21. The University will provide a high level of service to all members of the JMU community

Assessment or evaluation methods are identified for each objective to measure results. Student information literacy is specifically assessed by the Information Seeking Skills Test (ISST) which must be passed by all first-year students and by information literacy testing given to selected majors. Surveys, including the Continuing Student Survey, Faculty Morale Survey, Technology Survey, and LibQUAL+, provide feedback from the user community. Liaison Annual Reports, Academic Program Reviews, and other data provide feedback for improving collections and services.

While new strategic goals have been drafted by the strategic planning team, the opportunity for organizational feedback has not yet been possible. Forums to review the possible strategic goals will be scheduled in early 2007. The contributions of the

20

External Review Team are also warmly welcomed as a means of identifying appropriate strategic goals and objectives.

21

VII. Environmental Scan

A. External to JMU

This environmental scan highlights external factors with the potential to impact L&ET. It supplements the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Assumptions about the Relevant Future for Research and Academic Librarians and Libraries and the Madison Commission Report (Appendix C).

1. DemographicsDemographic trends cited by the Madison Commission Report and the ACRL Assumptions about the Relevant Future for Research and Academic Librarians and Libraries (http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/aboutacrl/whatisacrl/acrlstratplan/assumptions.pdf) include a shift in the age of university students to include more “non-traditional” students as well as an increase in the numbers of traditional students. Non-traditional can mean older students, students returning after a long absence from formal study, students studying in distance programs, and students participating in certificate and other non-degree opportunities. These trends mean that the Library may need to increase the overall instructional offerings to include diverse media applications and approaches that address differences in learning styles for which instruction is targeted. Adults attending the University for the first time or returning after an absence of several years will find the Library to be quite different and will need more intense assistance with research.

The addition of more part-time and distance students underscores the requirement that users be able to access all resources remotely, easily, and reliably at all times. The suggestion that colleges will enroll more first-generation students also implies a student group with different needs as they attempt to incorporate scholarship into their behavior and values.

For reasons that are unclear, JMU has seen a decrease in the numbers of male students and students majoring in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Employers, however, have expressed a need for employees who have advanced analytical, scientific, and information seeking skills. Increasing the proportion of students studying in STEM areas is a goal of the University, and one that may address the gender ratio as well as the number of international students studying at JMU. An increase in the numbers of international students has the potential to create increased demands for a specific type of library instruction as mentioned above.

2. State and Federal Influences

22

a) State Funding for Higher Education

The 2005 Restructured Higher Education Act renegotiates the relationship between the Commonwealth and the public colleges and universities. Public colleges and universities are eligible for three differentiated levels of increased autonomy, but must meet specific performance goals that address State needs. The goals include improved access to education for underrepresented populations, affordability, academic programs targeted to labor shortages, student retention, continuous review and improvement of academic programs, articulation agreements with all Virginia community colleges, local economic development, partnerships with K-12, and student safety (Couturier, 2006).

Increased autonomy from state funding has the potential to address certain workflow issues particularly the biennial budget cycle and annual budgeting that consolidates the most labor intensive functions of librarians’ jobs within the same four months. However, with it comes the possibility of increased expectations that universities will secure more of their own funding. The Library has been somewhat successful in securing grant funding in recent years; however, if grant seeking is expected to grow, additional positions will be required to assist with the applications, record keeping, and financial reporting, and to cover release/relief time to do the work.

b) Accessibility/ADA Compliance

The Virginia Information Technology Accessibility Standard (2005) establishes accessibility standards so that individuals with special needs can access the same information as any person without disabilities. This act potentially affects many of the sources of information that the library provides over the web, as many products have interfaces that are not ADA compliant, but which offer expanded searching capabilities. There is also the possibility that additional hardware and other adaptive technology will be required for compliance.

c) Intellectual Property

Copyright is an increasingly vital issue in the digital age. The Digital Learning Challenge: Obstacles to Educational Uses of Copyrighted Material in the Digital Age (McGeveran & Fisher, 2006) identifies the following obstacles to educational uses of digital technology: unclear or inadequate provisions for fair and educational use in copyright law; use of “digital rights management” technology to lock down content; difficulties in obtaining rights to use content; and excess caution by gatekeepers, including publishers and educational administrators.

At the present time many of the copyright questions have not been addressed by case law. Until precedents have been established, compliance with existing copyright laws will be ambiguous. Database licensing could become more complex and expensive as content is held more tightly by publishers and authors seeking to protect their profit margins.

The PATRIOT Act is another piece of legislation that touches on core values of libraries. Library records, including circulation and search strategies, have traditionally been considered private and have been protected by libraries. There is concern now that libraries may not be able to continue to protect these and may be required to keep even more data archived.

23

3. Technology

a) Web Discovery Tools

Google, Amazon, and other consumer-driven web services are redefining the discovery-to-delivery process and users’ expectations (OCLC, 2005). Lorcan Dempsey, Chief Strategist at OCLC, sees discovery of materials becoming “disembedded” from the local library catalog or web site, done in a variety of other contexts, and linked back to the library as “a location and availability service” (Dempsey, 2006). An example of this would be the use of the database WorldCat to find material on a specific topic, possibly followed by use of the catalog to confirm whether L&ET owns the item. A similar example of this phenomenon is the use of Google to search the JMU website. This represents a change in traditional means of searching for content that, while offering the appeal of familiar search environments, has major implications for bibliographic access and control.

Search engines like Google and Yahoo are viewed as competitors to databases and catalogs not because they search the same information, but because they are easier to use and seem, to the novice, to provide good enough results. The challenge for libraries then is to meet a set of user expectations for ease of use while providing higher quality results. One area of keen interest is federated searching, whereby users can search across different databases concurrently. Federated searching has the potential to have the ease of use of Google but the quality of information of a proprietary database. Subject headings and cataloguing records, the cornerstones of bibliographic access, stand to lose power as data is manipulated and records homogenized in order to be accessed by a different tool. Regardless of varying opinions on this issue, it is clear that these concepts need to be seriously reviewed and incorporated into more seamless/integrated user-friendly searching of the OPAC and other web resources.

Search providers are also digitizing and acquiring content. Gartner sees the Google and Yahoo digitization projects affecting library collection development, instruction, research, and e-learning in the next ten years unless copyright concerns delay progress (Gartner, 2006).

b) Social Software

In the last 15 years, there has been debate about whether the Internet is a threat or a benefit to the social lives of its users. Some writers feel that the more time spent online means less time spent interacting with other people. Other authors cite the expanded communication potential of the web as a unifying factor. Regardless, it is obvious that technology has changed and expanded the ways in which some humans socialize. In his article “The New Social Enterprise,” Jon Udell states that “Social software can be defined as whatever supports our actual human interaction as we colonize the virtual realm” (Udell, 2004). Examples include social networking sites (e.g. MySpace, Second Life), wikis, blogs, and social bookmarking. In some cases, like the popular Friendster site, technology that was developed to connect customers with products has been adapted to connect people to each other. It is clear that there is a large segment of library users who spend a lot of time in social spaces, and it would behoove libraries to begin to investigate ways of reaching these users.

24

Possible ways of participating in social virtual spaces include advertising and offering reference services in MySpace, including librarian profiles in FaceBook, and even interacting in Second Life. All of these applications would require non-native users (e.g. librarians) to spend time learning a new language and culture. Successful exploitation of the benefits of social networking would require additional positions and time devoted to learning how to work in these milieus.

c) Personal Digital Mobile Devices

The iPod, the cell phone, the personal digital assistant (PDA, Palm Pilot, Pocket PC), the laptop, and the tablet PC are all mobile devices with the potential to both connect users to information and transform user expectations.

Gartner’s Hype Cycle for Higher Education states that “students are the main drivers to access networks with small, personal digital mobile devices” (Gartner, 2006). The 2006 Horizon Report sees cell phones being used to access all kinds of educational content and to participate in online learning activities with the advent of faster networks making data transfer on phones comparable to wireless connections (New Media Consortium, 2006). Clearly students and faculty are becoming nomadic in their study behaviors and expectations. Increased collaboration and cross-discipline study require the maximum use of technology. Mobile devices offer the opportunity to work anywhere, but they also require a robust and highly secure network as well as information provided in formats that are compatible with mobile devices. Developing content for mobile devices will require substantial investments.

d) Internet2

Douglas Van Houweling, CEO of Internet2, states, “The network infrastructure will support a whole new set of applications—immersive collaborative environments, resource-sharing, real-time computation-intensive simulations, HDTV-quality video on demand, and many others that probably can’t even be imagined today. These applications will lead to further fundamental changes in the way we work, the way we learn, the way we entertain, the way we govern, and the way we live” (Talbot, 2005). User expectations in the technology realm tend to be market driven, with younger populations having a disproportionate effect on the overall market.

Because it is so difficult to anticipate how Internet2 will change libraries and educational technologies, the characteristics most important to cultivate are flexibility and creativity. These characteristics are nurtured by creating a culture where people have the freedom to collaborate, to experiment, and most importantly, to fail. This freedom comes only when staffing levels are appropriate, thus allowing staff to expend some intellectual effort on figuring out how to adapt and innovate.

4. Scholarship and the Information Marketplace

a) Changes in the Information Marketplace

Libraries face the challenge of subscribing to, rather than buying, many of our resources. In today’s changing information marketplace, library journal and database vendors are

25

experimenting with different pricing and licensing models, which has both positive and negative implications for libraries’ budgets and collections. Even when libraries “win,” the changes in vendors’ arrangements usually have confusing implications for our patrons. Perhaps the most critical issue is that subscription resources are much less interconnected than the public Web and must be marketed and promoted if they are to be “found.”

b) Changing Scholarly Process and Communication Crisis

Traditional scholarly communication was premised on the fact that dissemination of research was slow. Today, after the research has been conducted, it can be disseminated around the world in a matter of minutes. Impact factors still exist and are still used in some cases to identify appropriate publications, but this scenario no longer describes the main means of keeping up in any field. Thus scholarly communication can be freed from the schedules of publishers. At the same time, however, the values traditionally added by publishers—editing, indexing and abstracting, inclusion in databases, archiving, and promotion—are still an essential part of scholarly communication.

The Internet has been a democratizing factor in scholarly communication. What remains unclear now is how the value added services will be provided. One solution is for universities, scholarly societies, or even libraries to establish and maintain digital open access repositories. These repositories require diligent maintenance and control if they are to act as real alternatives to for-profit publishing, and the means of supporting them has not been standardized.

With open access, authors retain the copyrights to their works and then allow their works to go into publicly accessible archives for free access and distribution. Research funding organizations like the National Institutes of Health are beginning to require researchers to provide an open access version of their research. The policies usually allow an embargo (delay) period of up to one year for the open access version. Since these policies are new, the impact of providing an open access version will slowly emerge but hold the potential to remove price and permission barriers that are part of the current crisis.

Libraries can play a key role in open access. Librarians educate faculty, administrators, and others on the benefits of open access. They promote open access materials by providing links on library web pages and in library catalogs, and by providing access to open access articles along with items from paid resources.

Open source is a related concept wherein computer source code is shared so that applications can be modified. As with publishing, software writers and publishers have traditionally protected source code, making applications like Blackboard difficult to customize. Open source alternatives like Sakai, the course management program developed at MIT, are “free” in the sense that no licensing is required, but significant investments of time and talent are required to maintain them.

B. Internal to JMU

26

To survey the current state of JMU, information was gathered from many internal sources including the deans of each college, the provost, numerous university publications and reports, and various upper-level administrators. Factors influencing the future of the University and L&ET fell into five broad categories: student enrollment growth, programmatic growth, evolving faculty research needs, technology issues, and outreach. Each of these factors has implications for L&ET services.

1. Student EnrollmentAccording to the JMU Institutional Research Qwik Enrollment Summaries, student populations have increased from FY 2001 to FY 2006. The largest percentage increase is in the graduate student population, which increased from 609 to 1067, a 75% increase. The Provost remarked that JMU intends to protect its reputation and practice as a primarily undergraduate university, with targeted graduate enrollment of 10% of student enrollment. Although the undergraduate population had the largest increase in terms of raw numbers, the undergraduate student body has only increased 10.6% from 13,824 to 15,287.

Growth in the JMU student population is difficult to predict. There is ongoing and significant pressure for the University to increase its enrollment, particularly from alumni and in-state students. Currently, JMU has over 20,000 applicants for fewer than 4,000 freshman seats. That the college-aged population will be larger in five years than it was five years ago is commonly accepted. Though the growth pattern is unclear, estimates range upwards to 22,000 FTE. Clearly increases of this magnitude present challenges for all university services. Effects on L&ET range from increased demands on bandwidth as more students need to access Blackboard and other resources from remote locations, increased costs for subscription resources which are negotiated based on FTE enrollment, and increased L&ET services for faculty and students.

Strategies for increasing enrollment include accepting more transfer students, offering more distance learning opportunities, and increasing outreach and continuing education programs,. Transfer students who enter with an associate’s degree from a community college or who simply transfer from another four-year institution come with unique needs. They generally do not complete the General Education program that native JMU students do, thus they enter their junior year with a wide variety of experiences, and far less familiarity with the JMU community and the support it offers.

Offering more online learning courses would strain current resources in L&ET. Distance education requires different production tools to bring the instruction online, and these tools all require hardware, software, and technical support offered by L&ET. The “relief” expected from offering courses online does not extend to relief on the demands of faculty. Online courses require as much and often more time as classes taught in person. Depending on the nature of the program and the students it attracts, students participating in online education require different kinds of assistance from their professors, Ed Tech staff, librarians, and technical support staff. It will be important to remember that any extension of current offerings into virtual space will likely demand greater initial investments of time and financial resources, even if these programs are expected to be self-supporting eventually.

Outreach and continuing education programs offer the potential to reach part-time or non-traditional students. The current enrollment is small but it has the potential to increase over the next few years.

27

2. Programmatic ExpansionThe Madison Commission noted that there will continue to be a concerted effort to establish graduate programs “of distinction,” which implies that while JMU will have relatively few and small graduate programs, those that it does have will require the highest caliber of support. Programs of distinction will be marked by an “innovative or cutting edge” approach that qualifies them for national and international recognition, and they must meet a demonstrated need in the state. The viability of such programs is defined by many factors, including appropriate resources and infrastructure, which will include technology and library resources. Therefore, programs of distinction, while smaller in size, have the potential to demand disproportionate library attention.

The areas of programmatic expansion will be primarily in STEM areas. Predicted enrollment by 2016 is 25% health sciences, 10% education, 25% STEM, 20% business, and 20% arts and humanities. This projection has the potential to impact L&ET in a number of ways. Several college deans noted an increased need for complex datasets to support the research and teaching in growing departments. Examples of complex datasets include the human genome, various census datasets, and business datasets costing tens of thousands of dollars to acquire and support. These kinds of information sources represent a unique demand, one that the current library collection development policy does not address. In addition, cross-disciplinary collaboration is predicted to increase for both students and faculty.

The development of an engineering program at JMU would also require a liaison librarian with specialized skills. This begs the question of what the salary requirements would be for future liaisons if they are expected to possess skills that generally garner higher salaries in the private sector.

3. FundingOne of JMU’s areas of emphasis over the next six years is diversifying the funding stream in an effort to decrease its dependence on state monies. This points toward research and scholarship as anticipated areas of growth, with a growing emphasis being placed on externally funded research. The Provost mentioned that the University will begin to explore intellectual property as a revenue stream for the University. If the University is successful in recruiting research faculty of distinction, it is likely that they will bring increased demands on library materials, particularly in the area of electronic journals, which comprise the largest expenditure of the materials budget. STEM journals have historically been the most expensive, with subscriptions to individual titles costing tens of thousands of dollars.

4. Faculty and InstructionThe faculty population will continue to grow as the student population grows. According to the JMU Institutional Research Qwik Enrollment Summaries, the number of faculty increased from 934 in FY 2001 to 1,448 in FY 2006, a 55% increase. Currently JMU has some challenges recruiting and retaining younger faculty, while the retirement-age faculty continue to leave through attrition.

Several college deans mentioned the expectation that incoming faculty be comfortable teaching online and “hybrid” classes. This represents a challenge in terms of providing

28

appropriate software and hardware support, training users, and adapting the existing library instruction program to meet the need of online students. The University is actively exploring “hybrid” classes both to alleviate overcrowding of the physical facilities and to expand its outreach and continuing education offerings.

Hybrid classes are only one way that the use of technology as an essential tool for teaching and learning will continue. The University has put a wireless infrastructure in place throughout campus and particularly the library. This represents numerous security issues, including the requirement that users download software in order to access the network. There seems to be an operating assumption on campus that students are completely comfortable and competent in using computers. This opinion is not widely shared among librarians and staff, many of whom have had experience trying to help students and have seen computers act as obstacles rather than enablers.

It seems likely that the University will continue to expand geographically and virtually. It is vital that approaches to growth that hinge on technology and distance students include sufficient staffing of all kinds, from the teachers and instructional designers to the support staff and librarians. Rather than solving the problem of overcrowding, the adoption of distance models for education increase the need for staff and faculty. Many speakers mentioned that the University will begin to increase its international presence and global awareness. This is only possible with a robust infrastructure in place.

5. Lifelong Learning and AccessThere is a concerted effort at the University to continue its relationship with alumni. Not only do alumni represent potential future donors, but they also have continuing education needs. One benefit that has begun to emerge in academia is allowing alumni to continue to access some library resources after their separation from the University. Currently this practice is limited or prohibited by database licensing agreements and subscriptions. Extending these resources could fortify the University’s relationship with its alumni, but also has the potential to require new funding.

29

VIII. Organization and People Since most of this self study tries to examine themes across the entire organization, this section begins with a presentation of L&ET departments and the organizational chart.  Structures such as the liaison program, which defy organizational lines and departments, are also described.  It provides a comprehensive survey of committees and communications across the organization as well as partnerships with other groups on campus and within the state of Virginia. A section on personnel presents the types of positions within L&ET, the number and qualifications of people within those roles, and information about professional development opportunities. Finally, a section on the L&ET budget provides a financial overview. Key findings about the organization and personnel are included at the end of this section (Section VII).

A. Organizational Structure

The Libraries and the Educational Technologies organizations were officially merged in 1998 and the new organization officially named Libraries & Educational Technologies. While not unheard of, this combination is unusual in institutions of higher education at this time.

Most people are familiar with some if not all services that libraries offer. They are less familiar with services offered by educational technologies. In the L&ET organization, Educational Technologies include the Center for Instructional Technology (CIT), Distributed and Distant Learning Services (DDLS), and Classroom Technology. CIT works with faculty to develop the skills necessary for pedagogically-sound application of instructional technology. DDLS provides the technologies and services for online learning including JMU online courses. Classroom Technology installs and supports instructional computing systems in classrooms across the campus.

The 2006 organizational chart shows that, functionally, L&ET is divided into a total of six primary divisions: Administration; Media Resources and Classroom Technology; CIT and DDLS; Library Public Services; Technical Services; and Music Library (Appendix D). The Dean of L&ET leads the entire organization and reports to the University Provost in Academic Affairs. Four directors lead one or more of the six primary units and report to the Dean. (See Figure 1 for a simplified version of the chart.)

30

Figure 1: L&ET Functional Organizational Chart

Several departments reside within these larger divisions of the organization. It is at this level where the real work of L&ET occurs. These departments are briefly described below (in alphabetical order).

Acquisitions ensures the timely ordering and receipt of tangible, monographic materials such as books, videos, and DVDs. Materials are received via approval plans and firm orders.

Administration is responsible for budget planning and management, fiscal control, procurement, travel administration, building maintenance, project coordination, facilities scheduling, personnel administration, fund raising, statistical reporting and analysis, official communication, and records management.

Cataloging focuses on providing patrons with quality-based bibliographic access to materials and selected electronic resources via LEO Library Catalog.  The unit provides descriptive and subject analysis of books and materials in special formats. The unit also collaborates on the regional and local level to provide bibliographic access for specialized project-oriented collections (e.g., MDID2 Photography Image Database).

The Center for Instructional Technology (CIT), an educational technologies unit, provides direction, visibility, and proactive support for the pedagogically-sound use and innovation of technology in instruction. Instructional faculty members are its primary customers. The CIT provides group training, individual consultation, walk-in lab services, immersion learning experiences, research and development services, and technical and system support. Staff often collaborate with Liaison Librarians, Classroom Technology staff, and others within L&ET to work on projects, support ongoing initiatives, conduct research, and present at meetings and conferences.

Circulation Services provides assistance at the circulation desk, circulates materials according to established policies, maintains the circulation system, processes materials for course reserves, manages the library delivery service, and opens and closes the building. It is also responsible for keeping the book, periodical, and microform collections accessible, secure, and in good order.

Classroom Technology Services plans, designs, integrates, supports, and maintains educational technology throughout the campus. It provides infrastructure needed to support cutting-edge applications in new facilities and in renovation situations. Classroom Technology Services provides faculty and students with technology in the classroom that meets teaching needs and enhances the learning experience. In these activities the Classroom Technology staff work closely with Information Technology (IT) Lab Services and with CIT and Libraries staff as necessary. On east campus staff members are part of IT’s Technical Support East Campus (TSEC) unit.

Digital Services focuses on the evaluation, development, management, and use of technology by both researchers and L&ET staff. In support of researchers, the department is responsible for most of the L&ET website, licensed research databases, e-mail reference service, and public workstations and printing. In

support of the L&ET staff, the department is responsible for library staff workstations and computing, the StaffWeb intranet, library servers, web programming, and usability testing. Additionally, individuals in the department make significant contributions to outreach including reference, liaison duties, exhibits, and campus-wide informational fairs.

Distributed and Distance Learning Services (DDLS) coordinates the implementation, management, and support of core learning technologies, such as collaborative and course management systems that enable faculty and students to communicate outside the classroom through both synchronous and asynchronous modes of interaction. In collaboration with IT, DDLS supports the mission critical infrastructure for distributed and online teaching and learning systems. It also serves as point of contact and communication for individual faculty and academic units that are either interested in developing or planning implementations of technology-assisted instruction.

Educational Technologies include the CIT, which works with faculty to develop the skills necessary for pedagogically-sound application of instructional technology; DDLS, which provides the technologies and services for online learning including JMU online courses; and Media Resources, which installs and supports classroom technology across the campus.

The Information Literacy Program collaborates with teaching faculty to develop information literate students. Program activities include teaching course-related sessions, working with faculty to integrate information literacy into curriculum and course objectives, developing online instructional resources like Go for the Gold and CheckCite, assessing student information literacy skills, providing professional development opportunities for librarians and faculty, and managing library teaching facilities.

Interlibrary Loan (ILL) provides access to materials not owned by the Library to faculty, staff, students, and affiliates.  ILL provides electronic and print copies from journals, book chapters, and reports, and also borrows books, microforms, audiovisual items, theses and dissertations, and other materials from lending libraries.

Media Resources offers services across the L&ET organization. The Media Resources Center in Carrier Library develops non-print media collections (including online video) and the services related to their use. This function involves cooperation with the Libraries and with CIT/DDLS to implement them. The MR Equipment Loans office (temporarily located in Carrier Library) provides portable media and computing equipment that serves several broad purposes: (1) complementing instructional equipment installed in classrooms, (2) supporting curricular student projects, (3) supporting faculty and staff presenting off-campus at conferences, etc., and (4) supporting occasional campus events normally managed by JMU Events & Conferences. The Equipment Loans office is also the “call center” for the support of the Tech Classrooms.

The Music Library supports the unique needs of music scholarship and materials of the University and primarily the School of Music. It provides reference, media playback, circulation, reserve, maintain several special

collections, provide Midi lab support, and equipment loan. Music Library staff digitize, catalog, bind, and preserve all formats. Additionally, staff supports much of the technology in the School of Music.

Preservation is responsible for quality conservation treatment of traditional library materials as well as unique manuscript/archival materials. Paper-based materials are repaired in-house and/or outsourced for re-binding as needed. Preservation awareness is promoted throughout the organization.

Processing handles the physical preparation of physical items for shelving and circulation, including affixing barcodes, stamping with a property stamp, inserting security strip, attaching barcodes to records in Millennium, and labeling items with call numbers.

Reference provides direct professional assistance to students, faculty, staff, and others in the location, use, and evaluation of information resources. Interactions include consultations that take place at the reference desk, over the telephone, or through e-mail. It also develops the reference collection and employs appropriate technology to access to information.

Serials manages journal subscriptions, standing orders, and other materials requiring annual fees, including licensing, ordering, cataloging, and payment. The unit administers several library management systems, including LEO Library Catalog, link resolver, and periodical locator. The unit compiles inventory, financial, usage, and other data for the library collections.

Special Collections serves as the repository for rare, irreplaceable, unique, or otherwise valuable materials on the central Shenandoah Valley that need restricted handling to assure their long-term availability for use. Special Collections provides internship opportunities for students interested in various aspects of public history.

Focus group results and other data indicate that individuals internal and external to the organization are confused or puzzled by the L&ET organizational structure. The organizational web site (http://www.lib.jmu.edu/staffdir/) presents five primary divisions: Administration, Educational Technologies, Public Services, Systems, and Technical Services. In this configuration, the Music Library is included in the Public Services division instead of existing as its own division. The Educational Technologies division, which is not reflected in the organizational chart at all, includes the Classroom Technology unit and the CIT/DDLS unit; two different directors supervise the unit.

In addition, the identity of the Educational Technologies division within the L&ET organization and the relationships among the Ed Tech units are ambiguous. The following conditions reflect that ambiguity: 1) the Educational Technologies division is not recognized in the official organizational chart, 2) the division is directed by two different division heads, 3) the two units of that division (Classroom Technology and CIT/DDLS) have not met as a group since 2001, 4) Classroom Technology on East Campus is also a part of Technical Support-East Campus (TS-EC) which includes IT, and 5) the Classroom Technology web site resides within the L&ET web site while the CIT and DDLS web sites do not. Some external focus group participants questioned

whether educational technology services should even exist within the library system. For example, one individual suggested that Educational Technologies should be in its own division or associated with Information Technology.

The relationship of the CIT and the DDLS units is also unclear. Some individuals, both internal and external to L&ET, perceive that the two entities are completely separate departments. This perception may be encouraged by the units’ separate web presences (http://cit.jmu.edu and http://ddls.jmu.edu).

Despite the lack of clear organizational lines and certainty of “fit,” the internal focus group results reflect a positive working relationship across what have traditionally been perceived as the two “sides” of the organization—Libraries and Educational Technologies. Many Library staff members stated that they appreciate and use Educational Technologies services, collaborate (formally and informally) with Educational Technologies staff on a variety of projects, and see currently untapped potential for collaboration (for example, some suggested that there are opportunities for collaborative outreach and faculty development efforts between Educational Technologies staff and Liaison Librarians). Others suggested that a closer working relationship between the Library’s system group and CIT software engineers would allow the entire organization to leverage the enormous technology resources available.

Library Liaison ProgramThe purpose of the Library Liaison Program is to ensure that library services and collections meet the needs of students and faculty in all academic departments. It is not a discrete organizational unit within the library but a service model overlaid on the library functional organization. As illustrated in Figure 2, the Liaison Librarians do not necessarily report to the same supervisor. Except for the Director of Media Resources and Classroom Technology, the Director of Public Services and Instructional Technology, and the Director of Technical Services, all librarians are expected to serve as a liaison.

Figure 2: L&ET Organizational Chart: Liaison Reporting Structure

There are several organizational roles related to the liaison program.

The Liaison Program Coordinator is the Director of Public Services and Instructional Technology, and is responsible for making liaison assignments. The position also solicits liaison performance evaluations from the faculty in the departments, assesses the performance of each liaison, and sends the evaluation to the appropriate supervisors.

The Library Instruction Coordinator reports to the Liaison Program Coordinator and has no supervisory responsibilities. The position is responsible for maintaining Go for the Gold and the ISST (420-item test bank), keeping instruction statistics, coordinating scheduling of the classroom, providing leadership for the program, and organizing development opportunities. In addition, the Coordinator serves as the Liaison Librarian to Psychology and works on the Reference Desk.

The Acquisitions/Collections Librarian reports to the Director of Technical Services, and directly supervises the acquisitions unit but no liaison librarians. The position provides leadership for collection development and assessment, acquisitions, and preservation, including coordinating the library’s approval plan.

1. Standing CommitteesA significant amount of work is conducted in cross-functional and cross-departmental committees. The L&ET organization currently has ten standing committees: Collection Development, Leadership Group, Library Faculty, Personnel Advisory Committee, Library Faculty Hearing, Diversity Committee, Preservation Committee, Staff Association, Staff Development, and Travel. Most of these committees are very Library-centric although the Staff Association has in some years included an Educational Technologies representative. Furthermore, in September 2004, the L&ET Dean invited two Educational Technologies leaders (the Coordinator for Distributed and Distance Learning and the Manager of Faculty Development Services) to join the Leadership Group. The Dean currently intends to invite all faculty members from the L&ET areas of the organization to meet regularly with the Library Faculty, a group traditionally comprised only of professional librarians.

Standing committees are comprised of 3 to 22 members and meet on an as-needed basis, one time per year, once per month, or twice per month. Each is governed by a mission statement. See Appendix E or http://staffweb.lib.jmu.edu/administration/ for a complete description of each committee, including the current membership of each.

2. CommunicationL&ET makes use of several communication mechanisms. These are described below.

a) Internal Communication Mechanisms

StaffWebL&ET policies and procedures, a staff directory, phone and e-mail lists, committee lists, and information related to specific areas of the organization are available to L&ET faculty and staff through the StaffWeb web site (http://staffweb.lib.jmu.edu/). While much of the site is unadvertised but accessible to the public, several areas require a login (e.g.,

Committee Assignments, phone and e-mail lists, and the Library wiki). Historically, several individuals within L&ET contribute to and maintain the information on the site. In the last year, this responsibility has shifted to the Digital Services unit.

MeetingsMany L&ET units and subgroups of various individuals meet on a regular basis. For example, the Leadership Team meets the last Tuesday of every month, the Liaison Librarians meet the second and fourth Tuesdays of every month, and the CIT staff hold monthly staff meetings. Standing and ad hoc committees, task forces, teams, and unit heads also meet. Supervisors are encouraged to meet regularly with individual direct reports. Since 1999, the CIT had been using a group calendaring system (MeetingMaker©); in 2006, the University and the entire L&ET organization adopted the Oracle calendaring system, which has streamlined the process of scheduling meetings.

Some groups (e.g., Library Faculty, Reference, and the Collection Development Committee) regularly post meeting minutes on the StaffWeb web site. Some departments or units distribute minutes to group members only.

E-mailAll L&ET members are expected to use e-mail to send and receive information related to normal organizational operations. E-mail is also used to distribute announcements related to individual departments, L&ET, JMU, and the Commonwealth.

News DigestThe Assistant to the Dean recently implemented a weekly e-mail News Digest to all L&ET members. These Digests contain “news items gathered from announcements, e-mails, minutes, and updates from supervisors and team leaders.” The Digests are archived on the StaffWeb and can therefore serve as an historical record.

Dean’s CoffeeEvery other month the Dean schedules a Dean’s Coffee for all L&ET faculty and staff. This bi-monthly event is used to introduce new employees, say farewell to those who plan to leave, and celebrate other events. Food and beverages are served.

State of the Library AddressIn late August, before the start of each new academic year, the Dean invites all L&ET faculty and staff to a State of the Library event. During this event, he briefly summarizes recent L&ET accomplishments and activities and then shares his vision for the upcoming year.

L&ET ShowcaseIn early January of each year, the Dean invites all faculty and staff to attend the L&ET Showcase. The purpose of this event is to showcase current L&ET projects and initiatives. Individuals associated with those projects and initiatives are invited to present.

CollaborationOne question asked by the internal focus group facilitators was, “How do you collaborate with colleagues from libraries, educational technologies and media resources?” Responses to this question suggest that more collaboration may occur among the

departments involved in direct services to the user. Other observations about collaboration included:

collaboration is sometimes based on friendships among people within L&ET; collaboration occurs when a problem has been identified; the organization does not engage in collaborative planning, especially outside of the

established work group; collaboration always takes more time, but is used when other people’s skills are

needed.

b) External Communication Mechanisms

The Knowledge EdgeIn the fall of 2000, the Dean’s office published the first online newsletter “by and about James Madison University Libraries” (http://www.lib.jmu.edu/edge/). The intent of this online publication is to inform the general JMU community and the internal community about issues of interest.

Exhibits in Carrier LibraryA staff member in Digital Services works with others across campus to present visually compelling exhibits in the Carrier Library lobby and reference area, often highlighting JMU research, unusual programs, and student projects, as well as library materials and services.  The exhibits rotate on a quasi-monthly basis, with 14 exhibits being shown in FY 2006. 

Informational Fairs Staff members from both CIT and L&ET participate in numerous informational fairs held throughout the year.  As an example, in FY 2006, Digital Services participated in 10 orientation sessions for new students and related functions. The CIT participates in New Faculty Orientation at the beginning of every academic year.

L&ET WebsitesThe L&ET web site is an omnibus vehicle for promoting virtually any and all aspects of the organization. Most of the L&ET web site features database-driven "News" and "Featured Connections" sections to which users can subscribe via RSS.  Library staff has the ability to create items for pages they maintain and to "subscribe" to items that another may have created.  So far, approximately 10 library staff members are actively contributing to the database.  Each library's web site (CISAT, Music, Carrier) has designated staff members to determine which News items appear on the front pages.  The CIT web site does not yet share this application, but does provide database-driven promotional content such as announcements and workshop schedules.

Bulk E-mailSeveral individuals use JMU's bulk e-mail system to announce important events to students and faculty.  Such e-mails have been used to announce CIT workshops, new library databases, and major library events such as the East Campus Library building.

Print MaterialsSeveral printed publications feature library databases on a regular basis.  JMU Dining Services provides table tents in the dining halls to which the Library submits a short

advertisement for one or more research databases.  The Library has also been developing and distributing postcard announcements to faculty promoting research databases, generally on a department-by-department basis.

Library LiaisonsAny list of external communication with the library community needs to include the work that library liaisons do in promoting the library to academic departments and programs.  While every liaison chooses different channels, activities might include attending departmental meetings, sending e-mails to their department, promoting the library during instructional sessions, and distributing flyers or other print materials.  Some library liaisons also promote the work of CIT as part of their role; however, this practice is probably inconsistent.

WorkshopsThe CIT promotes L&ET services through its numerous workshops and other faculty development events held throughout the calendar year. Some events are accomplished through collaboration with other organizations. The CIT regularly distributes fliers and email messages to faculty to promote workshop schedules and services.

Library faculty and staff often conduct workshops or classes that promote the library to other groups than their assigned liaison program.  Several librarians participated in this year's Center for Faculty Innovation workshop series; some make presentations to programs or campus groups, from Residence Life programs to meetings of the Academic Deans.

3. PartnershipsL&ET has established strong partnerships with various organizations internal and external to the University. Those partnerships are described below (in alphabetical order).

Center for Assessment and Research Studies (CARS)The partnership between the Library and Center for Assessment and Research Studies (CARS) spans nearly two decades. The focus of collaboration has been assessment of information literacy in General Education and in the major. CARS assessment specialists and librarians, in consultation with General Education faculty, developed the Information-Seeking Skills Test (ISST) that all first-year General Education students are required to pass. This test has gained national recognition. Many institutions looking for a way to assess information literacy skills have asked to use the ISST. JMU has not been able to share it because it is a “high stakes” test and must be kept secure. Responding to this need, the Library and CARS developed a test called the Information Literacy Test (ILT) that is now commercially available (Appendix F). This instrument has been shown to be a reliable measure of ACRL Information Literacy Standards 1, 2, 3, and 5. The Virginia Community College System and several other institutions across the country have used this instrument. Funds generated by the ILT are split between CARS and the Library.

Center for Faculty Innovation (CFI) The CFI is a faculty-driven endeavor that resides within Academic Affairs. Its mission is to provide “support for faculty in their multidimensional roles” (http://www.jmu.edu/cfi/). L&ET has developed a strong collaborative relationship with the CFI and through that

relationship is touching more faculty than ever before. It participates in the CFI’s New Faculty Orientation each year, facilitates workshops in the CFI faculty workshop series, co-sponsors the annual Information Literacy for Teaching and Learning workshop for faculty, co-facilitates the CFI’s annual Madison Teaching Fellows groups involved in the study of instructional technology, and oversees the development and maintenance of the CFI web site. The CFI center will be co-located with the CIT on the fifth floor of the new library building, slated to open in 2008.

In addition, liaison librarians and assessment specialists have collaborated to develop information literacy tests in over a dozen majors. Data from these assessments have been useful to help focus library instruction to improve student learning.

DevelopmentFundraising is a collaborative partnership between the JMU Development Office and the academic and administrative leadership. L&ET is working closely with Development to develop an effective fundraising plan, and has identified several projects at the level of $25,000 or more. Projects include Student and Information Technology Assistants Program, Usability Testing Center, and Faculty Development support for innovative use of technology in teaching and learning.

Electronic Campus of Virginia (ECVA)The ECVA is a cooperative instructional technology initiative among the Commonwealth’s public and private colleges and universities. Institutional representatives of the Electronic Campus meet bi-monthly in Richmond to discuss collaborative approaches to issues of common interest concerning e-learning activities at their respective campuses. The ECVA also works closely with the State Council of Higher Education of Virginia (SCHEV) as an advisory group providing strategic planning for state-wide educational technologies initiatives. In addition to its role as a consultative and advisory body, the ECVA drafts white papers on emerging trends, policies, and resource sharing, and regularly hosts regional and state-wide conferences that bring representative of state government, education, business, and the public together to discuss how instructional technologies can better serve students’ educational needs. In 2005, ECVA convened a state-wide conference, “What’s next for Virginia’s E-Learning Environment?” The ECVA web site also provides students with a marketplace for online courses: a "one-stop" access to learning in a distributed environment that meets their needs for convenient and high quality undergraduate, graduate and professional, and continuing education.

JMU has been an active member of the ECVA since its inception in 1999. Educational Technologies staff members currently serve as members of the Learning Technologies Advisory Committee (LTAC), a SCHEV-sponsored strategic planning group. JMU has also hosted an ECVA Retreat in 2001. Jim Mazoué, JMU Distributed and Distance Learning Coordinator, served as Chair of ECVA from 2004 to 2006.

General EducationAnother critical partnership exists between L&ET and the JMU General Education program. Perhaps the most visible aspect of this partnership is the relationship with Cluster One: Skills for the 21st Century, the part of the General Education program that emphasizes critical thinking, written communication, and oral communication.

Information literacy is one of five key objectives for Cluster One and basic information skills are emphasized throughout the entire General Education curriculum.

Responsibility for integrating information literacy with the General Education curriculum is shared among librarians and General Education faculty. The two groups work closely to develop assignments, classroom experiences and support materials such as the Go for the Gold online tutorial, in order to ensure that students learn the skills needed by educated citizens and that students are able to demonstrate competency in those skills. All JMU students are required to participate in the General Education program and each student must pass the Information Seeking Skills Test (ISST) an instrument developed by the library in collaboration with CARS and General Education.

Librarians serve on the Cluster One committee and General Education Council and work closely with General Education faculty and administrators on projects such as workshops on effective assignments, out-of-class educational events for students, and a JMU Honor Code tutorial. Instructional technologists also help to support the General Education program by working with faculty to incorporate technology in their teaching and by managing systems that are heavily used in General Education. One notable example is the Summer Online Institute and other programs to help faculty develop online General Education courses offered during the summer as a way of addressing bottlenecks caused by high demand for those courses.

Information Technology (IT)L&ET has a close partnership with the central campus Information Technology organization. L&ET depends on the central IT organization for support and standards related to technology infrastructure: networks, security, server management, and utilities such as e-mail.  In addition, leaders from both areas work hard to make sure both organizations are moving in the same strategic directions.  For instance, an annual campus "Technology Satisfaction Survey" is jointly administered by IT and L&ET.

There are numerous established communication channels to coordinate technology planning and services:

Regular breakfast meeting between Dean of L&ET and the AVP for IT. Regular joint meeting of IT and L&ET technology directors. Media Resources and IT jointly organize the Labs and Tech Classroom Advisory

Group. Blackboard System Group including CIT and IT staff communicates regularly

through e-mail and meets at least once a semester. L&ET staff members participate in the IT Technology Coordinators group.

L&ET and IT also frequently collaborate on projects.  Sometimes these are large technology projects like the Campus Portal Project; other times individual staff members are asked to work on small projects or task forces together.  For example, L&ET staff have participated on program review teams in IT and participated in IT projects like responding to state requirements for technology accessibility.  IT staff have participated in L&ET technology projects such as the original streaming technology task force. L&ET and IT collaborate on an annual Technology Satisfaction Survey, which measures student and faculty/staff satisfaction with classroom technology, Blackboard, and other services.

Outreach

The University is beginning to make a significant investment in outreach programs that promises to expand the number of continuing education and distance education offerings while diversifying revenue streams. This commitment also represents an opportunity to continue the University’s relationship with its alumni and strengthen its goal of preparing students to be lifelong learners. Outreach programs currently emphasize teacher education but also include online graduate programs in areas like nursing as well as certification and continuing education programs in many other fields. As this effort grows, it is vital that L&ET maintain an active and responsive relationship with the College of Graduate and Outreach Programs. The responsibility and expertise for maintaining the online learning systems and support services, which are critical to outreach programs, lie with Educational Technologies and to a lesser extent with campus IT. More importantly perhaps, DDLS offers technology support and instructional design services aimed at helping faculty offer distance education. Finally, the Library faculty has particular talents that lend themselves to online education.

ProcurementProcurement assists L&ET in the acquisition of equipment, supplies, library materials, computer hardware, software, systems, and other items according to State and University guidelines. L&ET staff often request price quotes, place orders, and enter purchases into the Virginia procurement system, eVA, for these items. However, Procurement provides guidance in ensuring that purchases are entered into eVA correctly and that audit trails are properly maintained. In addition, Procurement staff issue Requests for Proposals, interpret state contracts, and work with L&ET staff to negotiate and execute licenses and contracts for information resources, software, and systems.

VIVA (Virtual Library of Virginia)VIVA (http://www.vivalib.org/factsheet.html) is the consortium of the nonprofit academic libraries within the Commonwealth of Virginia. Funding comes directly from the Virginia General Assembly and is augmented by the local institutional library budgets and some outside grants. VIVA consortial purchasing of electronic resources ensures cost avoidance for member libraries. As a member, JMU users benefit greatly from the resources purchased by VIVA. In addition, member institutions commit to deliver interlibrary loan materials within 48 hours. Several staff members have served or are serving on VIVA committees. JMU Procurement also negotiates licenses and establishes contracts for resources obtained by VIVA.

4. Advisory CouncilsThere are currently no active advisory councils or committees associated with L&ET. Previously existing councils and committees included an L&ET library faculty advisory committee, an L&ET student advisory committee, and a CIT faculty advisory committee.

5. Data Reporting L&ET is responsible for reporting pertinent data to a number of organizations, including the University, IPEDS, and ACLS. The Assistant to the Dean files the official report to many of the agencies. Data is compiled throughout units within L&ET, and it is often

difficult to know what has been compiled and what is being used. Data is often reported within the annual reports of units, but reporting from units is inconsistent. L&ET should evaluate ways to coordinate the collection, develop expertise in data analysis, and coordinate use of management information for decision making.

B. People

1. Employees and PositionsAs of December 1, 2006, L&ET employed 80 full-time and 10 part-time employees, per the Office Coordinator/Human Resources Officer. Total personnel costs for the entire organization increased 20% in the last five years from $3.5 million in FY 2001 to $4.9 million in FY 2006.

Of those in full-time positions, 51 are considered full-time classified staff, 23 are librarian faculty, and six are Administrative/Professional (A/P). Of the librarian faculty, two work under RTA (renewable term contracts), 12 are tenured, and seven are tenure track.1 One works under a yearly/part-time contract. All A/P faculty work under one-year renewable contracts.

In the past five years, L&ET has created several new positions or repurposed existing positions. Specifically, four new librarian positions have been created: an Education Librarian, a Digital Services Librarian, a Science Librarian and, most recently, a Business Librarian position. Other new positions include the Media Training Coordinator position (CIT), an additional Classroom Technology Support position to provide coverage for evening hours (MR), a Blackboard Support Technician (CIT), and the Coordinator of Faculty Training (CIT).

Table 1 provides data from the 2004 Academic Libraries Survey (ALS) compiled by the National Center for Education Statistics indicating that JMU has the lowest number of total library staff reported per 1,000 FTE students compared to all other Virginia public 4-year institutions (Appendix G). ALS Survey data from selected JMU Peer Institutions2 show the same trend (Appendix H). The 2006 survey data are not available. However, even with the addition of new positions since 2004, it is likely that JMU continues to have a low per 1,000 ratio of library staff to FTE students.

1 Virginia law states that academic librarians must have benefits and privileges (e.g., option to earn tenure) similar to instructional faculty.2 JMU Peer Institutions were selected from the list of JMU Faculty Salary Peers based on similar student enrollments (http://oirsacs.jmu.edu/PerfMeasures/peerSize.asp).

Table 1: 2004 Comparison of Total Staff per 1,000 Enrolled (FTE) of VirginiaSource: 2004 Academic Libraries Survey (NCES)

Library Name

Total FTE 12 month

Enrollment

Librarians and Other

Professional Staff

Librarians and Other

Professional Staff Per 1,000 Enrolled (FTE)

All Other Paid Staff

Student Assistants Total Staff

Total Staff Per 1,000 Enrolled

(FTE)UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA 20,766 105 5.03 204 44 352 16.94

COLLEGE OF WILLIAM & MARY 7,235 33 4.49 51 29 113 15.55

VIRGINIA STATE 4,309 9 2.09 14 4 27 13.00UVA - WISE 1,595 5 3.29 7 3 15 9.40

LONGWOOD 3,893 7 1.8 19 9 35 8.99NORFOLK STATE 5,384 8 1.49 17 23 48 8.92GEORGE MASON 20,443 52 2.52 82 37 170 8.32

MARY WASHINGTON 4,071 13 3.07 13 8 34 8.23VIRGINIA MILITARY

INSTITUTE 1,362 6 4.41 9 3 18 6.27VIRGINIA TECH 25,804 126 4.88 0 35 161 6.24

RADFORD 8,699 17 1.95 17 19 53 6.10OLD DOMINION 15,048 21 1.4 48 20 89 5.90

CHRISTOPHER NEWPORT 4,371 7 1.6 12 7 26 5.87VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH 22,564 35 1.55 79 13 126 5.60

JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY 15,362 21 1.39 38 9 68 4.43

The average age for all full-time employees is 45.1 years. The average age for all part-time Library employees is 30.2 years. Since 2000, two faculty members and five staff members have retired. Sixteen faculty and classified staff are 55 years of age or older and therefore may potentially retire sometime within the next 10 years.

2. Classified StaffThe Commonwealth's job organizational structure for classified staff consists of seven Occupational Families divided into Career Groups. Career Groups are composed of Roles (http://www.dhrm.virginia.gov/compensation/jobstructure.html).

Nine different classified staff roles are represented in the L&ET organization.

The Administrative and Office Specialist II performs a wide variety of office/program and administrative support duties based on agency business needs. The range of duties includes, but is not limited to, general office, secretarial, fiscal, and support activities.

The Administrative and Office Specialist III performs entry-level to supervisory level duties which may include compliance assurance, report writing, reconciliation of information or financial data, records management, scheduling, claims review and processing, data collection and analysis, research, inventory, budget management, personnel administration, and funds collections or expenditures.

The Library Specialist I provides assistance in a wide variety of activities in the library, including reference assistance, copy cataloging, stacks maintenance, acquisitions of books, journals, and other materials, maintenance of the government documents collections, and the handling of interlibrary loan requests.

The Library Specialist II has advanced skills in cataloging and archival preservation as well as managerial skills in administering library units, such as Circulation and Interlibrary Loan.

The Financial Services Specialist I performs entry-level to first-line supervisory responsibilities ensuring or evaluating compliance and accountability of financial programs and business operations/processes.

The Information Technology Specialist I applies basic skills in the areas of Applications/Programming, Systems Engineering, Network Analysis, IT Analysis, and Equipment and Applications Specialty.

The Information Technology Specialist II performs more advanced functions in the areas of Applications Programming/Analysis, Network Analysis, and IT Analysis and specialist level positions in Systems Engineering.

The Trainer and Instructor II is responsible for providing a variety of training, instruction, and services to faculty, students, and staff.

The Trainer and Instructor III is responsible for coordinating and determining training or organizational development needs and services for the department and various customer groups.

Pay for classified staff positions is determined by the role and its corresponding pay band. There are nine pay bands in the system. L&ET classified staff are dispersed across four pay bands in the state compensation plan (Table 2). Currently, 43% of classified staff are in pay band 2, 20% in pay band 3, 29% in pay band 4, and 9% in pay band 5. In the last three years, five positions in pay band 4 were added across two departments.

Table 2: L&ET Classified Staff by Pay Band and Role12/01/2006

Pay Band Salary Minimum Roles Number of

Full-timeNumber of Wage*

2 $19,310 Administrative and Office Specialist II 1 33 $23,076 Administrative and Office Specialist III 6 2

Library Specialist I 18 44 $30,146 Financial Services Specialist I 1 0

Information Technology Specialist I 8 1Library Specialist II 8 0Trainer and Instructor II 2 0

5 $39,384 Information Technology Specialist II 6 0  Trainer and Instructor III 1 0

*In addition to these permanent wage positions, there are 5 temporary wage positions

3. Library FacultyMost librarians at JMU are tenure-track faculty; tenure is awarded based on accomplishments as outlined in the Professional Development Document, which was updated in March 2004. Faculty must complete a certain amount of academic scholarship in order to receive promotion and tenure. Examples of academic scholarship include professional contributions to formally-organized panels, forums, debates, and staff seminars; publication of research in national, regional, or state journals; and in-house research that influences services and activities of Carrier Library, e.g. research and proposals leading to a new service, scholarly bibliography, etc.

Scholarly achievement is considered 20% of a librarian’s output for purposes of evaluation. Perhaps more importantly, however, it is one means by which librarians are able to extend their expertise beyond the University and engage in scholarly communication.

Librarians under the renewable term contracts also have a scholarship requirement and are eligible for promotion; they are ineligible for tenure.

4. Administrative/Professional FacultyThe JMU Faculty Recruitment Handbook (2006) states that administrative faculty are required to “perform work directly related to the management of the educational and general activities of JMU, its departments or subdivisions thereof. Incumbents in these positions exercise discretion, independent judgment and generally direct the work of others.” Professional faculty members are required to have “advanced learning and experience acquired by prolonged formal instruction and/or specialized work experience.”

L&ET currently has seven A/P faculty positions (one position currently vacant). All seven of these positions are in jobs related to computer or instructional technology. Five are in the CIT; two are in the Digital Services unit.

While there are no scholarship requirements for these positions, several of the individuals currently in them have contributed significantly to scholarship in their fields. Most have presented at local, state, and national conferences; contributed articles and other publications; and served on local, state, or national committees.

5. Student EmployeesL&ET also hires student assistants. Over the past five years, it has employed approximately 370 students who have worked or work in Carrier Library, the CISAT Library, the Music Library, Media Resources, and the CIT. Two-hundred and sixteen (216) students worked or work in institutional employment positions, and 152 worked or work in federal work study positions.

The number of student assistants has decreased each academic year. Specifically, in the FY 2002, the Library employed 84 student assistants while only 75 student assistants were employed in FY 2006. The decrease in the number of student workers may have been influenced by the elimination of the service desk for closed periodicals.

More students work during the academic year than during the summer months, primarily because fewer students are available during the summer. In some departments, a fewer number of student employees during the summer means that regular staff must perform the work normally performed by those students. Some suggest that summer wage positions, more hours in institutional employment positions, and pay increases for performance would attract a larger pool of student applicants and resolve this issue. For example, the CIT offers 40 hour/week institutional employment positions during the summer for students who are not attending a class; in addition, the CIT regularly raises a student’s hourly rate (usually per semester) if the student’s work performance warrants it. This department has successfully filled summer positions for at least the past three years.

Students perform a variety of tasks in L&ET such as sorting mail, checking in journals, processing interlibrary loan requests, and reshelving books in the stack areas. Some students serve at service points which require good customer service, knowledge of policies and procedures, and a sense of responsibility. Some positions (e.g., positions in Special Collections, Reference, and the CIT) require specialized skills and, in some cases, extensive training; these positions can lead to employment opportunities in a related field or advanced education (e.g., a Masters degree in library science).

L&ET is highly dependent on student labor to provide high-quality service and to keep the building open for approximately 105 hours per week (and extended hours during final exams). L&ET should do what is necessary to attract and retain a skilled and conscientious labor pool.

6. Faculty and Staff Credentials

a) Faculty

Faculty vitae were reviewed to identify credentials (educational level attained, certifications), years of employment with L&ET, service contributions (committee work), and contributions to research and scholarship (conference attendance, formal presentations, publications).

All 29 faculty members submitted a copy of their curriculum vitae (Appendix I). These documents reflect an accomplished and diverse group. All have achieved a minimum of a Bachelors of Art or Bachelors of Science degree and one achieved both. Twenty-two have earned a Master of Library Science or equivalent degree, 15 have earned a Master or Arts or Master of Science degree, and two are currently enrolled in a Masters level program. One faculty member has earned a Ph.D. Nine have at least a working knowledge of one or more non-English languages. All of those in Librarian positions have earned terminal degrees; of those in other faculty positions, three have earned a terminal degree.

All full-time faculty members are assigned a faculty rank. Of the 29 L&ET faculty, ten are assistant professors; ten are associate professors; three are professors; and five are instructors. The part-time faculty member is considered adjunct faculty and is not ranked. At this time, only those in full-time Librarian positions have the opportunity to earn a higher rank.

A large majority of L&ET faculty have contributed to research and scholarship on a local (i.e., L&ET), university, community, state, regional, national, and/or international level. Of the 26 faculty who submitted vitae, all (100%) have participated or are participating on various committees, published articles, delivered professional presentations, or received or participated in grant-funded projects.

Seventeen of the professional faculty members are liaison librarians. A liaison librarian is assigned to an academic program to ensure that library services and collections meet the needs of students and faculty.

b) Staff

The Review Team asked all staff to complete an online survey of their educational background, work experience, and committee work. Forty-eight of 53 staff completed the online survey.

Survey results indicate that overall the years of experience are fairly diverse. The largest number of staff who responded to the survey (29%) has worked in L&ET for less than 2 years. The second largest number (25%) has worked in L&ET for more than 20

years. Media Resources has the highest number of staff (3) who have worked at JMU for more than 20 years. Cataloging and Serials have the next highest number (2). Circulation has the highest number of staff (3) who have worked less than 2 years. The next highest numbers of staff employed for less than 2 years are in Administration (2), CIT (2), and Digital Services (2). See Figure 3 for all categories of years experience.

Figure 3: Years of Staff in L&ETSource: 2006 Staff Survey, L&ET Program Review

More than 2026%

Less than 230%

2 to 519%

6 to 1019%

11 to 154%

16 to 202%

The staff’s educational and professional development experience is somewhat dispersed. Forty percent selected “bachelor’s degree” as their highest educational level, while others indicated they had earned an associate’s degree (9%) or a master’s degree (15%). Some have earned additional field-specific certifications, and 18 (38%) have attended one or more professional conferences. Nine (19%) have delivered professional presentations.

Figure 4: Highest Educational Level Attained by L&ET StaffSource: 2006 Staff Survey, L&ET Program Review

Bachelors Degree 40%

Masters Degree15%

Associates Degree9%

Some College13%

High School or Equivalent4%

Some Graduate Work19%

Almost half (46%) of the staff who responded to the survey have been or are involved in L&ET committees (Hospitality, Preservation, Staff Development, Travel, search committees, etc.). Very few are involved in university, state, or national committees.

7. Professional Development and TrainingJMU’s Human Resource Department records indicate that from FY 2001 through April 6, 2006, 117 L&ET faculty and staff completed 3,680 hours of training provided through various university departments (HR, Computing Support, CIT, etc.). Thirty different faculty and 87 different staff participated in 1,166 training events. Training topics include various computer applications, library databases, general computing, supervisory skills and procedures, professional certification, and personal finance.

Faculty and staff also participated in professional development activities offered outside of the University. According to travel records, L&ET spent more than $186,000 for travel to conferences and training in the last five years. Travel expenditures increased 29% from almost $41,000 in FY 2001 to almost $53,000 in FY 2006 (L&ET Annual Reports).

Some professional development opportunities are coordinated by the L&ET Staff Development Committee. The goals of this committee are to:

coordinate and supplement staff development activities; enhance library faculty and staff members’ skills, knowledge, and personal

effectiveness in contributing to the goals of the organization and in accommodating technological and organizational change; and

foster an atmosphere of sharing and collegiality (StaffWeb).

To this end the Staff Development Committee sponsors a number of training opportunities for L&ET staff. From 2002 to the present, the Committee has organized 43 workshops and training sessions (see Table 3).3 These workshops and training sessions covered diverse topics such as Gaming in the Classroom, DiSC Team Building Workshop, Google at the Reference Desk, and Understanding the JMU Student Population. They also included database training sessions for resources such as Factiva, eHRAF, and Lexis Nexis. Some sessions are opportunities for librarians to disseminate the results of their summer leave activities. Most workshops are facilitated through a face-to-face format by members of the JMU community or outside speakers while others are offered through a teleconference format.

8. LibQual+ Survey DataThe Library has participated in three LibQUAL+ surveys in 2002, 2004, and 2006 (Appendix J). The goal of LibQUAL+ is to define and measure service quality across institutions and to create useful quality assessment tools for libraries. LibQUAL+ measures library user perceptions and expectations of service quality in three dimensions: affect of service, information control, and library as place. It identifies gaps between desired, perceived, and minimum expectations of service in these dimensions. Users are asked to identify the desired level of service they want to receive, the minimum level they are willing to accept, and the actual level they are receiving from the Library. In addition to the standardized survey, users can provide comments that cover a wide range of topics, including collections, facilities, staff, copiers, hours, the web, and miscellaneous concerns.  The LibQUAL+ data will be discussed later in the report, particularly “Library as Place” and “Information Control.”

“Affect of service” is the human dimension of library service quality. Questions relate to the extent to which library employees are caring, courteous, knowledgeable, helpful, and reliable to users. Library service received the most positive scores in this dimension in the 2002, 2004, and 2006 surveys compared to Information Control and Library as Place. Employees often exceed user expectation. The overall desired level of service for the nine questions in this dimension has dropped from 7.90 in 2002 to 7.84 in 2004 to 7.51 in 2006. The statements “employees who instill confidence in users” and “giving users individual attention” are among three of the lowest desired expectations on the 2006 survey.

Comments indicated that users are satisfied with library staff. One faculty member commented that “the quality of service and faculty at JMU's Libraries is unsurpassed”; another observed that “the staff of the JMU library provides exemplary support for every aspect of my professional and personal needs for information management.” A humanities user commented, “Your people are your greatest strength.” A social

3 No data was available for workshops & training sessions offered in FY 2002.

Table 3: Number of Staff Development WorkshopsSource: Staff Development

Annual Reports

Academic Year

Workshops/ Training Sessions

2001-2002 NA2002-2003 112003-2004 92004-2005 102005-2006 * 13Total 43

* 8 of the 13 sessions in AY 05-06 were database training sessions done in collaboration with the Digital Services Unit.

sciences user wrote, ”…library employees are ALWAYS so helpful and nice—you guys are awesome!” In addition, users applaud L&ET’s commitment to improving technology and collections but suggest that L&ET could improve communications to the JMU community to increase awareness of advancements and improvements.

C. L&ET Budget

The L&ET total budget has increased to $8,496,539 in FY 2006 from $5,968,093 in FY 2001. In FY 2006 the L&ET budget was 2.87% of the JMU total operating budget, which includes Educational and General, Auxiliary Enterprises, Financial Aid, and Sponsored Programs; that is a drop from 3.11% in FY 2001. The data is based on original budget allocations. The largest increase (110%) is in the materials budget. The library materials line includes expenditures for books, newspapers, journals, reference materials, music scores, maps, microforms, media, and other items. Personnel and non-personnel allocations have increased 20% and 19%, respectively. Personnel costs include salaries and wages of full-time and wage staff and student assistants, while non-personnel costs are for organizational support for telecommunications, travel, equipment, furniture, supplies, postal services, etc. The FY 2006 breakdown using this original budget data was 56% personnel, 34% library materials, and 10% non-personnel. Figure 4 shows the increases in these three areas from FY 2001 to FY 2006.

Figure 4: Libraries & Educational Technologies Budget OverviewSource: PeopleSoft Reports

$0

$500,000$1,000,000

$1,500,000$2,000,000

$2,500,000

$3,000,000$3,500,000

$4,000,000$4,500,000

$5,000,000

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Personnel Library Materials Non-Personnel

In addition to the original budget allocations, L&ET receives year-end monies from the University. Thus, the revised year-end total budget is bigger than the original budget. Funds are expended within L&ET and returned to budget lines in the next fiscal year. In FY 2006 L&ET expended $8,914,794 for an increase of $558,016. While budget increases are always welcome, receiving such a large increase at the close of the fiscal year has its own challenges.

Summer online courses provide revenues to L&ET. For summer 2004 the University approved a tuition rate for these courses that was $20 per credit hour higher than regular summer courses.  For summer 2005 the University approved making the tuition rate $40 per credit hour higher than regular summer courses.  The $40 differential remained in effect for summer 2006. The revenue from the additional tuition is allocated to IT and CIT for support of online learning with one third going to IT and two-thirds going to CIT. L&ET received $20,293 in FY 2005 and $69,274 in FY 2006.  The FY 2007 funding from the budget office has not yet been received, but is expected to be at least $70,000. Funding provides partial support for online learning systems, such as Blackboard.

L&ET receives additional equipment funding from the Equipment Trust Fund (ETF) Program administered by SCHEV. L&ET allocations for the past fiscal years are listed in Table 4. Specific guidelines restrict the type and use of equipment purchases and govern the maintenance and disposal of ETF equipment. Equipment must support programs of instruction, research, and academic support. ETF allocations have been used to purchase technology classroom projection systems in classrooms, computer hardware, etc.

From the sale of the Information Literacy Test (ILT), L&ET receives a small amount of revenue. In 2002, CARS and the Library collaborated to develop a test that other institutions could use. The ILT measures ACRL Information Literacy Standards for Higher Education 1, 2, 3, and 5.  Several institutions have used the new ILT to assess their students.  Funds generated by the ILT are split between CARS and the Library. The current balance is over $2,000.

L&ET manages one auxiliary account for fee-based printing, which accumulates revenues generated from printing in the public areas and in microforms. The revenue in FY 2006 totaled $58,174. Revenues are used to support direct costs related to printing, such as toner and paper, a wage position in Loan Services (beginning in FY 2006), and other costs, such as microform reader/printer equipment and computers.

L&ET administers a number of Foundation accounts, both expendable and endowed accounts. These are usually designated for specific purposes. For example, the McLaughlin Book account supports the purchase of reference books (Appendix K). L&ET is also developing a closer relationship with Development to identify funding opportunities for donors.

In the last five years, L&ET has received several grants. Grants provide support for new and significant activities; however, funds do not always support the associated labor costs. Grants awarded to L&ET are:

2002: Small Business Administration (SBA) - $1,000,000. Projects made possible by the grant include pioneering a reference linking service, software and hardware to support online learning, development of the Shenandoah Valley Business Link, an online business gateway, and the acquisition of several major business information resources.

Table 4: ETF Monies Received FY 2001-2006

Source: ETF AdministratorFY 2001 $235,000FY 2002 $185,000FY 2003 $206,400FY 2004 $370,000FY 2005 $486,000FY 2006 $250,000

2003: Mellon Foundation – $50,000. Grant supported development of MDID2 (Madison Digital Image Database, Version 2). The MDID is a free teaching and learning tool created by the CIT and faculty and staff of the JMU School of Art and Art History. The MDID is widely recognized for use in higher education.

2004: National Endowment for the Humanities – $3,970. Grant supported the on-site visit of a preservation consultant to assess the risks to the library collections, particularly Special Collections.  Results of the grant included the upgrade to the HVAC system serving Special Collections storage in room 205 and the replacement of the original roof on the 1939 wing of Carrier Library.

2005: Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) – $158,593. This National Leadership Grant is funding the research and development of computer games that will teach health information literacy and general information literacy. The project is being developed in partnership with the Library, the CIT, and CARS.

2006: Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) – $225,476. This grant is supporting development of MDID API (application program interface) for connecting to other image systems and tools. The project’s results will allow users to access more image collections and will serve as an image systems interoperability model.

D. Key Findings

L&ET is understaffed, which limits opportunities to preserve successful existing services while developing new services.

Data reporting across the departments and divisions within L&ET is inconsistent. In keeping with the move toward accountability, L&ET needs a more unified way of gathering, analyzing, and using data.

Central coordination of communications to L&ET’s external community is critical to inform our users about our services. 

New and emerging technologies mandate a more planned approach to staff development in order to keep skills current.

The identity of the Educational Technologies division within the L&ET organization and the relationships among the Ed Tech units are ambiguous and require clarification.

IX. Physical Spaces

JMU L&ET departments are dispersed in several buildings across campus (Appendix L). Carrier Library, the Classroom Technology main office, and the CIT are housed in the Carrier Library building. The CISAT Library is located in the CISAT Health Sciences building; the Music Library is located in the Music building; Media Resources Equipment Loans was, until very recently, located in Spotswood Hall; and College of Education services are located in Memorial Hall. The total square footage allocated to L&ET is currently 105,257 ft.

A. Carrier Library

Carrier Library is the flagship building of L&ET.  The building must meet the needs of competing interests and functions: user space, collection space, and staff office/work space. User space includes individual, group, and formal and informal spaces. Service points include the circulation desk, the reference desk, a service desk and closed media collection in Media Resources, Interlibrary Loan, and Special Collections. The CIT is a service point for faculty and staff. Many of these spaces provide Internet access to all users; except for the CIT, none provide access to integrated technologies.

Carrier Library houses most of L&ET’s physical collections, including books, journals, magazines, newspapers, films and sound recordings, maps, government documents, images, and special collections. Pre-1975 journals are housed in remote storage with compact shelving. Print abstracts and indexes are stored in the caged area of the original building. Loan Services staff retrieves materials for users from these locations.

Most of the L&ET staff offices are in Carrier Library. Exceptions are staff in the CISAT Library in the Health Sciences building, East Campus Classroom Technology in the Health Sciences building, the Music Library in Music, and the College of Education in Memorial Hall.

The number of physical (versus virtual) visits to Carrier Library has fluctuated over the last few years (see Figure 5). Counts include visits of both users and staff. Overall, the number increased by nearly 100,000 between FY 2000 and FY 2005. While there was a slight decline in FY 2006, anecdotal evidence indicates that gate counts will be higher in FY 2007.

Figure 5: Carrier Library Gate Counts Source: Loan Services

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

550,000

600,000

650,000

700,000

FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Cou

nt

A number of improvements have been made to Carrier Library over the past five years (Appendix M):

IT installed a wireless access network; Room 203 was added as a second instruction room; the space formerly occupied by the Law Library was converted into the

Periodicals Room, and space once allocated to periodicals was given over to the microform collection;

the tile roof over the original portion of the library was replaced and drainage was corrected to prevent water from leaking into Special Collections and certain areas of the basement;

the CIT renovated Room 7 for expanded office space and Room 22 to include a recording studio and video production facility;

two new offices were created on the first floor to provide space for the new digital services staff;

workspaces on the first floor were reconfigured to allow for growth and improve workflow;

unused space in microforms was transferred to Technical Services to allow for more space;

Room 203A was made accessible for the Center for Faculty Innovation as a meeting and study room for faculty;

Room 203B was reserved as a study room for students in the Honors Program;

the juvenile book collection was moved to the newly acquired Memorial Hall.

A special L&ET space planning task force is currently developing a plan for additional improvements to Carrier Library. The task force has solicited input from all L&ET work groups and department heads. Data collected to date suggest a need for more study spaces, more flexible user workspaces, and significantly more space for staff offices,

staff workspace, and instruction space. A number of recommendations for reconfiguring and renovating the current space have been collected as well.

B. CISAT Library—Health Sciences Building

The CISAT Library, a library service point akin to a branch library, is located in Room 2021 of the Health Sciences Building. The CISAT Library Director, two Liaison Librarians, and two library assistants are its core staff. Two Classroom Technology staff members from TS-EC provide technical support for various systems and software.

The facility includes 24 networked computers, video viewing stations, and a service desk. The collection contains reference books, equipment, reserves, a collection of tests, a small browsing collection, and two daily newspapers provided at the request of CISAT faculty. In addition to circulating local materials, the CISAT Library provides a document delivery service for materials from other libraries on campus as well as materials from other institutions through Interlibrary Loan. Electronic resources are available for the programs that the library supports.

Renovations to the public and staff areas in the CISAT Library were completed within the last year. Plans for the new East Campus library building are underway.

C. Music Library—Music Building

The Music Library is located in the lower level of the Music Building on the main campus of James Madison University. The staff includes the Music Librarian and two library assistants. The library boasts state of the art technology including 12 midi computer stations and 8 music commons stations. Materials include all AV formats, reference books, music scores, periodicals, reserves, software, and equipment. The Music Library also houses print and media special collections, provides electronic resources as well as digitization and recording services, and contains a music preservation and binding unit.

Over the past five years improvements to the Music Library space include:

Closet converted to office space Improvement to preservation area IT installed a wireless access network Media room (group study room) converted into office space Improved circulation area to comply with ADA regulations Digital video signage installed Research stations implemented Implemented wireless remote audio system

Improvements and additional space are needed. The L&ET space planning task force is working with the music library to address needs and develop a plan. Data collected to date shows a need for significantly more staff space, both office and work space, user listening area, and additional collection space.

D. Equipment Loans—Spotswood and Carrier Library

Until recently, the Media Resources Equipment Loans service was housed on the lower level of Spotswood Hall on the main campus. Water-related problems forced them to relocate to Carrier Library. The Media Resources Director is searching for another suitable location which can house the main campus Classroom Technology staff as well.

E. College of Education Services—Memorial Hall

The Educational Technology Media Center (ETMC) located within Memorial Hall houses the juvenile collection, a small reference collection supported by the library materials budget and the K-12 curriculum materials that support the College of Education. The Liaison Librarian for the College of Education holds regular office hours there.

F. New Library on East Campus

Construction has started on the new 106,000 square foot library building on East Campus which is scheduled for completion on March 20, 2008. The library building project is funded through the bond referendum for capital improvements in higher education approved by Virginia voters in 2002. News on the building is available at http://www.lib.jmu.edu/newlibrary/.

With the addition of the new building, the space allocated to L&ET will double; however, the new library will supplement rather than replace the existing Carrier Library.  Designed following the information commons model, the new facility will include an integrated service desk for circulation, reference, reserves, and media. It will include study and production space that is flexible, technology-enhanced, and adaptable. The new library will offer space for library instruction, reading rooms, and group studies. A secured section of the building will offer a 24-hour study and computer lab with a coffee bar. The library will house the science and technology collections, but it will be open to students and faculty from all academic programs as well as to community members. 

The fifth floor of the new building will house the Center for Instructional Technology and the Center for Faculty Innovation, a department in Academic Affairs. A faculty seminar room will be available for programs related to faculty development, teaching, and scholarship.

The new library will help to inform what renovations take place in Carrier Library. For example, if the information commons area is successful in the new library building, the administration may consider renovating Carrier Library to include one as well.

G. LibQUAL+ Survey Data

The dimension “Library as Place” refers to how the environment of the library meets study and research needs. It includes questions covering issues such as the usefulness of space, the symbolic value of the library, and the library as a refuge for work or study. Overall the scores in this area were positive with users. One Science/Math undergraduate student stated, “I mostly use the library to study, and it's perfect.” A Communications undergraduate student commented, “I love the learning environment of the carrier library [sic] because it allows me to focus on my studies and be motivated by the people around me who are also hard at work.”

Three main areas of complaint concerning library facilities were cited in the 2006 LibQUAL+ survey comments: the high noise level, lack of group study space, and lack of sufficient computers for student use. Users express dissatisfaction with the noise level. An education undergraduate student said, “I know it is probably hard to regulate, but talking in the study areas is very disruptive! It might be helpful to make the third floor completely quiet or something. It's so distracting!” A humanities undergraduate stated, “We need more comfortable and quiet places to study that are more secluded and less out in the open where it's noisy.”

The lack of group study space is particularly apparent when reviewing user response for the question on “community space for group learning and group study.” Business, education, and communications and journalism users expressed a high desired level for community space. The responses were still within the zone of tolerance; however, the adequacy gap is quite narrow, meaning the library could do more to provide this type of space. A graduate student in education (2004) commented, “I find the library very uncomfortable and non-conducive to academic study and learning. More group study spaces that are more comfortable would help, as would longer hours.” A business student (2006) said, “[there is]…widespread agreement that more quiet study space [is] needed and more importantly areas for group work.” A Health Sciences student commented, “I think it [the library] could be improved by adding more space for students to study especially in groups because often group study areas are full so groups move to areas that are supposed to be quiet.”

There was no specific LibQUAL+ question on computers, but there were many comments in 2006 related to the number of computers in the library. An engineering/computer science undergraduate wrote, “One of my only criticisms of the library is that there always seems to be a shortage of computers available for use.” This view was reinforced by the focus groups with undergraduate students. Students go to Carrier Library between classes and use computers for a variety of reasons, including checking Blackboard, accessing databases, checking e-mail, and checking periodicals online. However, it is difficult to find a seat due to overcrowding. Students also commented that the lack of Macintosh computers is an issue. LibQUAL+ results and discussions with JMU faculty also revealed that patrons still value the physical space of the library. Faculty described a welcoming, comfortable place that highlights and celebrates books (similar to a bookstore). One faculty member requested a program in which each department’s representative work with liaisons to display book jackets within departments, an idea that enforces the importance of physical collections to the faculty user population. Collaborative learning areas and computers throughout the library (including in the stacks) were also deemed important.

H. Key Findings

Users cite lack of group study space and lack of computers as major problems. The new east campus library in early 2008 promises increased study spaces and services, but Carrier Library and the Music Library must also be redesigned to recreate a functional user space.

Media Resources Equipment Loans needs a suitable new location to provide optimal service.

More staff spaces are needed as new positions are created.

X. Systems and Applications

Five L&ET departments across the organization manage, maintain, and support almost 500 computing systems for L&ET staff and users (Table 4). These systems include servers, desktop systems, technology classroom systems, and laptops, and are used for communication, instruction, research, content development, content delivery, and storage. JMU’s IT department manages an additional 40 PC computing systems in the public labs.

A. HardwareFive L&ET departments across the organization manage, maintain, and support more than 500 computing devices for L&ET staff and users (Table 5). These systems include servers, desktop computers, laptops, and technology classroom systems, and are used for communication, instruction, research, content development, content delivery, and storage. With few exceptions, L&ET provides technology support with internal staff rather than relying on the central JMU IT Department. IT manages 40 desktop computers in the L&ET public labs.

System administrators estimate that the number of computers they manage has increased by 50% over the last 5 years. However, due to limited physical space and increased availability of wireless network access to students, computer hardware growth has leveled off. The need for constant maintenance and replacement of existing computers continues to require significant investment of staff time and funds.

The number of Mac workstations in L&ET has grown and will continue to grow due to an increasing need for high-performing digital video and other multimedia editing stations. For example, Digital Services will soon be co-managing a Mac research lab in the Music Library and the department just purchased three Mac PowerBooks.

Table 5: Number of L&ET Computing Systems (all locations)+By Managing Department

Source: Systems Managers, November 2006

  Servers Desktop and Laptops (Staff)* Desktop (Public) Laptops

(Checkout)

Instruction (including instructor consoles)

ProductionClassroom Technology

SystemsTOTALS

    PC Mac PC Mac   PC Mac PC Mac    Digital Services 10 105 1 74 18 216

Digital Services and IT

8 (Music) 8

Media Resources 23 3

3 [will be 4 soon]

320

(+ 3 to be added soon)

52

Classroom Technology 150 150

Technical Services 4 4

CIT 12 22 8 5 3 11 6 3 5 75

CIT and IT 10 (Blackboard) 10

IT 40 40

TOTAL 555

+does not include peripherals (printers, scanners, cameras, etc.)*includes staff, student assistant workstations, service desks

Replacement PlanComputer hardware replacement plans vary across departments and types of systems. Generally, staff and public computers, technology classroom systems, and classroom workstations are replaced every three years, shortly before or after the three-year warranty expires. Other machines used by student assistants and for more generic functions have longer replacement cycles, often stretching to 5 years or more. Servers are under a four-to-five year warranty and therefore also have a longer replacement cycle.

In the past five to seven years, over 80% of workstations and servers have been purchased by ETF monies. Grant funds are also used. L&ET rarely participates in JMU-sponsored bulk-order programs because the large quantities ordered by L&ET usually mean better prices than the bulk order can provide.

Price quotes for Dell hardware are gathered from Dell’s premier site for JMU. Price quotes for Apple hardware are taken from Apple’s online store for JMU. L&ET purchases mostly Dell and Hewlett Packard printers.

Software ApplicationsL&ET staff uses a variety of software applications to perform the work of the organization. Common software applications on workstations across the organization include:

Microsoft Office Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox WS-FTP file transfer program Quicktime, Real Player, Windows Media DVD/CD burning software Symantec Anti-Virus Oracle Calendar client Adobe Reader

Many departments and units use software or programming languages specific to the work they do or the method by which they want to perform certain administrative tasks (Table 6). For example, web publishers within the library use Macromedia Contribute to contribute to the L&ET website. Both Digital Services and the CIT use various programming languages and software applications to manage their websites.

Table 6: Specialized Software Applications and Programming Languages by L&ET Area

Source: System Administrators, November 2006Library

WorkstationsCIT Staff and Public

WorkstationsTechnical Services

Other Specialized- Library CIT Web Apps

Thunderbird Adobe Acrobat 7.0 XML Spy 5.4 Visual Studio 2003 and 2005 HTML

Macromedia Contribute Adobe Photoshop CS Print Wizard 2.6 Microsoft Assistant

(Remote Desktop) ASP

Millennium client Adobe Image Ready CS Wert Bindery Adobe PhotoShop and

Creative Suite ASP.NET

  Adobe Photoshop Elements*

OCLC's Connexion Macromedia MX Suite Adobe Dreamweaver

  Adobe Premiere*

Library of Congress Cataloger's Desktop and Classification Plus

ILLiad client (ILL only) – allows Interlibrary loan staff operations.

Microsoft FrontPage

  Macromedia Studio 8*  NET Framework 1.1 and 2.0 – programming / runtime environment

Microsoft Visual Studio

  Respondus     DotNetNuke   Study Mate     MediaWiki  Captivate        SPSS 14.0        Norton Antivirus 10.0                      *applications that are metered with a software license manager

B. Costs for Systems and Applications

Technology has become a major budget item for L&ET. In FY 2006 alone, according to PeopleSoft reports, nearly $280,000 was allocated for desktop computers, maintenance contracts, servers, storage devices, and mobile devices. From FY 2001 to FY 2006, $1,732,400 of ETF money has been used to purchase equipment (Table 4).

Routine purchases include workstations ($1,100 - $1,600 per workstation), servers ($5,000 - $8,000 per server) and storage devices ($10,000 - $12,000). Equipping each technology classroom costs approximately $10,000 for hardware and $600 for labor.

In the past five years, special purchases have included three Tegrity multimedia systems ($87,370), two IP-based video teleconferencing desktop units ($13,000), a Polycom videoconferencing unit ($8,000) and a Tandberg videoconferencing unit ($5,000).

C. Key Findings

The need for data storage will continue to grow as content requires more space. Larger content will also require greater bandwidth.

The use of open source applications and operating systems within the organization is growing. L&ET must stay informed of this emerging approach to integrating software systems into the organization’s computing infrastructure.

There is a growing demand for Mac machines and therefore Mac technical support.

XI. Content

L&ET has benefited from significant increases to its materials budget over the past five years. The number and quality of research resources, electronic journals, and print and media collections have surged. While faculty and students are increasingly satisfied with the overall collections, specific areas still need attention. The increase in digital content and our users’ expectations of online access must be accompanied by a continued shift in library staffing resources and expertise, as well as additional staffing in order to deal with the sheer quantity of resources. Non-textual formats, such as images, audio, and video, will need specialized attention. Traditional categories of library materials, such as books, government documents, microformats, and archival materials, will need to be re-evaluated in order to determine their future place within collections and to maximize the usefulness of their content to our users. In addition to these challenges, L&ET is grappling with changes in the information marketplace. Traditionally, libraries have purchased and owned content. In recent years, more materials are acquired through licensing arrangements. L&ET seeks to pursue emerging alternatives to the for-profit model whenever possible, acquiring open access publications and favoring more open architecture for the content-delivery software. In sum, L&ET’s focus for the next five years will need to be on balancing our physical and digital content, grappling with the implications of changing formats, and maximizing the accessibility of all content, thus connecting the ideas in content with our users.

A. Library Materials Budget

Based on its April 2002 visit, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Visiting Team found JMU to be an excellent institution and only had 22 recommendations for improvement. Recommendation 20 stated, “The Committee recommends that JMU provide access to library collections sufficient to support the educational, research, and public services program of the institution.” This recommendation came as a result of steady-state materials budget of $1,373,000 for each year from FY 1996 until FY 2001. During this period the Library was forced to cancel journals and limit book purchases. In addition, a state budget crisis required two years of budget reversions in FY 2001 and FY 2002. The lack of resources hindered the library’s ability to support the student educational programs and faculty research.

In response to the SACS recommendation, the Library developed a five-year action plan (Appendix N). The goals were to improve library collections, in particular to strengthen book and primary source collections and to sustain progress made on journal and electronic resource collections. In preparing a response, the Library compiled Academic Library Survey (ALS) data from for Virginia and selected peer institutions to compare total library operating expenditures and library materials expenditures. Compared to the other state institutions FY 2002, JMU had the lowest per student expenditures for library materials at $82 (Appendix O).

The JMU University Administration accepted the plan and has increased the library materials base budget each year since FY 2002. The budget was $1,388,885 in FY 2003

rising to $2,888,885 in FY 2006, a 108% increase, which resulted in a per student expenditure for materials of $187. After FY 2008, the final year of the plan, the library will need, at a minimum, inflationary increases to sustain the growth in collections. In 2006, academic libraries saw price increases for serials just under 8% overall; in 2007, predictions are for increases in the range of 7 to 9% (Van Orsdel & Born, 2006). Inflation for books was 9.62% in 2006 (Loughran, 2006). In addition, increases based on higher enrollment and new programs will be critical.

Figure 6 shows the breakdown of library materials expenditures for FY 2001 through FY 2006. Book expenditures include purchases of all print materials, including books, musical scores, maps, and manuscripts. Serials include print journal subscriptions, electronic journals (both individual titles and packages), standing orders, and microform subscriptions. Media includes videotapes, DVDs, CDs, and similar formats.

Figure 6: Library Materials ExpendituresSource: Millennium Reports

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Books Journals Databases Media

Most purchased electronic collections represent a service time commitment for librarians and technical services staff. The acquisition of electronic journals, research databases, and streaming video collections requires license negotiation, and adds an additional layer to the purchase process. ERM (Electronic Resources Management module in Millennium) now serves as a vehicle whereby to track licensing terms, renewal dates, key vendor contacts, and other critical information.

The use of the Small Purchase Charge Card (SPCC) and eVA, two new state mandates in procurement, required a major change in procedures for library staff. Both mandates have increased the amount of time required by staff to process orders in multiple systems, maintain paperwork and documentation, and work with vendors. In addition, the dollar outlay from the library materials to support the eVA system will increase to 2% per transaction in FY 2008.

1. Collection Development Collection development is “the process of planning and building a useful and balanced collection of library materials over a period of years, based on an ongoing assessment of the information needs of the library's clientele, analysis of usage statistics, and demographic projections, normally constrained by budgetary limitations” (ODLIS). Collection development is a major component of each liaison librarian’s job description and includes selection of books, journals, databases, videos, and other needed materials for their department(s). One measure of collection development activity is the size of subject allocations liaisons must expend for books, scores, maps, and non-print materials. Most allocations have increased over 30 percent, with several exceptions (Appendix P).

While it is unknown how much time is spent on collection development activities, liaisons have expressed stress about the workload related to collection development. Because of library instruction and other responsibilities, many librarians do not have adequate time to devote to selection throughout the year. Furthermore, the University’s somewhat erratic budget cycle also has an impact on time management. In addition to selecting new materials, liaison librarians have made a concerted effort to weed the collection to reduce overcrowding in Carrier Library stacks and to prepare for moving a portion of the collection to the new Library facility planned for East Campus.

An approval plan is a time-saving collection development method whereby books are sent systematically to the library from a book jobber upon publication according to pre-established collection development profiles. Most departments are using approval plans to receive books on a timely basis. Table 7 shows that the Library’s approval plan generally accounts for 35 to 39% percent of all titles purchased. Except for two fiscal years, the percentage of books received on approval relative to total titles purchased increased as the materials budget has increased. Liaison librarians are adjusting approval profiles to increase the number of titles appropriate for the curriculum.

The Collection Development Committee (CDC), a standing committee, provides oversight and is responsible for planning, organizing, and monitoring activities related to collection development, evaluation, and maintenance for all types of information resources.

2. LibQUAL+ Survey DataThe additional library materials funding has increased user satisfaction with the collections. In 2002, when the library was responding to the SACS recommendation, the library participated in its first LibQUAL+ survey. A major section of the LibQUAL+ survey contains findings on Information Control (in 2002 this section was labeled Access to Information). Information Control is defined as “scope, timeliness, convenience, ease of navigation, and modern equipment.” Faculty, undergraduate students, and graduate students perceived the “comprehensive print collections” and “complete runs of journal titles” as below minimum service expectations. Faculty, in particular, thought library collections were deficient. One faculty member commented, “The library staff are

Table 7: Approval Plan—Percent of Total Monograph Purchases

 FY

2001FY

2002FY

2003FY

2004FY

2005FY

2006Total Titles Purchased* 10,051 9,693 8,086 12,530 15,699 16,301Approval Plan, net 3,948 3,639 2,868 3,698 3,798 5,775% Approval Plan 39% 38% 36% 30% 24% 35%

remarkable and help to make up for the appallingly poor condition of our collections for a university of our size. The library is woefully underfunded, particularly with regard to journals and databases.” One undergraduate stated succinctly, “more journals!! more books!!”

The 2004 LibQUAL+ survey results showed improvements in this area as the University Administration continued to increase funds devoted to the materials budget; however, the lowest marks continued to be in Information Control, specifically for the statements “the printed materials I need for my work” and “printed and/or electronic journals collections I require for my work.” Users perceived the library meeting the minimum expectation for the first statement, which was a marked improvement over 2002. Users, however, still indicated that the perceived performance for the second statement was below minimum expectations but less so than in 2002.

In the 2006 LibQUAL+ survey, undergraduate and graduate students perceived the library meeting above the minimum expectations in response to both statements. Faculty still perceived below minimum levels on both questions, but the gap was smaller than in 2004. Analysis of the 2006 LibQUAL+ faculty data indicates that faculty in the humanities and performing and fine arts are less satisfied with the library collection than faculty in other disciplines. The Faculty Senate’s 2003 Faculty Morale Survey also supports this finding reporting faculty in Arts and Letters are shown to be less satisfied with library resources than faculty in Business, Science and Mathematics, and Integrated Sciences and Technology (Appendix Q).

B. Content Types

Table 8 summarizes the item counts of various types of resources available in the library collection from FY 2001 to FY 2006. It also includes the expenditures for purchased materials by type, such as books, print periodical subscriptions, electronic journals, and research databases. The number of book withdrawals is included in the total book volume count, but the second row of the table states the number of book withdrawals by year, showing the activity of the weeding project particularly in FY 2002.

The rapid increase in the number of digital titles acquired and the total expenditures for digital materials by the Library is evident. Counts for the electronic journals and research databases purchased by the VIVA state consortium are also included. VIVA provides significant collections for JMU users.

Table 8 : Total Item Count and Expenditures per Fiscal Year FY 2001 Expend. FY 2002 Expend. FY 2003 Expend. FY 2004 Expend. FY 2005 Expend. FY 2006 Expend.

Books (volumes) 428,380 $349,843 416,547 $358,560 423,320 $469,627 433,222 $469,689 443,247 $563,524 450,724 $650,319

Book Withdrawals (volumes) (1,646)   (23,824)   (2,917)   (3,898)   (5,137)   (9,264)  

E-books (expenditures for e-book collections included with Research Databases) 8,249   8,287   8,294   11,561   13,650   30,663 $10,402

Bound Journals (volumes) 80,069   82,450   83,593   83,126   83,991   79,887  

Print Current Journal Subscriptions (titles) 2,168 $502,057 1,899 $399,778 1,733 $318,166 1,616 $392,957 1,525 $287,471 1,402 $270,258

Electronic Journals (titles) - excluding VIVA 1,832 $30,115 2,222 $30,995 2,354 $32,095 3,615 $333,480 5,648 $621,474 8,515 $758,160

VIVA Electronic Journals 748   1,022 1,107 1,091 1,361 1,517

Research Databases 102 $154,412 106 $210,568 113 $428,053 176 $428,859 204 $759,355 243 $847,029

VIVA Research Databases 141   141   128   125   126   140  

Microforms (pieces) 1,045,511 $53,008 1,063,806 $57,619 1,036,552 $45,365 1,050,336 $49,616 1,053,570 $44,620 1,050,660 $57,241

CD-ROMs n/a   283   287   296   317   334  

Scores 18,875 $5,468 19,279 $7,849 19,460 $45,581 19,743 $45,581 19,715 $14,969 20,071 $10,184

Sound Recordings 18,720 $7,876 19,292 $6,786 19,502 $5,081 19,719 $5,081 20,142 $7,808 20,736 $10,580

Video 10,812 $39,664 11,519 $38,810 11,845 $67,723 12,440 $68,323 15,050 $99,144 16,177 $77,327

Manuscripts 134   135   138   140   140   161  

Maps 515   514   546   533   533   539  

Theses added to collection     37   40   307   455   501  

Oral Histories n/a   142   147   147   149   189  

Government Documents 559,780   552,573   564,616   578,703   583,712   584,043  

1. Books Total book volume count was 450,724 at the end of FY 2006. Total expenditures increased by 86% from FY 2001 to FY 2006 as per Table 8. As previously noted, books are housed primarily in Carrier Library, with small reference collections in the Music Library, CISAT Library, and the ETMC. The ETMC also houses the juvenile collection.

Table 9 compares FY 2006 circulation activity by JMU user group for all formats. The percentage of circulation activity for each user group has remained relatively steady from FY 2001 to FY 2006. While the undergraduates account for 75% of the circulation, faculty are the most active borrowers: although they only represented 6% of the community in FY 2006, they account for 9% of the circulation activity.

Funding for the print reference collection has increased since FY 2001. In FY 2002 in-house usage of the reference collection decreased 12% from the previous year to 10,093. This internal re-shelving usage data is no longer collected systematically.

Several projects impacting the collection in the past few years include using the OCLC’s Automated Collection Analysis Services (ACAS) for weeding and collection development, moving the juvenile collection from Carrier Library to the ETMC in Memorial Hall, and beginning an ongoing inventory of the collection by Loan Services in FY 2006. The number of book volumes withdrawn from FY 2001 to FY 2006 total 46,686 as per Table 8. Weeding requires significant time from liaison librarians and Cataloging staff, but hopefully results in a more relevant collection and provides needed space for new materials. The inventory by Loan Services could be used to identify little-used items that could be moved to storage.

Electronic books (e-books) and e-book collections are still a small percentage of the annual materials budget. In FY 2006, a little over $10,000 was expended on individually-purchased e-books, while about $34,500 was spent on e-book collections totaled currently with research databases.

The first foray into e-book collections comprised free online collections from the University of California and National Academies Press. In FY 2003, the library purchased access to the Early American Imprints, Series I, Evans (1639-1800); in FY 2004, the History E-book collection; in FY 2005, Safari Tech Books; and in FY 2006, two collections from eBrary, the Eighteenth Century Collections Online, and American History and Culture Online (Appendix R). Certainly, the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act, incorporated into the Federal Copyright Act, virtually guarantees that

Table 9: FY 2006 Circulation by JMU User GroupSource: JMU Qwik Facts and Figures and Millennium Reports

User Group Population% of

PopulationCheck-

outs

% of Total Check-

outsUndergraduate Students

15,287 79%

108,259 75%

Graduate Students 1,0

67 6%

7,650 5%

Special Students 3

31 2%

1,004 1%Instructional Faculty

1,089 6%

12,369 9%

Other JMU Users 1,4

83 8%

6,327 4%

most copyrighted works issued after 1920 will only be available online through licensing agreements if they continue to have market value.

To ensure the fullest possible user access to these e-books and other e-book primary source material contained within select databases, the Cataloging Unit adds MARC bibliographic records to the LEO Library Catalog. However, the Cataloging Unit thoroughly evaluates each collection based specific criteria outlined in its OPAC-Access Evaluation for E-Monographs form and makes a recommendation to the Collection Development Committee on the inclusion of records in the catalog.

At the end of FY 2006, 17,014 e-books and 13,629 additional e-books in such collections as Early American Imprints, Alexander Street Press, and Documenting the American South were available to users through the LEO Library Catalog. Expansion into e-books is so new that insufficient data are available to draw definitive conclusions; however, initial usage statistics appear to indicate that these resources fill a need for users. These resources represent significant additions to the collection, providing easy access to timely information in computer science and other rapidly evolving subject areas, as well as unique materials in history and literature.

The library has an active preservation program for maintaining collections in serviceable condition for instruction and research, for educating both staff and users on the proper handling of materials, and for fostering awareness of technological developments in preservation of existing print, non-print, and other electronic media. Preservation is promoted by the Preservation Unit and the Preservation Committee. The staff and trained student assistants in the Preservation Unit perform both complex and simple repairs on print materials following preservation standards. The current binder was selected via RFP and follows current binding standards of the Library Binding Institute.

A change in book vendors enabled the library to make use of the interoperability between the new vendors’ online systems and the library catalog. In FY 2006, the library transferred its firm order monographs and approvals contract to Coutts Library Services and Yankee Book Peddlar (YBP) Library Services, with Coutts primarily handling approvals and standing orders and YBP fulfilling firm orders. The transition was not an easy one, requiring modification of procedures, the creation of load profiles and other system adaptations, and the need for staff training on both the vendor systems. Despite the challenges in adapting to two new book vendors, the turnaround time for firm orders improved from 60% received within 8 weeks in FY 2005 to 88% received within 8 weeks in FY 2006.

The Cataloging Unit evaluated vendor-supplied records from the two new book jobbers in FY 2006. After reviewing samples of the records, error rates were in the acceptable range and new books were processed more quickly for the collection.

Liaison librarians, who previously received paper notification slips, now received them electronically. In addition, they had to establish new approval profiles and learn to navigate and order materials on two new and very different interfaces.

2. JournalsJournal, magazine, and newspaper subscriptions total 11,434 in FY 2006. Of that number, 10,032 are available electronically. Of these electronic subscriptions, VIVA provides 1,517 titles. When combined with the aggregator and free e-journals, almost 35,000 unique journal, magazine, and newspapers titles are available to users. Expenditures for print current subscriptions dropped 46% from FY 2001 to FY 2002, while expenditures for electronic journals increased from $30,115 in FY 2001 to $758,160 in FY 2006.

Figure 7 illustrates the dramatic growth in the electronic journal subscriptions over the last six years. The Collection Development Policy states, “In most cases, the preferred format for serials will be an electronic version accessible via the Internet.” The number of print current journal subscriptions decreased 35% from FY 2001 to FY 2006. Some print subscriptions are bundled with an online subscription at no additional charge. There are specific disciplines in which the liaison librarian and academic department favor a specific title be acquired in print format. Microform subscriptions are for titles originally received in print and acquired in microform in order to save shelving space.

Figure 7: Journal SubscriptionsSource: Millennium Reports

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Subs

crip

tions

Electronic Print Microform

Usage of electronic journals continues to increase exponentially as print and microform usage drastically decline (see Figures 8 and 9). The steady increase of overall e-journal usage continues despite the continued adjustment of statistics by vendors implementing COUNTER. In FY 2006, 652,655 total article downloads were recorded. Since FY 2001, microform and print (both current and bound) usage has declined from 78,226 to 11,305 in FY 2006 based on daily re-shelving counts and captured in item records in the LEO Library Catalog. There were only 2,041 total uses of journal and newspapers in

microform in FY 2006. Providing a scanning service could be a useful alternative for users and would promote usage of collections only available in the microform.

Figure 8: Use for Selected Electronic JournalsSource: Vendor COUNTER-Compliant Usage Reports

050,000

100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000350,000400,000450,000500,000550,000600,000650,000700,000750,000800,000

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Art

icle

Dow

nloa

ds

Figure 9: In-House Journal Usage Statistics Source: Millennium Reports

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Num

ber o

f Use

s

Current Microform Bound

The Library has also made significant additions of electronic backfiles of journals previously available only in physical bound volumes in Carrier Library. The usage data reported above also includes that of electronic backfiles. Preservation of digital content is a major concern. The library uses the LOCKSS system to store and serve electronic journal articles and other digital material for which perpetual archival rights have been acquired.

Over the past few years, archival collections have been purchased from JSTOR and from selected publishers. Decisions were based on curricular need and demand by users. As additions are made to the electronic journal archival collection, liaison librarians, in consultation with academic departments, approved the withdrawal of bound volumes. For example, serials staff withdrew 5,731 print volumes and 9,406 microform pieces as part of the JSTOR withdrawal project in FY 2006.

Many e-journal subscriptions are the result of so called “big deals” or cooperative agreements which JMU has negotiated with publishers in conjunction with other Virginia institutions. Concerns about these agreements include their sustainability over time; the implications of mergers in the industry, which minimizes competition; and the challenge of selecting the most appropriate titles in a context where many titles are only sold in “bundles.” JMU’s cooperative agreements with Elsevier ScienceDirect, Wiley Interscience, Blackwell Publishing, and Springer/Kluwer have enabled the library to obtain access to thousands of journals simply by maintaining current subscriptions and paying a minimal additional annual fee. The Library would be unable to afford the number of journals which it currently offers without partnering with other institutions to obtain discounted pricing and shared access; while the library’s individual agreements with publishers result in a cost of several dollars per use, cooperative agreements often result in a cost per use less than a dollar (Appendix S).

Print journals are stored in three locations within Carrier Library. Pre-1975 bound volumes are located in storage or compact shelving in a secured location in the basement, and Loan Services staff retrieves volumes upon user request. Bound volumes dating from 1975 to present are located on the second floor. The current or unbound journals are located on the first floor within a reading room. The current periodical collection was moved to its current location in summer 2002. Until that time, current periodical issues were located in a closed stack area on the second floor. Figure 9 shows the usage of these journal titles.

3. Research Databases and ResourcesIn FY 2006, the library subscribed to or owned 243 research databases with access to another 140 through VIVA. Research databases include online resources other than journals, magazines, and newspapers: resources such as abstract/indexes, online audio collections, e-book collections, or statistical sources. Figure 10 shows the steady increase in electronic research databases available to JMU users since FY 2001 purchased by JMU and VIVA.

Figure 10: Databases Accessible to JMUSource: Millennium Reports

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

JMU

VIVA

While the number of databases to which JMU subscribes increased by 16% from FY 2005 to FY 2006, the expenditure for databases rose by 12% from $759,355 in FY 2005 to $847,029 in FY 2006. These expenses include one-time costs associated with some databases for archival purchases and additional user licenses. Research databases now comprise approximately 32% of the total materials budget. The amount of money spent on databases has steadily increased since FY 2003, when the amount became significant enough to track separately within the serials budget, as shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Growth in Research Database ExpendituresSource: Millennium Reports

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000

$900,000

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Database usage continues to grow rapidly.  The rise in both database and journal usage is due to increases in both user activity and in the number of available resources. More databases are instituting COUNTER guidelines or other standards for usage statistics, which will increase the reliability of reporting. Figure 12 shows the dramatic increase of searches within research databases using vendor usage statistical reports (all data is not COUNTER-compliant). It provides a snapshot illustrating the widespread usage of research databases.

Figure 12: Research Database UsageSource: Vendor Usage Statistical Reports

750,000

1,250,000

1,750,000

2,250,000

2,750,000

3,250,000

3,750,000

FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Sear

ches

The increase in the number of databases presents a challenge for staff members who support them; liaison librarians who need to be familiar with them; and for users who are baffled as to what is available or relevant to their needs.

4. Government DocumentsThe Federal Government documents collection has been a separate collection since Carrier Library became a selective federal depository in 1973. However, the bibliographic records for the collection are included in LEO Library Catalog. The collection has grown to encompass 578,703 pieces. Well over half of the collection is in microformat.

The transition to a more electronic collection that began in 1996 has accelerated in the last five years to the point where most documents are received are electronic (see Table10). Growth of the physical collection has slowed considerably, with only selected titles being added in print. A continuous program has been in place to weed the collection. Usage of the print government document collection over the last three years has increased from 934 in FY 2004 to 1,702 in FY 2006; however, as a percentage of

the tangible collection, usage is a negligible 0.08%. Usage is based on the number of check-outs and does not include circulation of titles classified by Library of Congress classification and placed in the general collection. In-depth planning for government documents is needed to examine local access, collection, and technical issues.    

Table 10: Inventory of Federal Government DocumentsSource: Millennium Reports

  FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006%

change Print Volumes 226,898 228,370 224,972 228,197 226,113 225,123 -0.8%

Electronic 7,157 10,444 15,079 24,844 29,630 34,062 375.9%

CD Rom     487 1,335 1,437 1,524 212.9%Microform (pieces) 329,484 314,681 318,259 319,439 319,399 318,099 -3.5%Journals 1,292 1,371 1,429 1,413 1,263 943 -27.0%

E-Journals     1,239 2,135 2,799 2,931 136.6%

5. VideoVideo counts in Table 8 include videotapes, laserdiscs, and DVDs. The preferred hard media format is DVD though some titles are still only available in videotape. The video collection has grown 50% since FY 2002. Circulation has increased 70% since FY 2003 for a total of 14,730. The market is in transition as technology continues to evolve. Download purchases and licensing arrangements will grow and likely dominate within the next decade.

As of June 2006, 1,000 streaming video titles were available to users, with approximately 1,700 under license. In FY 2006, VIVA licensed access to over 500 hours of video PBS. Digital licenses have been purchased enabling streaming access to selected titles from Films Media Group (FMG, which includes Films for the Humanities and Sciences), Annenberg Media, and other publishers. New digital licenses are acquired for titles from FMG on a routine basis throughout the year, and group licenses with other vendors are being investigated. Two systems feature records describing each online digital video: LEO Library Catalog, using MARC format, and MDID, using its own proprietary field structure. Individual fields in the MDID record were mapped to the appropriate Dublin Core fields where possible.

Streaming video collection files available through MDID and the LEO Library Catalog are selected and licensed by the Media Resources Director and processed by acquisitions and cataloging staff in Technical Services. The Media Resources Director estimates that 15 percent of his time is spent in acquiring and negotiating streaming licenses since the streaming media program was launched over two years ago. Most purchased digital collections represent a service time commitment for librarians and technical services staff similar to that for acquiring other databases.

6. Sound Recordings and Streaming Audio The number of sound recordings has grown 11% from FY 2001 to FY 2006 (Table 8). JMU’s doctoral program in music requires a continued investment in all aspects of the music collection. The library continues to increase its online resources for music, ensuring that the standard literature is available to patrons online, and purchased streaming audio subscriptions from Classical Music Library, Naxos Music Library, and the Smithsonian Global Sound. However, the unique and unusual of classical music will be less available online, so the library will continue to rely on CD purchases for these. Shorter in-print runs mean the library will need to react quickly to obtain this material before it goes out of print. For music recordings, the library will be required to deal with increasingly larger numbers of very small vendors

7. ScoresThe score collection has grown 6% from FY 2001 to FY 2006 (Table 8); however, the per unit cost has risen 47%. Circulation has increased 106% from FY 2003 to FY 2006 to a total of 6,922. It is unlikely that scores will become popular in electronic format, and printed scores will be purchased in the foreseeable future to support undergraduate and graduate education in music.

8. Images A sizeable collection of images is available to JMU users through the MDID and through research databases and resources. Images stored in the MDID are accessible primarily through JMU network authentication although three collections are available via guest login.

The MDID is an Internet-based content delivery and collection management system for teaching with digital images. Images within MDID are grouped into collections. Current collections include several art and art history collections, an art and architecture collection, a histology collection, the JMU Photography Collection, the Otis Library’s Artists’ Books collection, and several smaller collections. Not all collections are shared with other MDID users within JMU; each owner can determine access rights.

Figure 13 demonstrates the rapid acquisition of images within the MDID between June 2004 and May 2006. The number of images in MDID (currently 27,237 files) almost tripled between June 2004 and May 2006, a trend that is likely to continue. Remote collections, such as the NASA Image eXchange (NIX), are also available through MDID, and in the case of NIX, provide access to several million images. MDID usage is tied to the academic calendar. It gets more use in the fall and spring semesters, especially during mid-term and final exams. Summer use is low.

Figure 13: Image Growth in MDID between June 2004 and May 2006Source: CIT

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

Num

ber

of Im

ages

Images from purchased collections, along with images from JMU’s Madison Art Collection, from personal collections, and from freely shared collections at other institutions can be stored in MDID.

JMU users also have access to over 20 image collections through research databases and resources. ARTstor is by far the largest image provider containing nearly 500,000 images covering architecture, painting, sculpture, photography, decorative arts, and design. Searching for images and other non-text formats is a major unmet challenge.

9. Special Collections ResourcesThe number of manuscript collections has grown from 82 in FY 2002 to 111 in FY 2006. Nearly half of the collections are gifts, and 25% are on deposit with the remaining number purchased. Collections pertain to the central Shenandoah Valley, VA, especially Shenandoah, Page, Rockingham, and Augusta Counties. These unpublished materials include personal letters and diaries; legal forms such as deeds, wills, surveys, patents, indentures, road agreements, tax receipts, licenses, and military discharges; business ledgers and daybooks; political correspondences; and minutes and scrapbooks of organizations.  Each collection has a finding aid, which serves as an inventory. All finding aids are accessible online by collection title or by subject.  All manuscripts are housed in Special Collections. 

Important additions have been made to oral history collections housed in Special Collections. A majority of the interviews are fully transcribed, cataloged, and available for use. The process of acquiring legal releases, obtaining transcriptions, and cataloging the tapes and transcripts has been inconsistent and requires follow-ups. Topics in the oral history collections include various aspects of JMU history (including two interviews with the previous JMU President, Dr. Ronald Carrier), as well as a broad range of local

history, such as school integration in Waynesboro, the Shenandoah National Park, and fading rural ways of life.

Currently, scanning three major collections are underway: the JMU Founding Documents collection, the Acker Family Diaries collection, and the Varner Family Papers collection. Of particular note, the JMU Founding Documents collection consists of various historical documents from the early 1900s. It includes faculty and Board of Trustee minutes, student handbooks and yearbooks, letters from early JMU presidents, budget reports, and architectural drawings of building plans. Paper documents from these collections are scanned and converted to large TIFF images. The library derives smaller JPEG images from these large, archival images for future distribution via the Library web site.

A team of people from Special Collections and Media Resources have digitized approximately 1,600 photos in the JMU Historic Photo Collection in Special Collections to reduce the handling of the originals. Staff uses them to add historical resonance to university publications and for celebratory displays.  High-resolution images are available online, and both preservation and circulating copies are available through Special Collections.   

10. Software and DatasetsL&ET purchases and distributes centrally licensed data sets and software tools for data manipulation, such as SPSS, SAS for Windows and MacIntosh, MicroCase, and Maple for the JMU community. A site license, concurrent user license, or other license configuration is purchased depending on the need. In addition to these programs, ICPSR, Gartner Group, and other datasets are purchased. Datasets are increasingly important to members of the JMU community.

Media Resources provides access to the software throughout the year, by providing copies to individuals or to JMU Computing Lab Services. Media Resources has been investigating the feasibility of becoming the centralized purchaser of lab software across the university. However, in order to successfully meet the software needs of the University, designated funding for the purchase of required software must be allocated on a continuing basis and the funding with periodic adjustments for price increases and licensing changes. Current expenditures total up to $60,000. Some datasets are being purchased from the library materials budget.

C. Key Findings

L&ET needs to make a commitment to open access. Recognizing that open access does not mean “free,” L&ET must secure funding for open access publishing.

Users have increasing expectations for online content. The desire for online content, however, is highly discipline specific. While the sciences want predominantly online content, the humanities still desire ready access to print materials. The shift in user expectations will continue to challenge library budgets, staff, and services.

An awareness program must educate faculty on scholarly communication issues and provide assistance to faculty in publishing their research, perhaps in partnership with the Center of Faculty Innovation.

The increase in electronic resources puts an increased demand on the network infrastructure and on staff to negotiate licenses, design more intuitive web interfaces, and assist users in accessing library resources.

L&ET must provide support for emerging forms of content, such as blogs, podcasts, and wikis, and consider the implications of new devices for viewing content.

The Library needs a strategy for supporting a digital reference collection and promoting its usage.

The Library should use optimal methods for collection analysis and assessment. By partnering with larger institutions in the state, L&ET is able to subscribe to

packages of journals and databases that would otherwise be unaffordable. It is important to sustain current collections through cooperative licenses and look for future opportunities.

In order to successfully meet the special software and dataset needs of the University, designated funding must be allocated on a continuing basis with periodic adjustments for price increases and licensing changes.

Preservation of digital content, including purchased content and unique content held in Special Collections, is a major concern.

XII. Services

L&ET offers a variety of services to the faculty, students, and staff of JMU. These services facilitate access to collections and technology and help to educate JMU users about available resources in physical as well as virtual realms. L&ET is, at its core, a service organization, so it readily follows that the divisions and units within the organization work cooperatively to provide the best possible service to the JMU community. The following section outlines the services offered by L&ET. These services function together to provide the users with the information and technology they seek and the skills with which they need to use that information and technology effectively.

A. Liaison Program

Developed in 1985, the Liaison Program is the cornerstone service for connecting librarians to each of the academic departments on campus. A liaison librarian is assigned to each academic department. In turn, each academic department designates one faculty member as the departmental representative, with the exception of the foreign languages and literatures department, which has 3 departmental representatives for the various major languages. The role of the departmental representative varies greatly across the program, but most assist to some degree with communication and with selecting materials. Both departmental and library liaisons are encouraged to work with all faculty members and familiarize themselves with research and coursework in their departments. The success of the Liaison Program depends on the establishment of a personal relationship between a librarian with subject expertise and an academic department. Currently, 17 liaisons serve 35 departments.

Each liaison librarian is responsible for providing services in four main areas (Appendix T):

Collections: Develop and manage library collections in all formats that meet the needs of faculty and students in liaison disciplines.

Instruction: Collaborate with departmental faculty to teach basic and discipline specific information literacy skills to students.

Reference: Provide reference and research consultation to faculty and students and develop research guides for liaison disciplines. This reference activity is in addition to reference provided at the Reference Desk in Carrier Library; however, referrals are made from the Reference Desk to liaison librarians to provide in-depth consultation.

Communication: Inform liaison departments about developments in the library and stay informed of changing information needs in liaison areas. Each liaison librarian is responsible for marketing the library services and resources, particularly to faculty.

Each liaison librarian is a participant in the department’s Academic Program Review (APR). As part of the APR evaluation of the quality and quantity of academic support, the liaison librarian assesses library resources, including the levels and quality of access to information. In select majors, assessment data on Library and Technology Skills is also used to evaluate the level to which students are able to locate and use information. The liaison workload relates to the number of assigned departments, the amount of allocation funds, and the numbers of students, faculty, individual consultations, and instructional sessions. The largest number of students for which one liaison has been responsible is over 3,600, and the smallest number is 95. Additional liaison librarians are needed to enhance and improve services and to prevent liaison burn-out. As the Madison Commission aptly stated, “there is a critical point where the operation and personnel…can no longer keep pace…before ‘lean and mean’ translates to ‘haggard and burned-out.’”

In the internal focus groups, the Liaison Program in general and the relationships that it encompasses emerged as the service about which L&ET personnel are most proud. Many people cited their relationships with faculty and students as the most rewarding parts of their jobs, and phrases such as “faculty treat us as peers” and “the relationship liaisons have with departments is quite impressive” were dispersed throughout the focus groups. Corollary services such as instruction and collection development also earned many compliments from staff. Though each liaison handles outreach individually, the existing relationships between librarians and departments are viewed as powerful means of organizational communication. Liaisons have expressed a need for assistance with more coordinated outreach materials and information.

B. LibQUAL+ Survey Data

The LibQUAL+ surveys include questions about the frequency with which users access library and non-library information resources, such as Yahoo or Google. In the 2006 survey, JMU users access non-library gateways on a daily basis 70% of the time, library web pages 16%, and resources on library premises 9%. Weekly and monthly use of resources on library premises increased as did accessing library web pages. Students in the internal focus groups corroborated this data by indicating the first stop for finding information is Google. One student also cited Wikipedia as “foundation to get started.” Another said, “it would be hard for the library to outdo a general internet online search.”

LibQUAL+ comments as well as conversations with faculty indicate this desire for ease in searching and accessing materials online, which includes providing point-of-need assistance in both physical and virtual forums. These findings indicate a continuing need to provide web pages that delineate clear paths to information. Many librarians see non-library sources as complementary rather than competitive to the libraries’ collections. However, the Library should use the knowledge of users’ preference for services like Google and Yahoo to create intuitive search paths and consistent pages that provide point-of-need assistance.

Questions on information control can be divided between personal control and access to information. Access to information was discussed previously under content. Personal control relates to the users’ ability to find information easily, independently, and

remotely. In the 2004 and 2006 surveys, the 2 statements with the highest desired scores relate to personal control: “a library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own” and “making electronic resources accessible from my home or office.” The statement “ability to navigate library web pages easily” rose from sixth overall in 2004 as a desired score to third overall in 2006.

The library web site and remote access to electronic resources are important to our users, and it is critical for L&ET to explore ways to improve services. Comments in both student focus groups and the LibQUAL+ survey address the frustration of searching for information. Several students want a search engine “to look through databases rather than having to search each database individually.” An undergraduate in the humanities commented in the 2006 LibQUAL+ survey, “… finding the right database to use when researching is intimidating.”

LibQUAL+ results, as well as discussions with faculty, indicate a desire for greater electronic access to materials. One faculty member stated that the ideal is “access to any item, from anywhere, at any time.” L&ET has greatly increased the amount of materials available electronically; however, the organization continues to strive for ease of searching and ubiquitous access to all types of materials.

C. Web Services

Web services offered through L&ET facilitate access to both print and electronic collections through the Library website, which serves as a portal to the collections and services offered at Carrier Library, CISAT Library, Music Library, Media Resources, and CIT. Providing online service to our primary users whenever possible, augmenting, and at times replacing service offered within the libraries’ physical walls, the website provides information and guidance in the use of the various services found in the traditional library spaces. It serves as the primary finding aid for physical collections and as the primary means of delivery for digital collections. The website also provides instruction to users regarding the procedures and policies for using the L&ET services and collections.

The number of visits per semester has steadily increased since the spring 2004 in a comparison between like semesters (i.e. spring to spring, summer to summer, etc.) (Appendix U). In the same comparison, the average visit duration remains fairly static. There was a significant increase in page views for fall 2005 (135% increase from fall 2004) and an even greater increase in spring 2006 (207% increase from spring 2005).

To aid electronic access, L&ET provides around 60 public work stations in the reference area. In FY 2004, security on the workstations was changed to allow users to access Microsoft Word, Excel, FrontPage and PowerPoint more easily. Students can now also download any program they need for their work. A program called Deep Freeze restores each workstation to a clean state on each reboot. Students regularly stand in line for access to a workstation. The line typically moves quickly, but can get as long as seven people during the busiest hours. Attempts to address this problem have included reserving two workstations for quick, five-minute use, and moving sit-down workstations to stand-up furniture.

In FY 2004, the University completed wireless network access throughout Carrier Library. Until recently, Reference staff aided students in configuring their computers to use JMU’s wireless network. This service has shifted to checkouts of the VPN client at the Media Resources, CISAT and Music Library service desks. Media Resources in Carrier Library added five laptop computers, all configured for the wireless network, to the circulating collections, which circulated 2,059 times in FY 2004. The next year an additional five laptops were added, with 2,273 circulations. Also, in June 2004 the CISAT library added 4 laptop computers for check-out. FY 2005 shows 415 circulations of these computers.

A pay-for-print service was implemented campus-wide, including in Carrier Library, in Fall 2001. Before that time, printing was free in Carrier Library. Patrons routinely printed and never picked up large print jobs. The switch to paying for printing was heralded campus-wide as an environmental boon and was met with little complaint. In most cases, students print without trouble. That said, the printing software requires fairly consistent troubleshooting within Carrier Library. As existing issues are resolved, new issues tend to appear. This maintenance taxes both the Reference staff as well as Digital Services.

D. Access to Collections

Access services are broadly defined as the “provision of access to a library’s resources and collections, which includes the circulation of materials (general circulation, reserves, interlibrary loan, document delivery), reshelving, stack maintenance, security, and signage” (ODLIS). Essentially, access is the pipeline that carries content to the users. While much of the work done in L&ET involves selecting and evaluating resources, a significant amount of time and effort goes into enabling users to access selected materials. The book collection, for example, would be worthless without the catalog through which users find the material they need. Likewise our journal collection, replete with the full text of thousands of titles, would be far less useful absent the indexing databases to which the library subscribes.

All L&ET services, including access services, are designed with the JMU faculty, graduate students, and undergraduate students in mind. According to the JMU Institutional Research Qwik Enrollment Summaries, all three user group populations have increased from FY 2001 to FY 2006. The largest percentage increase is in the graduate student population, which increased form 609 to 1,067, a 75% increase. The faculty population increased by 55% from 934 to 1,448 faculty members. Although the undergraduate population had the largest increase in terms of raw numbers, the undergraduate student body has only increased 10.6% from 13,824 to 15,287. L&ET must continue to facilitate access to the collections and provide high-levels of service while serving ever-increasing user populations.

1. LEO Library Catalog  LEO Library Catalog is the most widely searched database provided by the Libraries and is a key entryway for users into the collections. LEO serves as a tool for locating tangible and some intangible items held by the Library, including books, journals, scores, audiovisual materials, microforms, and some e-books. Serials and Digital Services, with

input from the entire library staff and from users through usability testing, completed a multi-month overhaul of the look and feel, and some functionality, of LEO in April 2005. A new LEO Task Force has recently been formed to plan and implement the next phase of improvements to the catalog.

The most frequent LEO search performed is a Word search, which became the default search on the front page of the web site in August 2005 as well as on the LEO homepage in April 2005. Although the Word search has consistently been the most popular type of search, having the Word search as the default in these two key locations may account for the increased number of searches of this type. Title and Subject searches follow the Word search as the most common (Figure 14).

Figure 14: LEO Library Catalog SearchesSource: Millennium Reports

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Tota

l Sea

rche

s

WORDS

AUTHORS

SUBJECTS

TITLES

2. Research Databases and ResourcesThe area of the Library’s web site that lists research databases was recently upgraded to a robust web application that will hopefully improve access to research databases.  Liaison librarians can now maintain their subject's research database listings through an administrative interface.  Research databases can be classified not only by subject but also by the type of information they contain.  Research databases can be classified and described differently by liaisons on their subject pages, so that a database like Lexis Nexis Academic can be presented different ways by different liaisons. Custom lists of research databases will be able to be distributed through RSS feeds and similar technologies, so that they can be included on course web pages or online research guides.  The Library is planning usability testing of this application in spring 2007.

3. ReservesAcademic libraries have traditionally provided a reserve service to their user communities as a means for temporarily storing articles, books, and multimedia items so that students in specific classes may have guaranteed, if limited, access. At the request of the teaching faculty, library staff members scan journal articles to be stored on the library server and accessed through LEO.

L&ET offers reserves through Carrier Library, CISAT Library, and Music Library. Use of physical reserves at all three service points has significantly dropped since the implementation of electronic reserves and Digital Orpheus, a reserves module for streaming audio reserves.

4. Periodical Locator and LinkFinderPlusTwo major tools that facilitate electronic access to materials, specifically journal holdings, are Periodical Locator and LinkFinderPlus. Periodical Locator is considered the authoritative source for local newspaper, magazine, and journal holdings information. In FY 2006, there were 106,327 click-thrus for 62,117 periodical titles and 167 databases from the Periodical Locator. There is currently no comparative data for other fiscal years for Periodical Locator usage as the service began in January 2005. In addition to Periodical Locator, LinkFinderPlus guides users from citations in databases to the full-text of an article in either print or electronic format. Since implementing LinkFinderPlus in December 2002, the number of articles retrieved using the service has steadily increased from 26,669 articles in FY 2004 to 65,602 articles in FY 2006.

5. Proxy ServerThe Library provides instructions for users to configure their browser to use a proxy server for off-campus access to subscription resources. Starting in 2006, the campus also supports a VPN client for remote access which can be used as an alternative to the proxy server. In the last two years, Digital Services has increased promotion of the proxy server through bulk e-mails and improved instructions on the website on how to configure browsers (and an encouragement to use the VPN client instead).

In the LibQual+ survey, a graduate student in business commented, “Proxy server makes library unaccessable [sic] from work.” A Psychology faculty member stated, “Biggest issue I'm facing is the ability to consistently retrieve info from research databases while traveling (not a [sic] office or home computer).” A graduate student in the Health Sciences wrote, “I have been unable to access the libraries from home throughout. I have asked for assistance several times, but receive canned responses that do not address the problem. Very frustrating! I use an online library from a prior university that I attended.”

6. Special CollectionsSpecial Collections offers educational and historical preservation education opportunities through student internships, collaboration with faculty, and cooperation with community members to produce library materials (e.g., oral histories, research papers, etc.) of significant historical value. College deans and faculty involved in the July focus group

mentioned the value of the historical and unique collections, and believe that these collections help to define a university.

In FY 2006, two new computers—one for patron use in the reading room and one for the processing room—were purchased and installed in Special Collections. A book scanner was also installed in the reading room, making it possible for patrons to scan and print to the public printers in the downstairs reference area. Patrons are also able to download scans onto CD, DVD, and portable memory devices at their convenience.

The number of reference contacts made with special collections doubled in FY 2006 following a two-year decline. The fall semester saw heavy use of materials, with three separate research classes requesting the use of primary materials in Special Collections (Appendix V).

7. Interlibrary LoanInterlibrary Loan (ILL) provides access to materials not owned by the Library. ILL provides electronic and print copies from journals, book chapters, and reports, and also borrows books, microforms, audiovisual items, theses & dissertations, and other materials from lending libraries. LibQUAL+ results and usage statistics indicate that this service is widely used and greatly appreciated. One faculty member commented that “The ILL department is an invaluable resource, and their service is fabulous.” By providing timely access to resources, ILL plays a crucial role in meeting the information needs of JMU users.

From FY 2001 to FY 2006, the number of loan fills for all user groups (faculty, staff, doctoral, graduate, and undergraduate) has increased by 50% from 4,358 to 6,543. In contrast, the number of article fills for all user groups has decreased by 39% from 7,851 in FY 2001 to 4,783 in FY 2006 (Figure 15). In the past two years, filled requests for loans exceeded requests for articles, indicating that the electronic journal collection is better meeting user needs. As one faculty member stated in the LibQUAL+ comments, “ILL is amazingly fast, though I need it less every year as electronic journal collections have grown.” In FY 2006, the Library was classified as a net lender for articles within VIVA rather than a net borrower for the first time, meaning that the Library loaned article copies to other libraries than they borrowed for their own users.

Figure 15: Borrowing Photocopies & LoansSource: ILLiad Management Reports

-1,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Photocopies Loans

By combining services in ILL and the CISAT Library, a document delivery service is available to patrons on east campus. Whether owned by the Library or not, electronic and physical items may be requested, borrowed, and delivered to users. This is a heavily used service by patrons on east campus. The 2005 CISAT Library Annual Report stated, “There is a recent overall trend downward in article delivery to the east campus. This can likely be attributed to the rapid adoption of major online journal and research collections. Book and media deliveries appear to have remained static.”

8. Physical Delivery ServiceBeginning in summer 2006, the Library began implementation of a campus-wide physical delivery service with service to CISAT, Music, and ETMC. Previously physical delivery was only available to CISAT Library users. According to the Library Delivery Task Force Report from July 11, 2006, the delivery service will be implemented in the following 4 phases:

Phase One Recommendation: Implement a library transportation system centralized in Carrier Library. Key resources needed are a delivery vehicle and additional wage hours in Carrier circulation.

Phase Two Recommendation: Implement a book/media delivery service between all library locations for all library users. That is, any user may request any item that circulates be delivered to another library location for check out. Library materials may also be returned to any location for check in.

Phase Three Recommendation: Implement a campus-wide article delivery service for faculty, staff, and graduate students only. Key resource needed is additional wage hours in ILL.

Phase Four Recommendation: The task force recommends further exploring the possibility of implementing a book/media delivery service to departmental mailboxes for faculty and staff. This is a service that could be relatively

inexpensive to implement and would be very much appreciated. However, there are logistical questions that could be better answered after we have experience with a basic library-to-library delivery system.

To date, Phase One has been successfully implemented.

9. Madison Digital Image DatabaseThe Madison Digital Image Database (MDID) system includes three components— searchable database, slideshow builder and an image viewer. The searchable database provides access to still images and video encoded for streaming. The slideshow builder and image viewer allow instructors to create and show Internet-based lectures using digitized still images. Instructors use the slideshow builder to remotely generate "slideshows" that can be annotated, placed online for student study, or archived for testing or future use. They use the image viewer to present high-resolution images in class. L&ET received an IMLS grant to develop an application programming interface (API) for interoperability with other image systems.

Though many image databases provide flexible faculty and student access to online images, those systems generally do not provide a tool via which faculty can teach and student can learn. MDID brings the digital image and data library into the teaching and learning process, in and outside the classroom.

10. Streaming ServiceMedia Resources has implemented an online video collection. Films for the Humanities and Sciences titles are purchased for the online streaming collection when available. Decisions are based on the spectrum of programming, quality of programming and faculty requests of such programming. The Media Resources director and staff identify high-use video programming for which vendors offer digital rights at reasonable market rates and licensing terms.

E. Virtual Collaborative Space

L&ET offers several virtual collaborative spaces in which JMU users can collaborate to enhance their teaching, learning, research, and scholarship experience at the University. These spaces enable students and faculty to work with one another through virtual forums. These spaces often supplement and sometimes replace face-to-face interactions. The spaces L&ET offers for this type of collaboration include Blackboard, Centra Symposium, Video Conferencing, and Media Equipment Services.

There are currently several approaches to the provision of distance education. These vary from programs that require no physical attendance at JMU to “hybrid” programs that combine on campus with web based instruction, and include the use of online instruction to augment traditional face-to-face instruction.

1. BlackboardBlackboard is an enterprise-level learning system that offers course management capabilities. It is actively used as a course management system (CMS) for approximately 40% of all courses offered at JMU and is used for online class discussions, the submission and grading of assignments, a document and file repository, and for managing group projects. In addition to its use as a CMS, approximately four hundred organizations and student, faculty, and staff committees use Blackboard for document sharing, communication, and collaboration.

Since 2000, the number of active Blackboard course sites has increased from 240 in FY 2001 to 2,639 in FY 2005 and to 3,754 in FY 2006 (Figure 16). It has been used primarily to supplement traditional face-to-face class activities and distribution of class materials.

Figure 16: Active Blackboard CoursesSource: Blackboard Administrative System

240

1,111

1,517

1,927

2,639

3754

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

FY 2001

FY 2002

FY 2003FY 2004

FY 2005

FY 2006

The number of true distance courses using Blackboard almost doubled from 50 in FY 2002 to 99 in FY 2004. There were 126 distance courses in FY 2005 (Figure 17). According to various sources, including the Provost, distance education is expected to continue growing at JMU for the foreseeable future. This will require instruction and support for faculty as well as easily accessed information resources and technology for students.

Figure 17: Online CoursesSource: JMU Registrar's Office

23 23 23 22

1121 19

3023

34

74

27

16

57

94

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

FallSpringSummer

The 2006 Technology Surveys reports eight out of ten faculty respondents who teach indicate very satisfied/satisfied in overall satisfaction with Blackboard as a teaching and learning tool while 96% of student respondents reported very satisfied/satisfied in overall satisfaction (Appendix W1 and Appendix W2). 

2. Centra SymposiumCentra Symposium provides a synchronous meeting space with VOIP (voice over internet protocol) capability. Since 2001, Centra has been used for 226 courses and 280 course sections. Its primary users are faculty and students from the MBA Information Security online distance program. Course offerings and sections vary each semester with no noticeable trend. Highest offerings were in spring 2003 and summer 2005 with a major increase every year in summer institute enrollment. More than 500 students have been enrolled in Centra course sites just in the 2006 spring and summer sessions.4

The CIT provides workshops for faculty and staff in managing and using these and all of their programs. Deans and faculty say that they prefer brief workshops for learning the basics of new technologies rather than detailed, comprehensive workshops. Another suggestion is that workshops include syllabi so that faculty can determine whether or not the workshop is a suitable fit before enrolling.

3. Video ConferencingL&ET currently offers two units for video conferencing: Polycom FX and Tandberg 880 MXP. The Polycom FX unit is both IP and ISDN capable, and it has been used approximately 75 times for a variety of classes, conferences, and meetings. The

4 This number does not reflect unique users.

Tandberg 880 MXP unit is IP capable and has been used approximately 25 times for a variety of conferences and meetings. These video conferencing technologies should be considered in terms of the new library building as a means of enhancing internal L&ET communications.

4. Technology ClassroomsTechnology Classrooms (TCs) or “mediated classrooms” are teaching facilities in which advanced computing and multimedia hardware and software have been installed. Technology Classroom staff members are available Monday through Thursday 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and Friday 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Formal training sessions occur at the start of each semester, and more informal individual training may be arranged upon request. Faculty in a faculty focus group stated the need for quick assistance in those rooms even to the point of suggesting staffing in mediated classrooms.

The 2006 Technology Surveys reports 85% of faculty respondents who teach indicate very satisfied/satisfied in overall satisfaction with technology in the classroom, specifically the instructor computer and classroom projector (Appendix W1 and Appendix W2). Expectations for technology in classrooms are also changing. For example, one faculty member commented, “Add tablets to the classroom where you can write on the screen and it projects.”

5. Media Equipment ServicesThe Media Resources Center provides audio visual equipment for use of items from the collection. Such equipment includes DVD players, VCRs, laser disc players, and a multi-standard video for international video use. A screening room is provided for group use. Media Resource staff is responsible for maintaining and replacing the equipment as necessary.

Media Equipment Loans, a branch of Media Resources located in Spotswood Hall, circulates A/V equipment for faculty, staff and student use. Video equipment includes digital & VHS camcorders, DVD & VHS players, televisions, slide projectors, and P.A. equipment (amplifiers and microphones). They also circulate 2 high-end oral history recorders. Computing loans include data projectors, laptops (for faculty and staff use only), and digital still cameras. Pick-up & delivery services are provided for classroom use and individual training when requested. CIT also circulates digital cameras for faculty and staff use.

The Music Library provides and maintains an A/V area for use of all types of media formats held in the collection. This equipment includes ‘research stations’ that replace traditional CD players, DVD monitors by allowing simultaneous access to the multiple formats required for music research. This includes online research (streaming audio, digital scores), use of tangible items locally and access to all audio formats distributed via FM transmission.

F. Educational Services

Educational services provide training and instructional opportunities for JMU students and faculty so that they know how to access L&ET resources. These services are provided by members of the L&ET faculty and staff, and are used by many members of the JMU community as well as members of the larger academic community. Interpretation services are those that are provided in order to help our users understand and use the physical, virtual, and intellectual resources managed by L&ET. The user group (i.e., students and faculty) in most cases determines how and what educational services are provided. Educational services include information literacy training, reference and individual consultation, technology training and support, online tutorials, guides, and reference.

1. Information Literacy & Library InstructionInformation literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to “recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information” (American Library Association). In addition, information literacy skills have been identified for many disciplines (Association of Research and College Libraries. Instruction Section. Teaching Methods Committee).

The library instruction/information literacy program supports the mission of the University “to prepare students to be educated and enlightened citizens who will lead productive and meaningful lives.” The mission of the instruction program is to collaborate with faculty to develop information literate students. The goal is to integrate information literacy into the curricula of General Education and every major at the University to provide students with skills that are foundational to higher education, effective job performance, active citizenship, and lifelong learning. Teaching information literacy to students is a shared responsibility of faculty and librarians.

The program has two tiers: basic information-seeking skills and discipline-specific skills in the major. The Tier One skills (basic information-seeking skills) are fully integrated into Cluster One of the General Education program. At this basic level, the program consists of specific learning objectives for information literacy, Go for the Gold, the Information-Seeking Skills Test (ISST), and course-related assignments. The library supports this tier by maintaining Go for the Gold and the ISST, teaching workshops for Cluster One faculty each summer, and working with faculty on developing assignments.

To address the learning objectives of Cluster One, eight instructional modules with online exercises and a score report database comprise Go for the Gold. All first-year students are required to complete this tutorial in a Cluster One communication course. Go for the Gold not only teaches basic information literacy skills but also helps prepare students for the ISST. The ISST is an online 53-item test that measures the information literacy learning objectives. Since 1999, all first-year students are required to pass ISST by the end of their first year. Those who do not pass have a registration hold placed on their record until they pass.

Tier II—discipline-specific skills in the major—occurs through collaboration between the teaching faculty and the library liaisons. The goal is to collaborate with faculty to integrate information literacy in a required research-oriented course in at least one point in the curriculum. Some librarians have worked with their departments to write

information literacy objectives specific to the major that serve as a basis for planning instruction and assessing learning.

There has been a fluctuation in the number of students taught and the number of instruction sessions offered (see Table 11); however, the reasons for that fluctuation are unclear. Possible contributing factors include changes in the way that librarian-taught courses (for credit) are counted, changes in the way faculty construct assignments obviating some need for instruction, and changes in new faculty orientation may cause newer faculty not to know as much about the instructional offerings.

In

addition to instruction in the major, several liaison librarians have developed information literacy tests specific to the major (psychology, geography, social work, and integrated science & technology). These are performance-based tests that require students to find and evaluate information as well as answer knowledge-based questions. Results from these tests are used to improve instruction.

Per faculty request, liaison librarians also collaborate with departmental faculty to design information literacy assignments related to the content of a course. The amount of assignment-design collaboration varies greatly from liaison to liaison.

In May 2006, the Library and the CFI offered a 3-day workshop, “Information Literacy for Teaching and Learning: A Workshop for Faculty and Librarians,” in which instructional faculty and librarians worked in pairs to integrate information literacy into the coursework of majors.  Faculty and liaison librarians modified a course to include information literacy objectives, design effective active learning assignments, and plan accompanying instruction. The goal was to promote resource-based learning outside the classroom and to equip students with skills that will enable them to continue to learn in their discipline. The workshop experience and outcomes will set the stage for further collaboration between liaison librarians and departmental faculty toward integrating information literacy into the curricula of majors. The Library will offer information literacy development opportunities for faculty annually.

See Appendix X for awards received for the library instruction program and Appendix Y for additional information on assessing information literacy at JMU.

2. Instructional Technology WorkshopsThe CIT is responsible for helping faculty members integrate technology and technological innovations into their instruction. This service is provided by offering

Table 11: Library Instruction: FY 2000 - FY 2006Source: Room Scheduler

FY 2001

FY 2002

FY 2003

FY 2004

FY 2005

FY 2006

Students instructed 6,795 7,104 6,543 7,394 6,228 6,984Instruction sessions 269 306 252 261 241 256Librarians delivering instruction

13 15 14 14 17 20

Departments receiving instruction

27 33 32 34 34 34

workshops, providing “house calls,” where a CIT staff member will work with a faculty member in his or her office, and by maintaining a collection of resource guides for the various software applications. Finally, the CIT maintains a walk-in work area where faculty members can receive support and use various pieces of specialized hardware and software. The CIT is the focal point of support for Blackboard, JMU’s course management software.

CIT workshops come in a variety of formats, including standard application specific workshops, custom workshops designed for a specific department or project, and current awareness workshops designed to inform the faculty of emerging trends or technology. Based on the numbers of workshops offered and house calls made, the CIT is reaching a substantial number of faculty and staff in the JMU community. Until July, 2005, attendance numbers reflected the number of individuals attending each event, thus attendance of 100 could have been 100 individuals attending one event each, or 50 individuals attending two events each. Regardless, the maximum attendance was 1,602 in FY 2002 and the minimum was 946 in FY 2004. University records indicate that In FY 2006, the CIT provided nearly 2400 hours of instruction to 450 unique individuals. The CIT collaborates with the CFI, a JMU center that provides training in pedagogy and other kinds of instructional support to teaching faculty, to reach an even wider audience.

The CIT also sponsors intensive multi-day institutes for faculty looking for assistance and guidance in undertaking a large project like putting an entire class online. The summer institute is a competitive opportunity, which faculty members are paid to attend. The CIT also offers department specific institutes to support department wide initiatives. To date a total of 62 faculty have participated in summer institutes through the CIT.

3. Reference Desk ServiceThe reference desk service is provided by professional librarians, library assistants, and student workers. The individuals who staff the desk report to various supervisors across the organization. Reference desk service is provided face-to face, over the telephone, and via e-mail. Though it is a core function of the library, there is no overarching mission to guide the provision of this vital service; however, a reference strategic planning process is currently underway.

The reference service page on the L&ET web site currently defines reference desk service with the following sentences: “Reference staff are available to assist students, faculty, staff and community members with the resources available in JMU libraries. We can assist you with identifying and using electronic and print reference tools, creating search strategies, and answering specific informational questions” (http://www.lib.jmu.edu/reference/carrierref.aspx). The central Reference Desk is located on the first floor of Carrier Library, with both the CISAT Library and Music Library providing reference services as well.

Measuring reference services is difficult and has been done inconsistently over the past five years. The library counts all reference transactions during a “typical week” (usually in mid-October)—as suggested by the Academic Library Survey (formerly IPEDS survey). Reference transactions include in-person, e-mail, and telephone reference questions answered by all librarians and staff. For the ACRL survey (Appendix Z), which asks for an estimated annual total, this weekly total is multiplied by 40, the estimated

number of weeks the library is open, minus holidays, summer weekends, etc. (Figure 18).

Figure 18: Reference Transactions Reported to ACRLSource: ACRL Survey 1999 - 2006

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

In 2003, the Carrier Reference Desk began keeping a running tally of both reference and informational questions asked. Because this practice is quite different from the one used to report numbers to ACRL and because the time period during which it was done is not the same, a direct comparison of the two methods is not possible. However, for the single common year for which both sets of data are available, FY 2006, the actual number of questions tallied at the desk was 8,084. For comparison, the ACRL number for the same period was 38,880. The 8,084 questions includes only those questions posed in-person at the Reference Desk and excludes the CISAT and the Music libraries as well as any reference delivered via e-mail and by librarians in their offices. Whether this accounts for the 30,000+ discrepancy is unknown.

The Library has provided an e-mail reference service since 1999, and the numbers of e-mail reference transactions are represented in Figure 19. E-mail reference is coordinated by Digital Services and, as of 2005, is now part of reference desk duty rather than a daily assignment. Twice during the year, the archive of already-answered questions was accidentally deleted, which may explain some of the decrease for FY 2006.

Figure 19: Number of E-Mail Reference TransactionsSource: Digital Services Annual Report

0

100

200

300

400

500

FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

While librarians and library assistants staff the desk between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., professional librarians staff the desk in the evening and on the weekends exclusively. These shifts are four hours each, meaning that for each four hour evening or weekend shift that a librarian covers, that represents four hours of “comp. time” during the week when he or she is not available for instruction, faculty support, student support, etc. Moreover, the quantity of reference questions posed during these hours can be quite different from what happens during the day. While the reference statistics do not indicate whether a professional librarian’s skills are necessary to handle the questions posed during the evening and weekend hours, the practice of staffing the desk on weekends and evenings with librarians bears further consideration.

Unlike the Liaison Program, Reference was one area that garnered a significant number of negative comments from library staff during focus group conversations. Some comments noted that the lack of a unified marketing strategy from public services was most detrimental to Reference since it has no mission statement, thus no message. A number of comments mentioned the poor state of the reference area, noting that the furnishings are “shabby” and the lack of equipment is “embarrassing.” Many participants lamented the lack of virtual reference, noting that the Reference does not participate in online chat or instant message services, and fails to understand or connect to our core users, the 18- to 22-year-old “digital natives.”

4. Reference ConsultationFor more in-depth research questions, students and faculty members may meet with a liaison librarian for assistance in learning new sources and skills. These consultations are available on a per request basis only. The number of reference consultations

provided varies according to the subject area and liaison librarian. Some liaisons regularly meet with individual students and faculty members while other liaisons rarely provide reference consultation services. This service operates independently from the Reference Desk Service and is considered more a part of the liaison program.

5. Instructional Technology House CallsHouse calls provide faculty and staff with one-on-one instruction for many of the instructional technologies supported by the CIT. On average the CIT has provided 160 house calls each year for the past five years. The Faculty Development staff and the Blackboard Support staff conduct house calls for the CIT. Currently, there are seven staff members who fulfill this function.

6. DDLS Support DDLS support is provided for all Blackboard users. One full-time staff member and one part-time staff member are responsible for providing e-mail and phone support for Blackboard questions. DDLS support receives approximately 50 to 100 e-mails and 45 to 75 phone calls each month. The Faculty Development Staff and Blackboard Support Staff conduct house calls for the CIT. Currently there are 7 staff members responsible for house calls.

DDLS also serves as point of contact and communication for individual faculty and academic units that are either interested in developing or planning implementations of technology-assisted instruction. Faculty Forums serve as catalysts for faculty discussion and collaboration on teaching and research. Incentive programs like the Summer Institute and the Departmental Online Course Development Initiative serve a key role as the only programs that provide campus-wide online course development services for faculty.

7. Guides & TutorialsThe liaison librarians have prepared guides to important free and licensed sources for each major. These are available through the Carrier Library home page under Research Guides. Currently on the library website there are 37 top-level research guides and 166 sub-guides developed for specific programs, courses, or areas of enquiry. Concern has been expressed about the similarity of Research Guides and Research Resources functions on the web site. Liaisons have also developed videos, Tegrity presentations, tutorials, games, class exercises, and other materials to enhance learning. The Health Sciences Librarian is currently working on an instructional game that focuses on health and information literacy funded by IMLS grant.

Tutorials differ from guides in that they are designed to be somewhat interactive and may use multimedia formats. Applications like Tegrity and Captivate are used to capture video and audio. Studymate is a Blackboard plug-in that is used to develop Flash based games and study support materials. Generally, tutorials are designed to help users learn a specific task like using RefWorks to format a bibliography. CheckCite, created in-house, offers help to students citing sources. The most significant tutorial is Go for the Gold, the modular web-based tutorial that is used in conjunction with the General Education program. This tutorial serves two purposes: to orient new students to the library and to prepare them to take the Information Seeking Skills Test. There are ten

additional brief task-specific tutorials. Currently the library only has 11 tutorials online in a designated place; however, others may be “buried” in the various subject-specific research guides.

In addition to the Library’s guides, the CIT has 22 top-level guides and tutorials and a total of 124 sub-guides. These guides are developed to support the applications that are taught in the workshops and are posted on the CIT’s web page.

G. Key Findings

Students prefer to use virtual services and spaces for finding information. They also want easily navigable systems that delineate clear paths to information. L&ET must use the knowledge of users’ preference for services like Google and Yahoo to create intuitive search paths and consistent pages that provide point-of-need assistance.

Use of the Library’s virtual resources continues to increase. Staffing and maintenance of the virtual services must be adequately addressed.

The Library Liaison program faces some challenges: unified library communication, support for instruction and collection development, and assignment to academic departments. Librarians expressed a need for more coordination for this program in order to explore how to best serve the campus and the many ways students study and faculty teach.

With improvements in database technology and searching technologies, the functionality of the integrated library system (ILS) as a discovery tool must improve.

The complexity of library instruction competes with the scarcity of time each liaison has with students.

The Library will increase efforts to collaborate with faculty on developing information literacy assignments into coursework of majors.

Reference as a service must serve a growing non-traditional student population. Not only have user expectations and behaviors changed, but the information they need to access has also changed. The simplicity of the traditionally defined library reference service belies its complexity today.

XIII. Glossary to Terms and Acronyms

| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z |

| A |

ACAS – see Automated Collection Analysis Services

ACRL – see Association of College and Research Libraries

Access ServicesThe provision of access to a library's resources and collections, which includes the circulation of materials (general circulation, reserves, interlibrary loan, document delivery), reshelving, stack maintenance, security, and signage (ODLIS).

AggregatorA bibliographic service that provides online access to the digital full-text of periodicals published by different publishers (ODLIS).

ALA – see American Library Association

American Library Association (ALA)The leading professional association of public and academic libraries and librarians in the United States (ODLIS).

Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL)A division of the American Library Association since 1889, ACRL has a membership of academic and research librarians committed to improving the quality of service in academic libraries, promoting the career and professional development of academic and research librarians, and supporting the programs of academic and research libraries (ODLIS).

Automated Collection Analysis Services (ACAS)A service offered by OCLC that enables libraries to “analyze the age and subject content of their own collections, compare their collections with those of peer libraries, and compare, as a group, the level of overlap or uniqueness of their collections” (http://www.oclc.org/news/releases/20054.htm).

| B |

Back filesAll the issues of a periodical that precede the current issue, usually bound in annual volumes or converted to microfilm or microfiche to conserve space (ODLIS).

Bibliographic ControlA broad term encompassing all the activities involved in creating, organizing, managing, and maintaining the file of bibliographic records representing the items held in a library or archival collection, or the sources listed in an index or database, to facilitate access to the information contained in them. Bibliographic control includes the standardization of bibliographic description and subject access by means of uniform catalog code, classification systems, name authorities, and preferred headings; the creation and maintenance of catalogs, union lists, and finding aids; and the provision of physical access to the items in the collection (ODLIS).

Bibliographic RecordAn entry representing a specific item in a library catalog or bibliographic database, containing all the data elements necessary for a full description, presented in a specific bibliographic format. In modern cataloging, the standard format is machine-readable (example: the MARC record), but prior to the use of computers, the traditional format was the catalog card. Compare with catalog record, check-in record, item record, and order record (ODLIS).

| C |

CDC – see Collection Development Committee

CFI – see Center for Faculty Innovation

CIT – see Center for Instructional Technology

Center for Faculty Innovation (CFI)A faculty-driven endeavor that resides within Academic Affairs that purposes to provide “support for faculty in their multidimensional roles” (http://www.jmu.edu/cfi/).

Center for Instructional Technology (CIT)A center that “provides direction, focus, visibility and proactive support for technological innovation in instruction” in order to support “the use of technology for teaching and learning” and to develop “innovative courseware (from course-specific items to instructional systems) for use in synchronous, asynchronous and distributed learning environments” (http://cit.jmu.edu/cit/).

Circulation ServicesThe library department that manages the physical control of the collection, including checking material in and out, collecting fines, and maintaining the shelves.

CLIR – see Collaborative Library Instruction Repository

Collaborative Library Instruction Repository (CLIR)

An online storage system through which all liaisons can voluntarily store and share materials of any format in order to share with colleagues, spark creativity, mentor new liaisons, increase collaboration, reduce duplication of effort, and help colleagues answer class-specific reference questions.

Collection Development The process of planning and building a useful and balanced collection of library materials over a period of years, based on an ongoing assessment of the information needs of the library's clientele, analysis of usage statistics, and demographic projections, normally constrained by budgetary limitations. Collection development includes the formulation of selection criteria, planning for resource sharing, and replacement of lost and damaged items, as well as routine selection and deselection decisions (ODLIS).

Collection Development Committee (CDC)A standing committee charged with planning, organizing, and monitoring “activities related to collection development, evaluation, and maintenance for all types of information resources” (http://staffweb.lib.jmu.edu/administration/collection).

Content The essential matter or substance of a written work or discourse, as opposed to its form or style. In a more general sense, all the ideas, topics, facts, or statements contained in a book or other written work (ODLIS).

Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources (COUNTER)An international initiative launched in March 2002 to serve librarians, publishers, and intermediaries by developing more consistent, reliable, and meaningful measures of online resource usage to facilitate the recording and exchange of e-usage statistics. The project initially focused on journals and bibliographic databases but will include other types of networked resources, such as e-books. Librarians can encourage the adoption of this new code of practice by requiring vendors to be COUNTER-compliant in licensing agreements (ODLIS).

| D |

DLC – see Depository Library Council

DatabaseA large, regularly updated file of digitized information (bibliographic records, abstracts, full-text documents, directory entries, images, statistics, etc.) related to a specific subject or field, consisting of records of uniform format organized for ease and speed of search and retrieval and managed with the aid of database management system (DBMS) software (ODLIS)

DDLS – see Distributed and Distance Learning Services

Depository Library Council (DLC)

A council of depository libraries whose mission is to assist the Government Printing Office in identifying and evaluating alternatives for improving public access to government information through the Depository Library Program (DLP) and for optimizing resources available for operating the Program (GPO Access)

Distributed and Distance Learning Services (DDLS)Services provided through L&ET to connect JMU learners with quality academic experiences that bridge time and distance.

Dublin CoreA standard set of 15 interoperable metadata elements designed to facilitate the description and recovery of document-like resources in a networked environment (ODLIS). Dublin Core is used to guide the creation of MDID records.

| E |

ECVA – see Electronic Campus of Virginia

Educational Technology and Media Center (ETMC)

Electronic Campus of Virginia (ECVA)A cooperative instructional technology initiative among the Commonwealth’s public and private colleges and universities

Electronic Resource Management (ERM)A tool provided by Innovative Interfaces designed “to develop local control mechanisms for managing licensed resources such as e-journals, Abstracting and Indexing (A&I) databases, and full-text databases” (http://www.iii.com/mill/digital.shtml).

Equipment Trust Fund (ETF)A program administered by SCHEV as “an additional funding source that allows higher education institutions to purchase equipment. Equipment purchased with Trust Fund monies is not owned by the University, but is tied to leasing agreements with the VCBA” (http://www.jmu.edu/acctgserv/etf.shtml).

E-ReservesElectronic reserves— Items placed on reserve that an academic library makes available online to be read on a computer screen, downloaded to diskette, or printed as needed (ODLIS).

ERM – see Electronic Resource Management

ETF – Equipment Trust Fund

ETMC – see Educational Technology and Media Center

| G |

Go for the GoldA set of instructional modules designed by the Library reference staff to teach students basic information-seeking skills (http://www.lib.jmu.edu/gold/default.aspx).

| I |

IC – see Information Commons

IMLS – see Institute of Museum and Library Services

Information Commons (IC)A new type of technology-enhanced collaborative facility on college and university campuses that integrates library and computer application services (information, technology, and learning) in a single floor plan, often equipped with a wireless network and, in some cases, equipment for multimedia production (ODLIS).

Information LiteracyThe set of skills needed to find, retrieve, analyze, and use information (ACRL).

Information Seeking Skills Test (ISST)A test that “All students enrolled in General Education Cluster One are required to pass […] during the freshman year” in order to ensure that they “develop the necessary knowledge and skills early in their university career” (http://www.jmu.edu/gened/info_lit_general.html).

InfrastructureThe organizational structure, the people (their skills, experience, and credentials), the financial systems, the physical spaces, and the virtual spaces that comprise an organization

Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS)An independent federal grant-making agency created under the Museum and Library Services Act of 1996 to foster leadership, innovation, and lifelong learning by supporting museums, archives, and libraries of all types and by encouraging partnerships among them (ODLIS).

Institutional Repository (IR)A set of services offered by a university or group of universities to members of its community for the management and dissemination of scholarly materials in digital format created by the institution and its community members, such as e-prints, technical reports, theses and dissertations, data sets, and teaching materials. Stewardship of such materials entails their organization in a cumulative, openly accessible database and a commitment to long-term preservation when appropriate. Some IRs are also used as electronic presses to publish e-journals and e-books. An institutional repository is distinguished from a

subject-based repository by its institutionally defined scope. IRs are part of a growing effort to reform scholarly communication and break the monopoly of journal publishers by reasserting institutional control over the results of scholarship. An IR may also serve as an indicator of the scope and extent of the university's research activities (ODLIS).

Interpretation ServicesThe means by which library staff members help users decide how to use library resources.

IR – see Institutional Repository

ISST – see Information Seeking Skills Test

| L |

LC – see Library of Congress

LCC – see Library of Congress Classification

LDAP – see Lightweight Directory Access Protocol

LiaisonIn academic libraries, librarians are often assigned one or more academic departments for which they serve as intermediary between the teaching faculty and the library. Liaison responsibilities may include bibliographic instruction, collection development (including reference and electronic resources), current awareness, and faculty training in the use of library resources. Most liaison librarians have academic preparation or at least some level of expertise in the disciplines they serve (ODLIS).

Library of Congress (LC)Established by Congress in 1800 to function as a research library for the legislative branch of the federal government, the Library of Congress eventually became the unofficial national library of the United States. Located in Washington, D.C., LC houses a collection of over 120 million items and administers the U.S. copyright system, serving as the nation's copyright depository. LC is also the primary source of original cataloging in the United States (ODLIS).

Library of Congress Classification (LCC)A system of classifying books and other library materials developed and maintained over the last 200 years by the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. In LCC, human knowledge is divided into 20 broad categories indicated by single letters of the roman alphabet, with major subdivisions indicated by a second letter, and narrower subdivisions by decimal numbers and further alphabetic notation (ODLIS).

LibQUAL+

A suite of services designed to enable libraries to solicit, track, understand, and act upon the opinions of library users concerning quality of service. Developed with grant support from the U.S. Department of Education's Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) and offered by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), LibQUAL+ includes a rigorously tested Web-based survey bundled with training to help libraries assess and improve library services, change organizational culture, and market the library (ODLIS).

Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)The server that manages the identity of all JMU users with e-ids.

Link ResolverApplication software that uses the OpenURL standard to provide context-sensitive linking between a citation in a bibliographic database and the electronic full text of the resource cited (article, essay, conference paper, book, etc.) in an aggregator database or online from the publisher, taking into account which materials the user is authorized by subscription or licensing agreement to access. Some link resolvers provide "all text" linking capability with access services such as interlibrary loan and automated catalog searching (ODLIS).

LinkFinderPlusThe link resolver software provided by L&ET through Endeavor Information Systems in order to facilitate access to the libraries’ collections

LOCKSS An acronym for Lots of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe, an application designed to create low-cost, persistent digital "caches" of electronic journal articles, housed locally at institutions that have authorized access to the content and elect to preserve it. The idea behind LOCKSS is that e-journal content is more likely to be preserved if there are many distributed copies of the material (ODLIS).

| M |

Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) An international standard digital format for the description of bibliographic items developed by the Library of Congress during the 1960s to facilitate the creation and dissemination of computerized cataloging from library to library within the same country and between countries. By 1971, the MARC format had become the national standard for dissemination of bibliographic data and by 1973, an international standard (ODLIS).

Madison Digital Image Database (MDID)A database developed by L&ET to store collections of digital images primarily for the teaching and study of art and art history.

MARC – see Machine-Readable Cataloging

MDID – see Madison Digital Image Database

MicroformA generic term for a highly reduced photographic copy of text and/or images stored on a translucent medium (microfiche or microfilm) or on an opaque medium such as card stock (microopaque or aperture card). Microforms can be original editions or reproductions. Reader-printer machines are required to view and make hard copies. Digital storage media such as magnetic tape and disk, CD-ROM, etc., are superseding microforms in information storage and retrieval, but the transformation is far from complete (ODLIS).

Monograph A relatively short book or treatise on a single subject, complete in one physical piece, usually written by a specialist in the field. Monographic treatment is detailed and scholarly but not extensive in scope (see these examples). The importance of monographs in scholarly communication depends on the discipline. In the humanities, monographs remain the format of choice for serious scholars, but in the sciences and social sciences where currency is essential, journals are usually the preferred means of publication (ODLIS).

| O |

OA – see Open Access

OCLC – see Online Computer Library Center

Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) The largest bibliographic utility in the world, providing cataloging and acquisitions services, serials and circulation control, interlibrary loan support, and access to online databases (ODLIS).

Open Access (OA)Information content made freely and universally available via the Internet in easy to read format, usually because the publisher maintains online archives to which access is free or has deposited the information in a widely known open access repository. Open access is a new model of scholarly publishing developed to free researchers and libraries from the limitations imposed by excessive subscription price increases for peer-reviewed journals, particularly in the sciences and medicine (ODLIS).

| P |

Periodical LocatorA Serials Solutions product that is considered the authoritative source for journal description and holdings information of subscribed as well as aggregator titles, titles available through full-text databases

Project COUNTER

An international initiative designed to serve librarians, publishers and intermediaries by facilitating the recording and exchange of online usage statistics (http://www.projectcounter.org/about.html).

Public ServicesActivities and operations of a library that bring the staff into regular direct contact with its users, including circulation, reference, online services, bibliographic instruction, serials assistance, government documents, and interlibrary loan/document delivery, as distinct from technical services, which are performed behind the scenes, out of contact with library users (ODLIS).

| S |

SBA – see Small Business Administration

SCHEV – see State Council of Higher Education for Virginia

Small Business Administration (SBA)“Created in 1953 as an independent agency of the federal government to aid, counsel, assist and protect the interests of small business concerns, to preserve free competitive enterprise and to maintain and strengthen the overall economy of our nation” (http://www.sba.gov/aboutsba/index.html).

State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV)An advisory group providing strategic planning for state-wide educational technologies initiatives

| T |

Technical ServicesLibrary operations concerned with the acquisition, organization (bibliographic control), physical processing, and maintenance of library collections, as opposed to the delivery of public services (ODLIS).

Technical Support – East Campus (TS-EC)The branch of Classroom Technology that provides technical support for various systems and software on East Campus

TS-EC – see Technical Support – East Campus

| V |

VCBA – see Virginia College Building Authority

Virginia College Building Authority (VCBA)

A branch of the Virginia Department of the Treasury intended “to facilitate or provide financing for certain capital projects and educational equipment for state-owned institutions of higher education and to provide a conduit financing mechanism for private, non-profit institutions in Virginia” (http://www.trs.virginia.gov/debt/vcba.asp).

Virtual Library of Virginia (VIVA)A consortium of Virginia libraries that seek “to provide, in an equitable, cooperative and cost-effective manner, enhanced access to library and information resources for the Commonwealth of Virginia’s non-profit academic libraries serving the higher education community” (http://www.vivalib.org/).

VIVA – see Virtual Library of Virginia

XIV. ReferencesAllen, I. A., & Seaman, J. (2006). Growing by Degrees: Online Education in the United

States, 2005 (Southern Edition). Sloan Consortium. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/growing_by_degrees_southern.pdf

American Council of Learned Societies. (2006). Our Cultural Commonwealth: The Report of the American Council of Learned Societies’ Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for Humanities and Social Sciences. American Council of Learned Societies. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from http://www.acls.org/cyberinfrastructure/acls.ci.report.pdf

American Library Association. Presidential Committee on Information Literary: Final Report.. Retrieved 10/16, 2006, from http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/whitepapers/presidential.htm

Association of Research and College Libraries. Instruction Section. Teaching Methods Committee. Information literarcy in the disciplines. Retrieved October 16, 2006, from http://www.ala.org/ala/acrlbucket/is/projectsacrl/infolitdisciplines/index.htm

Atkins, D. E., & etc. (2003). Revolutionizing Science and Engineering through Cyberinfrastructure. National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory, Panel on Cyberinfrastructure. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from http://www.nsf.gov/cise/sci/reports/atkins.pdf

Beckett, C. (2006). The New World Order in Collection Development: The Commercial Perspective. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from http://www.scholinfo.com/presentations/2006/8/10/the-new-world-order-in-collection-development-the-commercial-perspective.htm

Couturier, L. K. (2006). Checks and Balances at Work: The Restructuring of Virginia's Public Higher Education System. National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from http://www.highereducation.org/reports/checks_balances/virginia.pdf

Dempsey, L. (2006, October 13, 2006). Distributing the Catalog Discovery Experience. Message posted to http://orweblog.oclc.org/archives/001174.html

Downey, M. (2006, August 14, 2006). Assessing Colleges Proves Challenging: Federal Commission Calls for Ways to Measure Learning versus Cost. [Electronic version]. Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Retrieved October 10, 2006, from LexisNexis Academic database.

Gartner. (2006). Hype Cycle for Higher Education. Gartner. Retrieved August 15, 2006, from Gartner Advisory IntraWeb database from http://www.gartner.com/resources/139100/139174/hype_cycle_higher_educat_139174.pdf

Lamb, G. M. (2006, October 5, 2006). Real learning in a virtual world. [Electronic version]. Christian Science Monitor, Retrieved October 10, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis Academic database.

Loughran, T. (2006). Book pricing update--book price inflation highest in years. Against the Grain, 18(2), 73.

Lynch, C. (2002). Digital collections, digital libraries and the digitization of cultural heritage information. First Monday, 7(5)

McGeveran, W., & Fisher, W. (2006). Digital learning challenge: Obstacles to educational uses of copyrighted material in the digital age. Berkman Center for Internet & Society. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=923465#PaperDownload

Meattle, J. (2006, August 11, 2006). Social networks gaining on top portals. Message posted to http://blog.compete.com/index.php/2006/08/11/top-social-networks-gaining-on-top-portals-yahoo-google/

Needham, G., & Williams, J. F. (2006, August 11, 2006). Perceptions and Realities: Confronting the New Library Environment (webcast). Message posted to http://infopeople.org/training/webcasts/list/archived

New Media Consortium. (2006). 2006 Horizon Report. New Media Consortium. Retrieved September 6, 2006, from http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2006_Horizon_Report.pdf

Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources: A report to the OCLC membership.(2005). OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. Retrieved September 22, 2006.

Talbot, D. (2005). Next-Generation Networks: Today’s internet is like “second-class mail,” but solutions exist, says doug van houweling, CEO of Internet2. Technology Review, September 3, 2006 . Retrieved September 3, 2006, from http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=15937&ch=infotech

Udell, J. (2004). The New Social Enterprise. InfoWorld, 24(13), 47-52.

Van Orsdel, L. C., & Born, K. (2006). Journals In the Time of Google. Library Journal, 131(7), 39-44.

Virginia Information Technologies Agency (VITA). (2005). Virginia Information Technology Accessibility. Commonwealth of Virginia. Retrieved September 6, 2005, from http://www.vita.virginia.gov/docs/psg/AccessibilityStandard_GOV103-00_Eff_11-04-05.pdf