The draft of the GPO study Regional Depository Libraries in the 21st Century: A Time for Change? has been posted on the FDLP Desktop. The draft itself runs 23 pages, but there are several pages of Appendices included. These Appendices are mostly comprised of the letters, etc. that were already linked on the Desktop; so you might not need to print the entire document.
Most important, of course, is the section on "Conclusions and Recommendations" (VI). Please take a moment to read these and let me know what you think. Also, as before, you can give feedback directly to GPO from the Desktop.
Looking forward to hearing your opinions.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
New Link
I have just added a link to the Federal Depository Library Handbook; this link is now in the list at the bottom of this main page. For information specifically on "Disposal," see chapters 5 and 12 of the pdf. document.
Friday, May 23, 2008
From Your Regionals: Now It's Your Turn
Introduction
What you are about to read has been several days in the making and is not intended to be interpreted as a defense of particular people or the institutions to which they belong. Instead, it is a measured response to the results of the Regional Directors’ Survey and to the comments made by individual members of the depository community. These results and comments are now available on the FDLP Desktop at http://www.fdlp.gov/regionals/study.html
If this response is successful, what you will see is a philosophical analysis of human and organizational behavior as it impacts the current discussions about Regional Depository Libraries. The response is also an acknowledgment of the right for people to express their dissatisfaction with the current Regional System--and a plea for our depository libraries here in Louisiana to be more actively engaged in local policy/procedural issues that must, in turn, conform to the policies and procedures of the GPO/FDLP.
If everyone in the Louisiana Depository Community communicates forthrightly about both the good and the not-so-good aspects of our current system, we should be able to reach consensus and avoid the majority of problems that have been highlighted in some of the responses to GPO’s Regional Study. Two of the responses from Louisiana Selective Depositories were shared with others in our community before being posted on the Desktop; one of those responses was quite favorable, one was not. The not-so-favorable one made some good points, as you will see acknowledged below; but most of those points have their origins in the past—and we need to be looking toward the future if we want to make satisfactory changes to our environment. There was a third comment that appears to be from Louisiana (in spite of GPO’s efforts to camouflage all the responses, certain tell-tale culturally and geographically oriented words stood out in some of them). This third comment was hard-hitting and provocative enough to give rise to this response—and again, the emphasis in this response should not be construed as a rebuttal as much as a desire to open the dialogue further and address the needs of all Louisiana Depository Libraries, both Regionals and Selectives alike.
Response
In the political arena, we hear a lot about “Special Interests” and how they control our government and, by extension, our society. However, before “Special Interests,” there were good old-fashioned “Self-Interests”—the most individuated level of “looking out for number one.”
According to a well-known online quotation resource, Bartleby.com, the 17th century French writer Francois, Duc De La Rochefoucauld, had quite a lot to say about self-interest. Two examples follow:
Self-interest makes some people blind, and others sharp-sighted.
Virtues lose themselves in self-interest, as rivers in the sea.
Taking each of the above quotes in turn, it seems that (1) self-interest can be either bad or good, depending upon the circumstances and (2) self-interest—when considered “bad,” i.e. “non-virtuous”—diffuses or drowns out the better human qualities. The river-to-sea simile is especially pertinent to any discussion of how the greater good can either be compromised by self-interest or conversely be strengthened by it.
When reading the various responses to the Regional Depository Study/Survey, one cannot help but notice how differently each constituency of the FDLP has responded. While each constituency is not represented by only one position, a majority position clearly prevails. Thus, directors have a view; professional organizations have their views; Regional Librarians have a view; and Selective Librarians have theirs. The problem is that most of these views reflect only self-interested positions—or is that really a problem? Does the self-interest of directors, for instance, negatively impact the FDLP system in its entirety? Should Regional Librarians stop complaining about lack of support and resources because their concerns are seen as selfish? Should the needs of the Selectives dictate how the whole program is administered?
The problem is not really that everyone is self-interested—it’s reasonable to be one’s best supporter, but the problem is that each group is so blinded by its own needs that it is not allowing its virtues to blend into the greater sea to benefit all FDLP participants. These self-interested players need new glasses in order to be sharp-sighted enough to make necessary and, above all, fair and equitable changes to the program. Now that the metaphor has been mixed and stretched to its utmost limits (apologies to the Duc), let’s talk about how we here in Louisiana can work together for a better vision.
The interested FDLP participant who looks through the recently posted “Comments Received for GPO’s Study of Regional Depository Libraries” on the FDLP Desktop, will find that a certain number of Selectives are not happy with their Regionals’ services—and that at least a couple of those Selectives are from Louisiana. It appears that the unhappiness stems from the following feelings: that there is too much turn-over in Regional Librarians; that the Regional Librarians who do come to Louisiana are not experienced enough; that these inexperienced Regional Librarians have no resources for being trained themselves or for providing training to Selective Librarians; that there are no “back-up” Regional Librarians for those times when the Regional Librarian positions are not filled; and that—for one reason or another-- not enough is being done by these Regionals in the areas of quick response to disposal lists
While this list of concerns has some validity, it does not completely nor accurately reflect the current situation in our state. Yes, there were times when each Regional had no professional librarian in the position of Head of Documents; and yes, GPO does not rush in to train new Regional Librarians; and, of course, during the stress periods of post-hurricane life in southern Louisiana, discards were not managed in the same way that they normally would/should be. Nevertheless, we now do have two Regional Librarians (more than many states have) who are trying to get acclimated to new locations, climates (both literal and figurative), and intense academic workloads.
The institutions in which they work expect them to do more than Regional Depository duties—the percentage of time allotted to Depository duties in one of the institutions is 35%--less than half of the total workload for the position of Government Documents Librarian. This thirty-five percent is actually quite generous when compared to some job descriptions for Regional Librarians in the FDLP. That said, quite a bit can be accomplished in that time frame—but only if everyone involved understands everyone else’s situation and expectations are not unrealistically high.
In the end, trust and communication are key elements to making Louisiana Depository Libraries the best that they can be. The Regionals are often placed in the awkward position of trying to please the Selectives while honoring their duties to GPO. At times it seems as if many Selectives see GPO as an enemy and expect their Regionals to take their side in what they see as a battle. Perhaps at some time in the past, this mindset was accurate; but today, with the new and proven emphasis on a more friendly and helpful GPO, this kind of combative attitude is out of synch and counter-productive.
This reference to a “kinder/gentler” GPO is the perfect segue into the conclusion of this response: as depository libraries respond to GPO’s request for feedback on the “Newly Released Public Access Assessment Initial Review Documents,” Louisiana Federal Depositories could be participating in an open discussion about these documents. Perhaps today is a bit late to begin this dialog, since tomorrow is supposed to be the deadline for sending remarks in via the Desktop; but the issue is far from set in stone—and the administration at GPO has shown itself to be receptive to suggestions for any of its programs, especially those that have an impact on the basic functions of depositories.
Conclusion
In summary, your Regional Librarians are also of the “kinder and gentler” model and will be happy to listen to your ideas and receive your constructive criticism. The venues for sharing are many in this era of electronic communication: Bayoudoc; the Blog (now linked from LSU’s main docs page [http://louisianadocs.blogspot.com/]); regular email; or even that old technology called the telephone can be used to express opinions, flattering or otherwise. Remember, however, that not everything can be done quickly, perfectly, and exactly the way one person wants it done. Trusting that things are being accomplished or will be accomplished to benefit the greatest number is vital to any successful group or organization. By trusting that your voice will at least be heard, you make it possible for everyone concerned to be respected and dealt with fairly and (hopefully) expeditiously. If you will excuse an old phrase from the sixties, it does seem pertinent to our current situation that if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Let’s be problem solvers and communicators and make Louisiana Depository Libraries the wonderful institutions and resources we know they can be—and let’s do it together.
What you are about to read has been several days in the making and is not intended to be interpreted as a defense of particular people or the institutions to which they belong. Instead, it is a measured response to the results of the Regional Directors’ Survey and to the comments made by individual members of the depository community. These results and comments are now available on the FDLP Desktop at http://www.fdlp.gov/regionals/study.html
If this response is successful, what you will see is a philosophical analysis of human and organizational behavior as it impacts the current discussions about Regional Depository Libraries. The response is also an acknowledgment of the right for people to express their dissatisfaction with the current Regional System--and a plea for our depository libraries here in Louisiana to be more actively engaged in local policy/procedural issues that must, in turn, conform to the policies and procedures of the GPO/FDLP.
If everyone in the Louisiana Depository Community communicates forthrightly about both the good and the not-so-good aspects of our current system, we should be able to reach consensus and avoid the majority of problems that have been highlighted in some of the responses to GPO’s Regional Study. Two of the responses from Louisiana Selective Depositories were shared with others in our community before being posted on the Desktop; one of those responses was quite favorable, one was not. The not-so-favorable one made some good points, as you will see acknowledged below; but most of those points have their origins in the past—and we need to be looking toward the future if we want to make satisfactory changes to our environment. There was a third comment that appears to be from Louisiana (in spite of GPO’s efforts to camouflage all the responses, certain tell-tale culturally and geographically oriented words stood out in some of them). This third comment was hard-hitting and provocative enough to give rise to this response—and again, the emphasis in this response should not be construed as a rebuttal as much as a desire to open the dialogue further and address the needs of all Louisiana Depository Libraries, both Regionals and Selectives alike.
Response
In the political arena, we hear a lot about “Special Interests” and how they control our government and, by extension, our society. However, before “Special Interests,” there were good old-fashioned “Self-Interests”—the most individuated level of “looking out for number one.”
According to a well-known online quotation resource, Bartleby.com, the 17th century French writer Francois, Duc De La Rochefoucauld, had quite a lot to say about self-interest. Two examples follow:
Self-interest makes some people blind, and others sharp-sighted.
Virtues lose themselves in self-interest, as rivers in the sea.
Taking each of the above quotes in turn, it seems that (1) self-interest can be either bad or good, depending upon the circumstances and (2) self-interest—when considered “bad,” i.e. “non-virtuous”—diffuses or drowns out the better human qualities. The river-to-sea simile is especially pertinent to any discussion of how the greater good can either be compromised by self-interest or conversely be strengthened by it.
When reading the various responses to the Regional Depository Study/Survey, one cannot help but notice how differently each constituency of the FDLP has responded. While each constituency is not represented by only one position, a majority position clearly prevails. Thus, directors have a view; professional organizations have their views; Regional Librarians have a view; and Selective Librarians have theirs. The problem is that most of these views reflect only self-interested positions—or is that really a problem? Does the self-interest of directors, for instance, negatively impact the FDLP system in its entirety? Should Regional Librarians stop complaining about lack of support and resources because their concerns are seen as selfish? Should the needs of the Selectives dictate how the whole program is administered?
The problem is not really that everyone is self-interested—it’s reasonable to be one’s best supporter, but the problem is that each group is so blinded by its own needs that it is not allowing its virtues to blend into the greater sea to benefit all FDLP participants. These self-interested players need new glasses in order to be sharp-sighted enough to make necessary and, above all, fair and equitable changes to the program. Now that the metaphor has been mixed and stretched to its utmost limits (apologies to the Duc), let’s talk about how we here in Louisiana can work together for a better vision.
The interested FDLP participant who looks through the recently posted “Comments Received for GPO’s Study of Regional Depository Libraries” on the FDLP Desktop, will find that a certain number of Selectives are not happy with their Regionals’ services—and that at least a couple of those Selectives are from Louisiana. It appears that the unhappiness stems from the following feelings: that there is too much turn-over in Regional Librarians; that the Regional Librarians who do come to Louisiana are not experienced enough; that these inexperienced Regional Librarians have no resources for being trained themselves or for providing training to Selective Librarians; that there are no “back-up” Regional Librarians for those times when the Regional Librarian positions are not filled; and that—for one reason or another-- not enough is being done by these Regionals in the areas of quick response to disposal lists
While this list of concerns has some validity, it does not completely nor accurately reflect the current situation in our state. Yes, there were times when each Regional had no professional librarian in the position of Head of Documents; and yes, GPO does not rush in to train new Regional Librarians; and, of course, during the stress periods of post-hurricane life in southern Louisiana, discards were not managed in the same way that they normally would/should be. Nevertheless, we now do have two Regional Librarians (more than many states have) who are trying to get acclimated to new locations, climates (both literal and figurative), and intense academic workloads.
The institutions in which they work expect them to do more than Regional Depository duties—the percentage of time allotted to Depository duties in one of the institutions is 35%--less than half of the total workload for the position of Government Documents Librarian. This thirty-five percent is actually quite generous when compared to some job descriptions for Regional Librarians in the FDLP. That said, quite a bit can be accomplished in that time frame—but only if everyone involved understands everyone else’s situation and expectations are not unrealistically high.
In the end, trust and communication are key elements to making Louisiana Depository Libraries the best that they can be. The Regionals are often placed in the awkward position of trying to please the Selectives while honoring their duties to GPO. At times it seems as if many Selectives see GPO as an enemy and expect their Regionals to take their side in what they see as a battle. Perhaps at some time in the past, this mindset was accurate; but today, with the new and proven emphasis on a more friendly and helpful GPO, this kind of combative attitude is out of synch and counter-productive.
This reference to a “kinder/gentler” GPO is the perfect segue into the conclusion of this response: as depository libraries respond to GPO’s request for feedback on the “Newly Released Public Access Assessment Initial Review Documents,” Louisiana Federal Depositories could be participating in an open discussion about these documents. Perhaps today is a bit late to begin this dialog, since tomorrow is supposed to be the deadline for sending remarks in via the Desktop; but the issue is far from set in stone—and the administration at GPO has shown itself to be receptive to suggestions for any of its programs, especially those that have an impact on the basic functions of depositories.
Conclusion
In summary, your Regional Librarians are also of the “kinder and gentler” model and will be happy to listen to your ideas and receive your constructive criticism. The venues for sharing are many in this era of electronic communication: Bayoudoc; the Blog (now linked from LSU’s main docs page [http://louisianadocs.blogspot.com/]); regular email; or even that old technology called the telephone can be used to express opinions, flattering or otherwise. Remember, however, that not everything can be done quickly, perfectly, and exactly the way one person wants it done. Trusting that things are being accomplished or will be accomplished to benefit the greatest number is vital to any successful group or organization. By trusting that your voice will at least be heard, you make it possible for everyone concerned to be respected and dealt with fairly and (hopefully) expeditiously. If you will excuse an old phrase from the sixties, it does seem pertinent to our current situation that if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Let’s be problem solvers and communicators and make Louisiana Depository Libraries the wonderful institutions and resources we know they can be—and let’s do it together.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Link to ALA GODORT Virtual Library Legislative Day Info.
Anyone interested in issues being promoted by ALA GODORT can connect to this site and see what we've been up to. As a member of the Legislative Committee, I worked on the draft of the handout supporting the CRS Resolution (Sen. Res. 401).
Virtual Library Legislative Day Activities:
http://wikis.ala.org/godort/index.php/Virtual_Library_Legislative_Day_Activities
Remember, you can use the handouts to state your own positions on these issues:
". . . please visit the links . . . , download the talking points and background materials, and . . . on either Tuesday, May 13th or on Wednesday, May 14th contact your legislators and let them know how these services will affect your ability to serve their constituents."
Virtual Library Legislative Day Activities:
http://wikis.ala.org/godort/index.php/Virtual_Library_Legislative_Day_Activities
Remember, you can use the handouts to state your own positions on these issues:
". . . please visit the links . . . , download the talking points and background materials, and . . . on either Tuesday, May 13th or on Wednesday, May 14th contact your legislators and let them know how these services will affect your ability to serve their constituents."
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
LLA GODORT: Program for next year
It seems as if the 2008 LLA Conference in Shreveport were only yesterday; but, alas, it is time to start planning for 2009.
Beverly Laughlin's email of April 25 identifies the dates as March 12-14 and the location as the Hilton Hotel near the Old State Capitol in Baton Rouge.
What I'd like to do here on the blog is to open up a discussion on suggestions for GODORT programming. Right now, be open to all ideas, even wild and crazy ones--later on we can be more rational and cut out what won't mesh well with the overarching plans for the conference.
I think I mentioned at the breakfast in Shreveport that we might want to have a special guest from local government at the upcoming breakfast in Baton Rouge. So, along with other suggestions, would you all think about someone who might be appropriate for that occasion?
Beverly Laughlin's email of April 25 identifies the dates as March 12-14 and the location as the Hilton Hotel near the Old State Capitol in Baton Rouge.
What I'd like to do here on the blog is to open up a discussion on suggestions for GODORT programming. Right now, be open to all ideas, even wild and crazy ones--later on we can be more rational and cut out what won't mesh well with the overarching plans for the conference.
I think I mentioned at the breakfast in Shreveport that we might want to have a special guest from local government at the upcoming breakfast in Baton Rouge. So, along with other suggestions, would you all think about someone who might be appropriate for that occasion?
Friday, May 2, 2008
My Request for Feedback--April 29, 2008
On Tuesday, April 29, I sent the following email:
I have volunteered to write up a section on standards and training for regional depositories. Would you all mind taking a moment to tell me what is most important to you in terms of expectations for regionals? If standards were to be developed and implemented, how would you like to see this done?
Any and all ideas welcome—but I need to have this pretty solid by end of day tomorrow (sorry, I also am suffering from the lack of time to actually think through some of these issues—the pressure is definitely on).
Stephanie
After that, I received emails from several of you and would like to share them with the group. I also posted the Draft of the ASERL Response. With Lori Smith's permission, I have copied her responses and posted them here as comments. Because I am using my own log-in to post her comments, the comments reference my name. Don't be fooled--they are really from Lori!
****UPDATE****
I am adding Ferol's and Howard's comments (with their permission)--but am adding them to a separate place on the blog. Look under the postings at the heading "Comments from You All Concerning Regional Issues."
SGB
I have volunteered to write up a section on standards and training for regional depositories. Would you all mind taking a moment to tell me what is most important to you in terms of expectations for regionals? If standards were to be developed and implemented, how would you like to see this done?
Any and all ideas welcome—but I need to have this pretty solid by end of day tomorrow (sorry, I also am suffering from the lack of time to actually think through some of these issues—the pressure is definitely on).
Stephanie
After that, I received emails from several of you and would like to share them with the group. I also posted the Draft of the ASERL Response. With Lori Smith's permission, I have copied her responses and posted them here as comments. Because I am using my own log-in to post her comments, the comments reference my name. Don't be fooled--they are really from Lori!
****UPDATE****
I am adding Ferol's and Howard's comments (with their permission)--but am adding them to a separate place on the blog. Look under the postings at the heading "Comments from You All Concerning Regional Issues."
SGB
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Response from ASERL to Study of Regionals
ASERL Collaborative Federal Depository Program Steering Committee response to GPO Study of Regional Depositories request
Regional libraries of the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) are individually and collectively facing challenges that inhibit their ability to effectively deliver a high level of service to the selective libraries and populations of their regions. Collaboration is key to strengthening the ties among Regionals, and between Regionals and the selective libraries they serve. Formal collaboration, such as that proposed in the Kansas-Nebraska shared regional, is a vital component of the success of our Regional libraries as they respond to the changing environment for libraries and information services. Regional depository libraries are currently exploring collaborations in order to meet some of these challenges. It is our view that Congress and the Government Printing Office (GPO) should continue to encourage and support these collaborations.
Preservation: Support collaborative efforts to develop redundant electronic collections.
The goal of the FDLP is to provide no-fee access to current and historic government information, regardless of format, yet there is no distributed preservation strategy in place for the born-digital materials that increasingly make up the FDLP collection. To ensure that today's electronic government publications are freely available in the future, the GPO should continue working towards a distributed preservation strategy for both print and electronic materials.
Flexibility: Support continued flexibility for Regional libraries to manage their collections.
The current network of Regional libraries, with its redundant, poorly described tangible collections, provides an inefficient, informal, incomprehensive preservation strategy for printed and re-formatted government information. By proliferating multiple copies of all printed or re-formatted materials to each of the fifty-three Regional depository libraries and proscribing that they be retained, Congress and the GPO have attempted to ensure the long-term survival of tangible government information.
Regional depository libraries must continue to have flexibility in managing these collections – including the ability to continue to use re-formatting to preserve and make accessible older materials. Preservation reformatting is being used by many of our libraries for other non-FDLP materials, some of which are quite rare.
Access: Support collaborative efforts to catalog Regional library collections.
The lack of comprehensively cataloged Regional collections hinders access. Comprehensive cataloging strengthens the FDLP as a whole by providing public access to otherwise unidentifiable materials. Comprehensive cataloging of Regional library collections also aids the work proscribed in Title 44 Section 1912 – “assistance for depository libraries in the disposal of unwanted Government publications.” Regionals are currently attempting to collaborate by sharing information on retrospective cataloging projects in their institutions, but would greatly benefit from a renewed emphasis on cataloging of these older materials by the Federal Government.
Standards: Support collaborative efforts to define standards of service for Regional libraries.
There is no standard for evaluating a Regional depository. In many cases, services and access to depository resources are dependent on individuals, leading to inconsistencies across institutions as staff and administrators come and go. Participants in the FDLP are self-funded and voluntary, which makes it difficult to impose standards. However, Regional libraries should work toward consistent service across states, and Selectives need to know what to expect from their Regionals. Minimum standards should be developed, with input from the GPO, Regionals, and Selectives, and should be outlined in official FDLP documentation such as the FDLP Handbook. GPO should host an orientation for new Regional librarians prior to the Depository Library Conference, as a way to introduce new Regional depository librarians to some of the issues that they will face during their tenure. Positions continue to blur as depository coordinators also are expected to perform duties that in some cases are completely unrelated to depository operations. This makes education extremely important – both of new depository coordinators and of depository library administrators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
