Faculty Senate Library Committee


May 30, 2006


Present:  Sara Singleton (Chair), Béla Foltin (ex-officio), Donna Packer, Kyle Crowder,

                Andrea Peterson, Steven Emory, Eiledon McClellan, Nicholas Wonder


Absent:  Larry Gilbert (ex-officio), Kathleen Tomlonovic, Danny Rowe                  


I.                    Minutes

Minutes of April 26, 2006 were approved with one correction – the date.


II.            Announcements

a)          New Members:  Professor Nicholas Wonder joined the committee, representing the area of Finance and Marketing.  S. Singleton said this would be her last meeting to serve as Chair of the committee; however, she will stay on for another two year term.  K. Tomlonovic has also agreed to return for a second term.

III.                Reports 


a)     Interdepartmental Allocation of Acquisition Budget & Statistics:  S. Singleton presented the SLC annual report to the Faculty Senate. The Senate asked for more transparency regarding how decisions are made in the allocation of this budget and how the process works.

A primary allocation issue is the “books to journals” ratio; departments should spend no more than 85% of their allocation on journals but due to yearly escalating journal costs, their budget could quickly be eaten up by inflation alone.  The idea of having all departments take a yearly review of their journal subscriptions list was discussed.

Several data sets were distributed by D. Packer, which provided information on factors involved with allocating the acquisitions budget. D. Packer listed the main, (but not only), variables for departments as:

Ø               Number of students

Ø               Number of staff and faculty

Ø               Cost of materials

Ø               Number of materials published and amount of research done

Ø               Volume of literature used

There is no ‘right’ answer because no single formula has been found that would be ‘right’ for all departments. Anytime the formula is changed to benefit one department, it will invariably cause cuts to another. 

The growth of the university is another factor that seriously affects the allocations budget; as more courses and/or majors are added, more strain is put on the allocation for that department / discipline because there is no extra money is available to cover the need for new books and materials.

Regarding the acquisition budget, members hope to accomplish the following during the next year:

Ø               Provide Faculty Senate with clearer information on how department allocations are made, and also provide information on the varied needs of individual departments

Ø               Produce a document which shows the effects different types of adjustments would have on department allocations.


Sen Library, p. 2



The next steps the SLC should take in moving toward resolving the long-term problems of acquisition allocations are:

Ø               D. Packer to produce a list of what variables are used in deciding allocations and how they are weighted;



Ø               Determine what information departments should collect in order to address these variables, and what are the most important issues for each department

Ø               Members to review the original formula developed and also review what we are using now (B. Foltin asked D. Packer to run today’s numbers against the old formula to see outcome)

Ø               B. Foltin to collect information on what the most important needs are for library materials within departments, i.e. course syllabus, faculty research, credit hours taught (currently this information is collected on a voluntary basis only so full picture isn’t achieved).

IV.                Discussion

a)     Letter from LeAnn Martin, Chair, Physical Ed, Health & Recreation:  Professor Martin expressed concern about her department’s percentage of the acquisitions budget due to dept growth. She requested a ‘recalculation’ of her department’s allocation. This brought up the growth issue outlined earlier and emphasized that departments do not understand the complexities or process involved in allocating this budget.  Members suggested:

Ø               Departments should review their journals list yearly and consider ‘use’ of each journal

Ø               Librarians to help get departments more involved with the allocation process so they will understand the issues and can help make informed decisions.

Ø               B. Foltin and D. Packer could attend a future Faculty Senate meeting to explain issues in more detail.

b)      Update on Potential Student Fee:      B. Foltin informed the AS officers earlier this year that the proposed student fee had been turned down, due to legal issues.  He will still pursue this fee next year, although in a different direction, because the library has a real need for this separate, long term funding.  

c)       Election of Committee Chair:  S. Emory was elected unanimously to chair the SLC for 2006/07 academic year.


VIII.      Adjournment:            

            The meeting adjourned at 3:35 p.m.

            The next meeting: TBA , Fall Quarter


Minutes taken by:  Connie Mallison