Presentation on theme: "Experiences in a University- Community College-Private College Consortium Or…I am not young enough to know everything. Oscar Wilde Or…Ignorance is the."— Presentation transcript:
Experiences in a University- Community College-Private College Consortium Or…I am not young enough to know everything. Oscar Wilde Or…Ignorance is the mother of admiration. George Chapman
Where anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
Topics for Comment – using OhioLINK as the stalking horse Structure/Governance Library types served Services offered and that can be offered Financial implications Impact of changing technology Different models Philosophical underpinnings for the future Before I refuse to take your questions, I have an opening statement. Ronald Reagan `
Models/Ranges of Consortia Highly Decentralized Highly Centralized No common agenda Large benefits No external funds No central sponsor No central staff Small discounts Low involvement Small benefits Common agenda External funds Central sponsor Central staff Large discounts High involvement
International Coalition of Library Consortia [ICOLC] Independent Multitype/ Multistate Amigos LYRASIS Minitex International Australia China Germany Great Britain Israel Netherlands South Africa Tighter Federations BLC NERL PALCI ASERL Colorado Alliance Loose Federations GWLA eiFL Including Ad hoc buying clubs State-based Galileo OhioLINK VIVA NAAL CARLI NC LIVE CDL Orbis- Cascade Mobius Vale Marriage of Money and Politics
So, Are there Different Models? In Degrees only - for State based programs Relationship/structure to Libraries Relationship /structure to state/campus administrators Policy versus Operational oversight by state/campus administrators Central vs Local technology architecture Central vs Local funding: Operations vs Content Breadth of Program Initiatives Technology vs Academic/Library mission orientation Tactical vs Strategic posture towards global information and intellectual property issues The politics of cooperation
MEMBERS State Library 49 private liberal arts colleges 23 public two- year colleges 1 standalone medical school (7 total med) 2 private universities 13 public universities Includes 9 law 500,000 FTE +130 primary delivery sites 60 Innovative ILS
Libraries Connect Ohio – Towards the Ohio Web Library Common Information Needs K-12 Higher Education State Government Public Libraries
OhioLINK Mission Economically sustainable, increased student and faculty access to and use of library provided information to support and improve instruction and research…as a consortium In USO terms…provide world-class information access to support a globally competitive state education system…at efficient and affordable cost
Group Service Approaches Do things for everyone- as a system. Services/Technology at the group level is more about raising the bar for everyone – and enabling the system not just the institution The technology to make available services should not be (unnecessarily) duplicated Historic local service idiosyncrasies should be reduced Technology that works at the group level must leap over a higher bar
Leveraged, Common Services and Technology With New Projects/Directions Single Vendor Integrated Local Library Systems and Central Cat - Patron-Initiated Borrowing –Project to redefine service needs and architecture – more efficient, handle diversity, expansion, compatibility Common Core Reference Database Set +100 –Vendor sites –Common interface for locally loaded databases –Federated Searching – multiple resources on one search Project to create new Discovery Layer - Unified Index/Web 2.0 (Cent Cat, Ref DBs, EJC, EBC, EDC, DRC, local e-content, open web)
Leveraged, Common Services and Technology with New Projects/Directions Electronic Journal Center – access and archive –Migrate to new platform and expand licenses – current and deep archives, handle diverse formats, pre-prints, mobile devices Electronic Book Center – access and archive –Build and expand licenses – migrate to new platform- build in access via mobile devices Electronic Thesis/Dissertation Center –Home Grown - Built to Grad schools specs with common submittal and approval mechanism –Migrate and integrate with other services
Leveraged, Common Services and Technology with New Projects/Directions Digital Resource Commons – access and archive – from working papers to peer-reviewed; images to animations; institutional and commercial –Expand storage –Build and expand institutional portals and collections –Expand video/audio group licenses Multi-Service features –Find It capability - Resolver –Remote User Authentication – to Shibboleth –Chat Reference with Publics and K-12; plus local IM options
Leveraged, Common Services and Technology with New Projects/Directions Regional Library Depositories – high density archive and access –From Regional to Coordinated Statewide Operations – Two- Year Coordinator position as of Nov 08 –De-duplication and preservation at Statewide level – first focus on Journals –Space planning with statewide shared space and service efficiencies in mind –Space planning in coordination with electronic archives –Can we utilize beyond public university clientele??
OhioLINK Central Funding – 2 yr budgets Capital funds FYs 89-92 $9.2 million FYs 93-94$10.8 million FYs 95-96 $6.8 million FYs 97-98 $5.0 million FYs 99-00 $6.3 million FYs 01-02 $7.5 million FYs 03-04 $8.2 million FYs 05-06 $8.1 million FYs 07-08 $8.9 million FYs 09-10 $9.9 million FYs 11-12 ???? Operating Funds FYs 90-91 $.4 million FYs 92-93 $ 1.7 million FYs 94-95 $ 4.4 million FYs 96-97 $ 8.8 million FYs 98-99 $11.5 million FYs 00-01 $14.6 million FYs 02-03 $14.2 million FYs 04-05$13.8 million FYs 06-07 $13.8 million FYs 08-09 $14.0 million FYs 10-11 $12.9 million FYs 12-13 ????
Where does the money to license electronic content come from?
Cost Effective Purchasing Power Costs controlled below market averages Costs controlled with expanded 2x-10x rather than diminished content
Some Economic Lessons Besides any other criteria used –all activities must meet this measure - dramatically improve the efficiency of library operations and outputs so that much more information access can be afforded and is made available Taxing libraries to build the new services/infrastructure is a limiting approach Not treating information efficiency and access as a necessary utility restricts effective long-term planning Use central funds to create the efficient, commonly needed service/infrastructure Use central funds as a catalyst to make change happen as a system Never utter the words – cost savings OK- cost efficiency, cost effectiveness, cost avoidance
OhioLINK Governance and Advisory Organization Executive Director and staff Technical Advisory Council Library Advisory Council 15 U, 3 IC, 3 CC, 2 M, 1 L, 1 SLO Coop Information Resources Mgmt User Services Inter-Campus Services Database Mgmt and Standards Lead Implementers Independent Colleges Library Directors Community Colleges Library Directors Med Lib Directors Law Lib Directors Chancellor of the Ohio Board of Regents Digital Resources Mgmt Academic Programs Vice-Chancellor Governing Board –13 provosts 8 public Us 1 private U 1 private C 3 two-year CCs
OhioLINK Governance and Advisory Organization Advisory Board Provosts. CIOs Executive Director and staff Technical Advisory Council Library Advisory Council 15 U, 3 IC, 3 CC, 2 M, 1 L, 1 SLO Coop Information Resources Mgmt User Services Inter-Campus Services Database Mgmt and Standards Lead Implementers Independent Colleges Library Directors Community Colleges Library Directors Med Lib Directors Law Lib Directors Chancellor of the Ohio Board of Regents Digital Resources Mgmt Vice-Chancellor for Ed Tech
Proposed Joint Board of OhioLINK and Ohio Learning Network BOARD COMPOSITION Public University Provost 5 Public Community College CAO5 Private College Provost2 Library Director2 Distance Leaning Dean 1 Adult Career Tech1 University Research VP1 CIO (each sector)3 Fiscal Agents2 Chancellors Representative1 Executive Directors2
A FEW WORDS ON HOW WE APPROACH THE FUTURE Apologies to Joe Lucia and others
Bridging function: Libraries serve as bridges the proprietary domain of commercially valued intellectual property ------------------------------------------------------- the gift economies of intellectual and cultural expression
A Foundational Claim The cultural assumptions and social practices embedded within Open Access Information and Open Source software are congruent and co-extensive with the values and missions of libraries writ large. Embracing Open = Deepening & enhancing our cultural mission & social function
A Foundational Position –all future investments in content and content creation, infrastructure & systems will flow toward non- proprietary regimes, which will mean a fundamental reordering of the library, and the academic publishing and library technology business environments.
The Commons as the Core The unique cultural and social role of libraries: –to support, expand, and preserve –the intellectual and cultural commons –in all of its discursive & literary forms –to nurture the generative conversation –begetting new knowledge & cultural expression
Embracing the Commons = Keeping Libraries Open: Open Stacks Open Standards Open Access Open Data Open Source
Challenges to Library Open Source and Open Access Vendor dependency Software maturity Functionalist orientation Technical confidence / competence Administrative buy-in Strategic vision Intellectual timidity Herd mentality
Open Libraries Is the Goal Radical Collaboration may be the tool: To embed the values, processes and practices of the knowledge commons within libraries & the library community… To harness the network effects of open practices for the benefit of the unique cultural & social function of libraries
Thought Experiment 1 2008 Aggregate Annual Expenditures, Public, Academic & School Libraries: $18,100,000,000 Assume 1.5% goes to technology support: $ 271,500,000 If we collectively redirect 20% of this annual investment to open source work: $ 54,300,000
Thought Experiment 2 200 Largest Public / Academic Libraries Allocate 1 Staff position to open source 200 FTE Technical Staff Immense pool of library-native talent building apps & infrastructure for the participative, commons-centered library of the future
Discussion/Questions Any new venture goes through the following stages: enthusiasm, complication, disillusionment, search for the guilty, punishment of the innocent, and decoration of those who did nothing. Unknown One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown is the belief that one's work is terribly important. Bertrand Russell