UC/Stanford U.S. History/Women's Studies Consortia
Spring Meeting
June 9-10, 1997
UC Davis

Minutes of day one (6/9/97); Broidy recorder

Present: Ariel, Broidy, Howard (for Paquette, CDC), Jahns, Janes, Kanter, Kimball,
Koller, Kushigian, Shelton, Sibley, Tambo

1. Agreed to continue rotation of minute-taking responsibilities alphabetically among the
campuses. UCI is up now, followed by UCLA.

2. Consortia cordially welcomed Tomas Jahns, Stanford, to the group.

3. After adding UCLA and UCSD to campuses engaged in serials cancellation projects,
approved minutes of December meeting.

4. Nancy Koller will assume duties as convenor at the December 97 meeting. Beth
Sibley volunteered to serve as the next convenor, beginning December 98. Thanks,
Beth!

5. Announcements:

N. Koller announced that American Women's Diaries (Western Women), a southern
campus mini-SCAP purchase, has arrived and interim guides distributed. The "real" reel
guide is due sometime in the fall.

Ariel and Broidy announced the 3 openings at UCI (UL, Head of Collection
Development, Romance and Germanic Languages Ref./Bibliog.)

6. Campus reports

Since campus reports were distributed via e-mail prior to the meeting, the discussion
focused on whether to attach them to the minutes. We decided instead to keep an official
paper archive of the reports (in addition to individuals retaining e-mail copies). Nancy
Kushigian offered to maintain the paper archive. We agreed that this archive should
contain the following:

minutes
campus reports
final agendas
serials lists
other critical documents (formal agreements, policy statements, recommendations,
etc.)

Nancy will make sure that all documents included in the archive are dated and labeled.

NB: We need to discuss further the mechanics of collecting past documents at the
December 1997 meeting.

7. CDC report.

Clint Howard, UCD, sat-in for Judith Paquette. Judith had reported on CDC activities via
e-mail. Clint added some new information and reiterated critical points.

*There will be another mini-SCAP, with a $3000 minimum.
*There are no plans for consortial (as in UC/Stanford) acquisition of Harpweek.
*No new money or systemwide money available; SCAP is being funded from campus
funds.

*Question was raised about canceling SCAP ongoing commitments. The expectation is
that individual campuses will take on responsibility for these titles. The monies that
might have gone to fund SCAP purchases have been earmarked for the digital
library/online resources. There is a possibility, however, that inflationary money will go
to resource sharing (in all formats).

The Consortia would like to see a list of ongoing SCAP commitments. We also need a
list of SCAP titles on the chopping block and how much they cost so we can determine
how best to retain them in the system.

Another question was raised about guidelines for mini-SCAP, specifically, do the
guidelines preclude the Consortia from submitting a request for a portion/segment of a set
as a one time purchase. Titles mentioned in this category are NAACP Papers and ESTC.

*CDC has been tackling the question of the future/viability of cooperative and consortial
groups, although the discussion at the last CDC meeting was "inconclusive." CDC is
interested in looking at the groups, making sure they are on track.; also interested in
seeing what other areas might benefit from having selector groups.

The role of the consortia may in fact increase because of the California Digital Library
Initiative, particularly in area of defining content and in providing substance to language
about how collections are described (e.g., what does "robust collection" mean?).

President Atkinson has committed $1.5 million for Digital Library. Some of the money
will fund a director and staff; the rest will go towards collections.

Brief conversation ensued about the possibility of requesting some of the money from the
state to offset inflation for paper collections.

C. Howard also discussed the necessity for the UC system to make decisions in a more
timely manner than in the past. There is a new emphasis on deadlines for getting
proposals to UCOP and then to the legislature.

Question raised about whether there was a place at CDC to discuss resources that are not
digital. C. Howard responded affirmatively and said that stabilizing paper collections is
actually an important component of the funding for the digital library -- money for
inflation; money for resource sharing; opportunities for getting some renewed funding for
resource sharing. Will probably hear on this in 98-'99.

8. To VideoConference or Not to VideoConference; That was the Question

After a somewhat protracted conversation and sharing of information members had
gathered at the local level, we decided to table the idea of a videoconference at the
present time. The next meeting (see item 9) will be face-to-face, up close and personal.

9. Next meeting

Tentatively set for Monday-Tuesday, December 8-9, 1997, at UCI. We will aim for a one
day meeting, but members were asked to keep both days free pending creation of the
agenda.

10. Consortia Website

Elliot distributed printouts of the latest iteration of the website for review.
Ellen will send Elliot a copy of the rationale for CRL membership.
Cindy will send Elliot Guidelines/Procedures for Collaborative Purchases
Joan will send Elliot the Memorandum of Agreement for WS journals (who has a clean
copy of the MOA for History?)
Joan will send Elliot a DRAFT of the WS Microform Sets list

We also agreed that the Guidelines for Shared Access to Materials in Special Formats
(UC document) should be included on the website; Joan will forward a copy to Elliot.

As soon as they are determined, we may want to consider putting "primary" collecting
areas on as well.

Nancy Kushigian will take a "snapshot" of everything new headed for the web (for our
paper archive).

20. Feminist Presses
[NB: Agenda item out of sequence; Dave Tambo asked that we discuss this item,
originally slated for Tuesday, on Monday]

Beth Sibley announced that we finally have agreement from Bancroft in concrete form
(Bancroft has designed a template for all their agreements). Beth will update addresses
for the presses and contact each one informing them of Bancroft's involvement.

Beth also asked Bancroft about presses no longer in existence. She thinks that if the
information is provided, they will follow-up. She agreed to monitor this on an on-going
basis.

We agreed that although it would be nice to have everything in one location, Bancroft's
charge is Bay Area/No. California. We need at least one other location. Dave
volunteered UCSB for southern presses (they already have a small press archive). UCSB
probably cannot fund new purchases; however, there aren't many presses in the south, so
we agreed that "adopting" campuses would acquire two copies and send one to UCSB.

The real expense connected to this project would come if we decided to attempt to
acquire (purchase) the papers/archives of the presses or any large backlists.

Suggestion was made that we do a proposal announcing our attempts to acquire the
papers of California feminist presses; possible mini-SCAP? (Was this left unresolved?)

We do need an agreement about what exactly we would want to collect. It would also be
helpful to have an agreement between UCB (Bancroft) and UCSB about what we collect.

Agreed that it is important to continue to have a coordinator for this project. Dave
volunteered to serve as a liaison with Special Collections librarians and he will develop a
proposal/agreement analogous to the one Bancroft drafted. Elliot and Dave will also draft
a letter to Bancroft about UCSB's participation.

Beth and Nancy Koller will work together to insure that Bancroft receives archival copies
of Frog in the Well and Woman in the Moon publications.

Things still to do:

ÀÀ Notify Beth of any new presses
ÀÀ Investigate the existence of Spanish-language presses
ÀÀ Identify defunct presses
ÀÀ Acquire copies of all catalogs for the archive(s)

We agreed that we wanted to acquire and keep the following in the California Feminist
Press Archive (not an exhaustive list):

ÀÀ Catalogs
ÀÀ Files that relate to specific titles/projects
ÀÀ Graphic materials
ÀÀ Information on how the press operates/operated

After corrections/revision, statement about the presses project will go onto the web.

Possible next project: serial publications (newspapers, newsletters, magazines, etc.) and
bookstore archives.

11. (back in agenda order) HARPWEEK

Cindy reported on David Farrell's efforts to arrange a consortial agreement with the
publisher if 8 campuses joined in. The publisher won't negotiate down from $15,000..

UCB and UCLA have committed to acquiring it and will help to develop a network
version (developed by September) and a web-based (by January). The web version will
not necessarily contain images. Access probably controlled by IP address. It will be
available only on-site at UCB, UCLA, but will be available to anyone coming into the
library to use on-site.

Tomas has told David that Stanford would like to postpone decision on acquiring it.

This is a huge database. UCLA is getting it with funds from the Friends and will
probably mount as a stand-alone.

12. NAACP Index

Phoebe reported that all campuses should have received guides for parts 1-20. UCB has
canceled the NAACP set as of 6/1/97. Victoria Peters claims that there are two more
parts (24 and 25) due, at approximately $14,000/ea. We need to be sure that this set is
added to the list of shareable items no longer available.

This led to a discussion of the creation of a list of humanities resources that are being
"lost." We need to let CDC know that we need/want a solution to this problem.

Phoebe and Nancy Kushigian will draft a statement to CDC on the importance of
maintaining these collections.

UCB has also canceled the 18th Century (ESTC); order originally a SCAP purchase.

Question raised: should there be an awareness beyond the libraries (e.g., Academic
Senate Library Ctte, etc.) about the cancellation of critical resources? (Did we come to
closure on this question?)

13. Records of Antebellum Southern Plantations

Stanford is committed to continuing to fund acquisition of the set. This raised, one more
time, the question of MELVYL access to Stanford records for non-SCAP major
microform sets. User needs to be able to "set form microform" and be sure to pull up
everything relevant.

Ellen will distribute memo she sent to Judith last year(?) re: Stanford microform sets on
MELVYL.

We also discussed the possibility of a specific record on MELVYL that would indicate
the holding library for Records of Antebellum Southern Plantations (Parts 1 - ? at UCI;
remainder at Stanford).


14. Collaborative Purchases/Mini-SCAP -- Proposals

Suggestions:

New England Women and Their Families -- $4600 (pt. 1 available)
Southern Women and Their Families -- $20-30,000 (Stanford has)
Papers of American Slave Trade -- $6565
Complete the Sanger set (Stanford will check)

Cindy will write up the proposal for Papers of the American Slave Trade.

Campus contribution no longer a necessary element in the proposal!

UCLA is purchasing Series C: Records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Central Classified
Files, 1907-1939. Series C: Indian Health and Medical Affairs, Pt. 1: Reports on Medical
and Nursing Activities.


16. Recommendations to CDC (item 15 incorporated into item 13)

a. Chadwyck-Healey databases

Nancy Kushigian distributed a memo from the Literature Consortium on the Chadwyck-Healey databases. There is talk about purchasing LION for the system. Lit. Bibs report
that faculty are interested and they (Lit. Bibs) support the acquisition. They ask that
US/WS support it as well, in part in an effort to insure that humanities databases are
central part of the new digital library.

US/WS wants to make it clear that this needs to be funded out of new monies (digital
library funds), not more money coming from funds that support MELVYL databases.

Elliot will draft a statement supporting acquisition of LION, underscoring the absolute
necessity of the inclusion of important humanities sources, and pointing out that
HARPWEEK would be a fine addition for History. Other desirable sources include: APS
(Cindy will forward Elliot a copy of the APS info.), Archives USA (possibly part of
LION), NIDS (in LION), and African American Newspapers.

b. Z39.50 priorities for MELVYL Web

All I got out of this conversation is that we don't feel particularly passionate about which
FirstSearch or Eureka databases should be brought up when -- although we made a plea
for improvements to MLA.

c. Contemporary Women's Issues (CWI) and other FirstSearch/Eureka databases

We need to bring CWI to CDC's attention as a very high priority for funding/mounting.
This needs to be done asap. Elliot will send a memo to Judith (incoming chair of CDC)
stating our strong interest in and support for this.

d. Port/user limit crisis for MELVYL FirstSearch/Eureka

Apparently, the problem is not a matter of ports but rather the limited number of users on
any database. With no save or mail function, if you're bumped, you lose the search.

Day one concluded with an absolutely fantastic dinner at chez Kimball/Kushigian.



UC/Stanford U.S. History/Women's Studies Consortia
Spring Meeting
June 9-10, 1997
UC Davis

Minutes of day two (6/10/97); Ariel Recorder.


Agenda Item
16.d. Continued: Port/user limit crisis for MELVYL FirstSearch/Eureka

Group reviewed memo regarding full text databases in the humanities to CDC/CFC from
UC/USC/SU English and American Literature Bibliographers. The Literature
Consortium asks that we endorse this memo or some modified version of it. We agreed
that "good humanities packages such as the Chadwyck-Healey databases offered in LION
and Expanded LION" should be a top priority for addition to the MELVYL system.

Kushigian expressed a sense of urgency in determining "acceptable level of turnaways."
Cal State libraries apparently have set 10% maximum which seems reasonable. Issue is
all the more important with the increasing reliance on MELVYL databases, cancellations
of paper copies of some titles. The promises of the digital library re. enhanced access
through new formats seem empty when users do not have efficient access to current
resources on the system.

Group endorsed (but did not sign) the MLA memo from Literature librarians. By the
beginning of the academic year, Kanter will write cover memo emphasizing access needs
and reiterating maximum of 10% level of turnaways.

17. Last Copy Agreements, in a Season of Cancellations

a. Women's/feminist/gender studies journals: Ariel

Ariel distributed updated copies of the list of titles under cooperative agreement.
Discussion noted the following:
1. It is critical to put notes in holding library's acquisition records for these titles:
"title under cooperative agreement." UCD, UCR, and UCSD have already done this.
2. We need to examine the question of journals in electronic format. These
should be included but raises questions for some regarding passworded access, shareable
principle, and archive purpose.
3. Stanford is willing to take some titles currently assigned to UCLA.
4. Davis will assume responsibility for Redbook.
5. Members will review titles and bring questions, etc. to December meeting.

b. U.S. History journals: Broidy

Project has been steady-state; almost no action on these journal titles. It is important,
however, to carefully review library cancellation lists since some titles are not controlled
by the history bibliographers. UCSD may propose to take on some state history titles if
retention of these becomes a problem for other libraries and/or we need to balance
assignments.

Broidy will compile a new list prior to the December meeting.

c. Cancellations

All members should remember to inform each other of proposed cancellations by putting
lists on the reflector.

18. Electronic Journals (EJ): Koller

Koller reported that UCR has been mandated to come up with paid EJ titles on a one year
pilot test and asked how many others are doing this? This lead to a wide-ranging
discussion of issues raised by Ejs: how to determine what to buy, how to fu nd, how to
archive, how to judge whether users will use electronic versions and agree to be weaned
off the print copies. Publicity on availability and access is important, e.g., e-mail notices
to faculty and graduate students. Additional questions include:
- How are Ejs used?
Recommend experiment to test user reception, number and type of usage,
etc.
- Will there be consortial subscriptions?
- How can we enhance use?
Use will increase once they are in MELVYL; needs to be more seamless
- What is the role of front-line selectors in titles included as part of Digital
Library, especially since DL is seen/organized as a separate entity?
- What are the licensing issues and how to these affect ILL? What are the
implications for cooperative collection development?
Raises a significant concern re. move toward less accessibility rather than
more.
- How do we address the problems in publishing and lack of awareness of critical
issues?

Shelton suggested sending letter of inquiry to CDC regarding EJ status and
recommending addition of these as part of the Digital Library.

Howard stated that he expected continuation of consortial rates that campuses' will buy
into. He also pointed to the necessity to change scholarly communication and publishing,
citing the example of High Wire Press at Stanford which has made publishing many
association-based titles economically viable. There is increasing complexity in
negotiating contracts resulting in a new occupational speciality.

Shelton pointed out several programs at upcoming ALA meetings in San Francisco that
will deal with these issues. Koller recommended and distributed copies of speech on
"Remote Access" delivered by Nancy Eaton (Dean of Library Services, Iowa State
University) to ARL meeting at 1996 ALA Midwinter.

Sibley reported on UCB experience with JSTOR journals and disappointing response
from faculty. UCB hosted a seminar on JSTOR and Project Muse, but very little
attendance. Economics loved it, especially with addition of more social science titles.
Once again, however, these developments raise significant concerns regarding coverage
for non-traditional, interdisciplinary fields.

Group noted ongoing questions about the content of the Digital Library. Front-line
selectors and bibliographers need to be involved with representation from all disciplines
and consultation with exisiting consortia. Koller asked about possibility of inviting a
representative (DLA?) to come to next meeting for further discussion.

19. Women's/gender studies primary collecting areas: Kushigian

Kushigian distributed a draft list she compiled from member submissions of "Primary
Collecting Areas in Women's Studies." Given the range of responses from quite broad
(e.g., "Feminist Theory") to fairly specific (e.g., "Women Caribbean writers), discussion
centered around how best to define the scope of this project. One suggestion was that we
aim toward the identification of "pockets of excellence" approaching collecting levels
equivalent to RLG 4. Kushigian will review the list and revise to incorporate more
specificity where possible. Group decided to retitle this project: "Collecting Areas of
Special Interest in Women's Studies" to better reflect the envisioned scope.

20. Feminist Press Project: Sibley
shifted to 6/9; see minutes for day one #20

21. Women's Studies databases

Group shared information about and experiences with available databases/CD-ROMs in
Women's Studies. "Women R" is not highly recommended; much of it is a subset of
Ethnic Newswatch.

WRI: UCB has networked; includes Women Studies Abstracts and is more complete than
Women's Studies on Disc.

Davis/Kushigian worked on modifying contract with CWI which might be of interest to
other members and she will send copies.

Consensus "rating" of current available CD-ROMS:
CWI
WRI
Women R
Women's Studies on Disc


Meeting adjourned early at 12:45 p.m.