Minutes

University of California Heads of Public Service (HOPS)

Telephone Conference

March 13, 2006

4:00PM-5:00PM

Present: Barclay (Chair), Dawson, Farley, Friedman, Gravier, Hughes, Persily, Rios, Watstein, Yokote

1. Minutes of the conference call ( Feb 9, 2006 ) were approved.

http://libraries.univerisityofcalifornia.edu/hops/meetings/2-9-06.html

2. BSTF report to SOPAG
A point of clarification was made that the report from HOPS to SOPAG should be from the point of view of the all-campus group, not a summary of the various campus conversations.

Gail Yokote proposed that in April, HOPS think about using the BSTF report as a springboard to identifying and developing HOPS' future goals and the context in which we want to operate in the future.

Catherine Friedman and Gail Persily reminded HOPS that SOPAG will give the comments to the ULS who may go back to the TF for more detailed thinking. Moving forward from a PS point of view will probably not get “out in front” of the ULs since the themes are so broad. SOPAG may appreciate HOPS thinking about broad strategies and will be receptive to a white paper/report later in the spring.

Yokote began a round robin report on the state of campus conversations. She mentioned that there were several discussion sessions at UC Davis and that the public services discussion focused on the scenarios and reactions by library staff, including librarians to these scenarios It was noted that the scenarios represented only a sample of the variety of uses by a diverse group of users.

Merced , UCSF, UCSD, UCSB, UCI, and UCR reported staff conversations as being pleased with the document and supportive of the spirit and general directions. UCSF conversations were very focused on issues related to the catalog which is not necessarily the richest tool for our users. However staff saw how transforming the catalog could impact and improve getting the user to the item/full-text, whether it be a journal article, book, picture, etc. UCSB also had conversations about the catalog and cataloging workflow and what it would mean for re-education of our users about services and strategies. UCI noted that there will be a strategic decision about whether to build services on top of the current catalog structure, or start with a totally new data management infrastructure. UCD also discussed the question of building from scratch vs. enhancing he current system, especially in light of decision support systems/feedback systems based on the user context needed to get people to the information they can best use.

UCSC and CDL have not yet had conversations. UCLA was not reported.

How to prepare the report for SOPAG? It was decided that Gail Persily would summarize the votes and comments sent to the HOPS listserv previously, along with conveying the content of this conference call for Q1 & Q2. But whichever course is taken for Q3, HOPS is interested in the capacity to display information effectively to the public, the ease of this option for supporting the development of new discovery tools, and how, if there is a single point of entry for users, does the user get presented with a search context suitable for their needs? A one-size public interface will not fit all. Will any system be able to support customizability for users to effectively build and modify their own “search contexts”? What core should be developed as the vanilla default? What road signs will we be able to build to lead people to choose the appropriate options for their needs? How can be build a “reference interview” into the options presented to the user? What types of customization should be support? RSS feeds? Emailing of results? Customizable toolbars? Selection of preferred information resources? Will our infrastructure and tools support harvesting, federated searching, or only traditional OPAC searching?

Serious concerns about how to develop a new model for a data store that can go beyond the MARC model to support desirable services.  Buy vs build decisions will involve a range of tradeoffs. NCSU is an intriguing model; OhioLINK less so. HOPS needs to develop a set of principles or “requirements” for SOPAG's consideration about the user services/support implications of BSTF recommendations.

Gail P. volunteered to draft the HOPS report body while Catherine F. and Laine Farley will develop the Appendices of additional comments. The draft of this document will be on the agenda of the April 3, 2006 HOPS meeting in Oakland . (DO WE HAVE A LOCATION???)

3. Shared Digital Reference
There was no update on the shared digital reference project. Patrick Dawson noted that UCSB's contract with Tutor will be completed in July 2006 so they will be interested in joining the project.

4. Other
Hughes updated the group on the InfoLit CIG plans to have Jennifer Dorner as the keynote at their workshop. Probable date: between Aug 7-11 in Irvine .

Document owner: Donald A. Barclay
Last reviewed: May 17, 2007