ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 442 / C & R L N ew s L ibraries a n d co m p u ter cen ters B y t h e A C R L T a s k F o r c e o n L ib r a r ie s a n d C o m p u te r C e n te r s Richard W. Boss, Chair A progress report, May 30,1987. I n the sum m er of 1986, the ACRL Board of Direc- tors established a tw o-year ad hoc Task Force on L ibraries and C om puter C enters. The need for such a task force stemmed from the varied perspec­ tives evident th roughout academ ia on the p er­ ceived com m onality of function and purpose be­ tw een libraries and com puter centers. The Task Force was charged by the ACRL Board “to investi­ gate cooperative ventures betw een academic li­ braries and com puting facilities and to draft guide­ lines for such cooperation.” C urrent members of the Task Force are: R ichard W. Boss (chair), auto­ m ation consultant, W ashington, D .C .; Charles R. A ndrew s, H o fstra U niversity L ib rary ; Shirley Leung, University of C alifornia Library, Irvine; Kenneth Luker, University of Utah Systems Office; Peggy Seiden, C arnegie-M ellon U niversity L i­ brary; and M ichael D. K athm an, St. John’s Uni­ versity Library. In response to its charge from ACRL, the Task Force divided its w ork into three parts: to ascertain w h at cooperative ventures and joint adm inistra­ tion is occurring now in academ ic institutions; to identify the issues w hich had to be addressed; and to develop guidelines for cooperation and joint ad­ m inistration. In order to accomplish its first task in advance of its original meeting at the 1987 ALA M idwinter Meeting, the Task Force surveyed 100 representa­ tive academic libraries, including members of the Association of Research Libraries, smaller univer­ sity libraries and college libraries. Slightly greater th an 35 % of those surveyed responded to a series of questions regarding the m an ag em en t reporting structure employed on cam pus w ith regard to both the librarian and the com puter facility director; whether or not a m erger of the two facilities m ight be under consideration; w h a t th e m ajo r issues would be if such a m erger were considered; the n a­ ture of and any issues relating to existing or poten­ tial cooperative programs between the two units; and the names of institutions which are moving in the direction of a merger or cooperative venture be­ tween the library and com puter facility. Over three-quarters of the library directors at the responding institutions reported to the vice president for academic affairs (also identified as provost), while only 45% of the directors of the principal academic com puter facilities reported to the same position. Almost 10% of this latter group reported to the vice president for financial affairs, while another 10 % reported to the vice chancellor or vice president for adm inistrative affairs. W here the two administrators to whom the different di­ rectors report are not the same individual, nearly 60 % of the respondents report th a t though differ­ ent, the administrators are on the same level in the institutional hierarchy. Nearly all of the libraries (90%) report th a t no change in the reporting rela­ tionships at either director level is under active con­ sideration, though some suggest th at the com put­ ing facility’s reporting structure m ight change in the future, and others report th a t there is interest within both parties to integrate the two units into a scholarly inform ation office. Among the institutions in which the library and academic com puting center directors report to the same individual, 63% of the respondents report that there is a fair am ount of coordination, while another 16% report their being a little coopera­ Septem ber 1987 / 443 tion. A total of 22 % of the respondents report that there is only some or no cooperation. W hen asked how the library would assess the prospect of merging the two facilities into a single departm ent on campus, a resounding 86% re­ ported that the prospect either was possible but not likely, or was highly unlikely. Only 11 % reported the prospect as being highly likely. On the other hand, while 28% of the respondents suggest that the prospects for such a merger in the next decade is highly unlikely, 36% report th at it is highly likely. Among the most frequently m entioned issues stem m ing from consideration of such a merger were: the adm inistration and management of hu­ m an resources; the division of library and com put­ ing center responsibilities; the ability to provide ef­ ficient, quality service; funding considerations; functional differences; physical location of the two facilities; a lack of understanding on the p art of the adm inistrations of the functions of the d ep a rt­ ments, etc. In noting existing cooperative programs, report­ ing institutions indicated th at services such as net­ working, public access catalogs, consulting, in­ s tru c tio n , e tc ., system m a in te n a n c e and engineering, housing of equipment, etc., already are taking place between the two departments. On the other hand, a majority of the institutions (58%) report that there are no cooperative programs be­ tween the library and other on-campus facilities. Issues similar to those raised by the possible merger of the library and computing centers were raised in consideration of w hat major issues would need to be discussed were cooperative programs with other campus computer facilities to be developed. The following academic institutions were listed by the respondents as moving in the direction of mergers and/or cooperative programs between the library and a campus computing facility: Brown University; Carnegie-Mellon University; Colum­ bia University; D artm outh College; Notre Dame University; University of New Mexico; University of California-Berkeley; University of Minnesota; University of Michigan; and Virginia Tech Univer­ sity. Members of the Task Force undertook a number of telephone interviews with the institutions identi­ fied, as well as with some referrals made by the in­ terviewees. The interviewees reported consider­ able discussion on their campuses, but for the most p art little major reorganization or other activity. The following reports have been subm itted by members of the Task Force. Brown University The vice president for computing and the uni­ versity librarian both report to the provost. For some time, there has been recognition of the need and importance for the library and the computer center to work closely together. The library and the computer center are in the process of installing an online system, which even­ tually will be developed as a fully integrated system accom m odating all technical service functions. The library system will become a part of the cam­ pus local area network. The CPU will be located in the computer center, whose staff will provide com­ puting and maintenance support. The library re­ cently hired two full-time staff to work on the de- 58 % reported no cooperative library /computer center rograms. velopm ent of the acquisitions sub-system. This staff resides in and reports to the computer center. The library and the computer center recently have begun to create a formal shared funding agreement in order to codify some of the programs already put into place. Carnegie-Mellon University On July 1, 1986, the operations of the libraries were combined with computing and information services to form the Division of Academic Services. The division includes the libraries, central aca­ demic com puting services, audiovisual services, telecommunications, and classroom support. The Academic Services Division is led by a vice president for academic services. The head of the li­ braries has become associate vice president for aca­ demic services. In addition, he retains his former title, director of libraries. This change in organiza­ tion was widely discussed over a period of some m onths, including presentations to the Faculty Senate and to the Education Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees. Both the libraries and computing services are ex­ periencing rapid changes in technology and in the expectations of their academic clientele. For the li­ braries, this began in the 1970s with the heavy use of computing to support traditional library opera­ tions such as cataloging and information retrieval services. Today, they are seeing a second phase in w hich m any of the m aterials th a t the libraries make available to faculty and students are created and exist solely in electronic form. The campus computer network is a fine way to deliver these ser­ vices. Over the next few years the university will be moving from a change in basic computing technol­ ogy (from a time-sharing to a distributed system) to p 444 / C& RL News a period in which the emphasis will be on using the new technology for academic purposes. This inter­ acts with the libraries in several ways. For exam­ ple, the library has taken responsibility for collect­ ing and indexing softw are, and for m achine- readable databases. As the focus of computing shifts from an emphasis on physical storage capaci­ ties to ways of organizing, accessing, and retrieving information from enormously large information stores, the traditional orientation and expertise of the libraries will become more and more relevant to computing services. College of St. Benedict/St. John’s University In July of 1986 academic computing was added to the responsibilities of the joint director of li­ braries and media. The two academic institutions share a single VAX 785, 60 public access micros and approximately 100 other micros in labs and offices. Included under academic computing is a repair fa­ cility with 2.5 FTE technicians, a teaching and software support group with 3 FTE positions and a main frame support group w ith 3 FTE positions. The decision to merge the academic computing center with the library was made because the fac­ ulty wanted more service orientation in academic computing, which they believed was present in the library, and due to a desire on the part of the joint institutional administration to bring together both inform ation resources planning and decision­ making. Initially the decision to merge the two operations involved only a joint directorship, but over a six- month period, supervision of the library public ac­ cess area gradually moved from academic comput­ ing to library staff. The institution reports having achieved a smooth transition which has proven m utually desirable. Increased dialogue between the library instruction and computer instruction staffs also has developed. Management of the institution’s computer facil­ ity initially proved to be problematic under the new arrangement. For example, it was difficult for an individual trained in librarianship to supervise and evaluate a computer technical operator. The organizational structure in the area of academic computing, therefore, had to be revised. Someone with the appropriate technical knowledge had to supervise the computer system manager, a devel­ opment which is being implemented. A close relationship also exists between adminis­ trative com puting and the library. Over time, some of w hat now falls into academic computing’s responsibility may shift to administrative comput­ ing and joint planning is underway for such a change. The faculty reportedly is pleased with the new service orientation in academic computing, and from the point of view of both management and staff, the merger reportedly has gone as smoothly as can be expected. Dartmouth College D artm outh currently is considering a 15-year plan for the entire campus, part of which includes the possibility of a closer relationship between the computer center and the library. At the present time, there are a number of overlapping areas be­ tween the two agencies, and in the future it is possi­ ble the library may undertake responsibility for some of the academic (but no administrative) com­ puting functions now handled by the computer center. There is no plan for either a merger or takeover by either unit at this time, and any change in areas of responsibility would be undertaken gradually. The library’s two DEC computers are housed in the computer center and are dedicated solely to li­ brary use. There is some reliance upon the com­ puter center staff for maintenance and trouble­ shooting. The library has as part of its own staff three full-time programmers and a director of com­ puter systems, who also has a library degree. Dartm outh is somewhat unusual in that com­ puters are heavily used throughout the campus for a variety of functions. There is a campus LAN. The library has its own “homegrown” public access cat­ alog and acquisition system, and in cooperation with the mathematics faculty, the library has be­ gun placing software in its reserve room to be used by students on library terminals. The library and the computer center also are col­ laborating in other areas: working on an electronic information policy for the university (e.g., the ac­ quisitions of electronic databases); and the estab­ lishment of a microcomputer center. W ith regard to the latter, the library is providing assistance in software purchase decisions. At the same time, the university librarian apparently does not foresee a merger between the library and the computer cen­ ter in the near future. Holy Family College Holy Family College is in the initial stages of bringing academic computing under the manage­ ment of the library director. Since the college does not have an academic mainframe (it has an ar­ rangement with Temple University to run large programs), the operation will be micro-based. The rationale for making the change is that “the library is the place that gathers and disseminates informa­ tion and there will be easy access” with the new structure. The library is one of the largest users of micros on campus, and its staff is able in some de­ gree to support both hardw are and software. University of Cincinnati The director of the computer center and the uni­ versity librarian both report to the university’s pro­ vost and senior vice president, who reportedly has been involved actively in fostering the working re­ lationship between the two units. Septem ber 1987 / 445 There apparently has been a close working rela­ tionship between the two units for over four years. It started when the library was exploring its auto­ mation options. At th at time, there was a staff per­ son working in both the library and com puter cen­ ter. The individual worked w ith the library on a half-time basis developing a RFP for an autom ated system. The com puter center has since served as a major advisor/consultant to the library in all as­ pects of library autom ation, and the library cur­ rently is planning to enlist the assistance of the com puter center w ith regard to office automation. The library and the computer center had drafted a general agreement on services when they first en­ tered into cooperative efforts in developing the on­ line public access catalog. Their relationship re­ p o rte d ly has proven to be q u ite satisfacto ry . Services provided to the library are charged on a use basis, and the library soon will be the second largest customer of the com puter center. The two units have regular, formal meetings. There is a bi-weekly production meeting between the library and com puter center systems personnel. In addition, there are frequent informal contacts. There reportedly has been no discussion about merging the two units; however, there is strong ad­ ministrative encouragement for them to work co­ operatively. University of Minnesota There is no active discussion regarding the m er­ ger of the library and academic computing center; however, there are ongoing discussions and efforts to enhance cooperation between the two. To that end, a joint task force has been established and ap­ pointments to th at task force have been m ade by the two area directors. The task force reports the following decisions re­ garding m achine-readable data files: • all non-private files should be accessible; • all non-private files should be represented bib­ liographically in the online catalog; • adequate technical connections from the bib­ liographic database through a telecommunications link to the machine–readable database should be present; • a formal liaison between the two areas should be established. The group also is investigating the possibility of access through the library’s online system to both bibliographic information and the content of data files such as the Census Bureau data. The following is from the Report on Integrated Online Library Systems Conference, September 23-24, 1986, by Sharon Charles. “Effective interaction is occurring at the Univer­ sity of Minnesota between the library and Adminis­ trative Inform ation Services (AIS) which is where the lib rary ’s com puter for the NOTIS system is housed an d o p e ra te d . AIS’s IBM te rm in a ls throughout the university will be able to access the library’s catalog. “The library plans to offer users the ability to search external databases w ith these same PCs. In addition to searching the library’s catalog the user would have the option of searching external d a ta ­ bases and sending an electronic message to the li­ brary to order materials found. The staff is investi­ g a tin g tw o m eth o d s of s e a rc h in g e x te rn a l databases. One is to use a modem on the local PC: “The library is one of the largest users of micros on campus. ” the other would be to use the central com puter’s connection w ith the national IBM data communi­ cation network. Each departm ent has a budget for searching databases such as BRS. The library antic­ ipated encouraging faculty to search the external databases directly. A charge-back system would be set up to fund this service. “The library is also investigating the possibility of mounting some reference databases on its cen­ tral computer, identifying the various local d ata­ bases on campus that might be made available to others, and, meanwhile, reorganizing 40 reference points and 18 buildings into 4 public service de­ partm ents and one bibliographic database.” University of New Mexico Initial discussion on campus w ith regard to a possible merger between the computing facilities and the library reportedly has ceased, and appar­ ently the merger is not likely to occur any time soon. Over the course of the past two years, how­ ever, serious consideration was given to such a un­ ion, and the two units briefly reported to the same administrator. The University of New Mexico recently has faced considerable transition w ithin its academic adm in­ is tra tio n . C hanges in staffin g have occu rred throughout the campus. One such change has re­ sulted in the dean of general libraries having been asked to serve as acting head of the computing fa­ cilities in addition to m aintaining responsibility for the library. As this new m anagem ent structure evolved, the director apparently considered the possibility of developing a more perm anent combined relation­ ship betw een the library and com puter center; however, political differences on the campus and operational differences between the two units ap­ parently convinced the university adm inistration to move in other directions, and early in 1987, the re p o rtin g rela tio n sh ip s of th e tw o units w ere 446 / C & R L N ew s changed. Most recently, both had reported to the vice president for academ ic affairs, although ear­ lier the associate vice president for com puter sup­ port had reported to the vice president for business. T he com puter center now reports to the vice presi­ dent for research, while the librarv continues u n ­ der the academ ic vice president. Plans for com bin­ ing the tw o units reportedly have been dropped. “Long-term benefits in cost and simplification appear to be positive. ” Vanderbilt University E ighteen m onths ago the academ ic com puting d ep artm en t was added to the responsibilities of the library director. The tw o operations are m anaged independently of one another, though there is some overlap. The rationale for keeping the two separate is the desire to m aintain as simple an operation as is possible. E ach school at V anderbilt has its own dean, and the schools operate almost as if they were separate institutions. E ach school contracts w ith both the li­ b rary and academ ic com puting for services, which essentially m a rk e t th e ir services to th e various schools. The library also contracts w ith the com ­ puting center for the services provided. There are tw o seperate staffs and two distinct organizations, though they are m anaged by the same person. Virginia Polytechnic Institute VPI has no form al relationship or true coopera­ tive venture betw een the library and the com put­ ing center; ra th e r there is a structure consisting of four discrete units w hich report to the vice presi­ dent for inform ation systems. The units include: the library; the com puter center; the learning re­ sources center; and telephone services. Previously the director of libraries reported to the provost, though no effective lines of com m unication existed am ong the four discrete units which had reported to different adm inistrators. At this time, under the leadership of a vice president, there is a clear un­ derstanding of the common goals and objectives of this unit. However, apparently it still is not clear w ith w hom certain responsibilities reside. Representatives of the four units meet weekly. T h ere reportedly is close cooperation and m ore support from the adm inistration th an there had been w ith the previous reporting structure. There also is m ore technical expertise available from am ong the units and a greater consciousness of the lib rary ’s needs. On the other hand, as the library has its own com puter and systems staff, there is lit­ tle involvem ent betw een the library and the com ­ p u ter center, except in the case of cam pus netw ork­ ing, especially w ith regard to rem ote access to the library catalog. Weber State College W ith the appointm ent of the present director of inform ation services in July 1986, the com puter center and the library were com bined into a newly created academ ic division reporting directly to the academ ic vice president. The director serves as the chief operating officer of both the library and the only com puter center on campus. The academ ic vice president reportedly had been considering the unification of the tw o opera­ tions an d h a d in v estig ated th e o rg a n iz a tio n in other institutions, particularly C olum bia U niver­ sity, b u t the move apparently crystallized only af­ ter the com puting center had a series of m anage­ m ent and budget problems. Since the m erger, the new director has focused attention on the budget and staff m orale. Internal cost controls and staff re­ ductions have resulted in the elim ination of seven of the twenty-five positions at the com puter center. W ithin the next fiscal year, the library staff also m ust be reduced due to state–w ide funding short­ ages. It is perceived th a t such reductions will be m ade easier because of the increased staffing op­ tions m ade available by the m erger. Since July the staffs of the tw o units have been w orking closely on tw o fronts: a com m ittee meets once each m onth to review options for enhanced organization and operation; and the tw o staffs are adjusting to the recently installed PALS integrated library system. These areas of contact have resulted in positive discussions, enhanced m utual respect and im proved morale. One elem ent w hich ostensibly has encouraged the success of the m erger is the interest on campus in personal com puters. Interest in m aking personal com puters available has come from the library, ac­ adem ic departm ents, faculty and students. The new division coordinates all these interests, the suc­ cess of w hich is viewed as critical to the long-term success of the m erger. O ther interests th a t the library and com puter center hold in com m on also lent support to the con­ cept of a merger. In p articu lar, the tw o units share a role in the overall inform ation function of the in­ stitution, and therefore the opportunity for net­ w orking electronic com m unications already was bringing the centers closer together. In addition, the mission of each unit included support for the educational activity of the school. Eor these reasons the m erger seemed logical and has proven practical and successful. In fact, there is some feeling th a t fu rth e r consolidation of other areas w ith the now- m erged library and com puter center is possible in­ cluding, for example, the student tutorial functions Septem ber 1987 / 447 currently provided by the learning center and the indicates th at they too eventually will endorse the arrangement. The staff at the college believes that for a merger to succeed there first must be a positive expectation of success, particularly among the staffs of the merged units. Of greater importance, however, are said to be the management and communication abilities of the individuals involved, and the will­ ingness of the staffs to cooperate with one another. Issues Papers Members of the Task Force prepared a series of issues papers th at provided background for the dis­ cussions at ALA Annual Conference in San F ran­ cisco. The group will attem pt to complete a first draft of guidelines, with a view to completing them by January 1988. ■ ■ media support services provided by the instruc­ tional development unit. The academic vice president reportedly is com­ fortable w ith the current structure and results, even though the merger was begun as an interim venture to solve an immediate problem. The long­ term benefits in cost and simplification appear to be positive. The questions raised by the faculty have centered on how competent the library direc­ tor would be to manage the computer technology, a discipline admittedly outside his previous experi­ ence. However, the incum bent’s “facilitative” ap­ proach to those questions appears to have helped win support. The professors of computer courses reportedly were and remain the most wary about the consolidation, but the progress realized to date ACRL action s, June 1 9 8 7 Highlights of the Annual Conference meetings of the ACRL Board of Directors. T he Board of Directors of the Association of Col- lege and Research Libraries met twice during the ALA Annual Conference in San Francisco: on June 27, 1987, and June 30, 1987. Accreditation While confirming its commitment to the MLS as the term inal degree for professional librarians, the Board voted to support an AASL proposal th at ALA join the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) and designate AASL the responsible participant in the NCATE accredi­ tation process as it relates to school library media education programs not eligible for accreditation by ALA. Acid-free paper The Board approved the following policy on the use of acid-free paper developed by the Publica­ tions Committee: “that by 1990, ACRL will begin publishing all serial publications of the Division on acid-free paper, with the exception of ephemeral publications such as but not lim ited to section new sletters and handbooks.” The Publications Committee will review cases in which an exception is being requested to this requirement. ALA Divisions The Board had an opportunity to pose questions about the proposed “Policies of the American Li­ brary Association in Relation to Its Divisions” to members of ALA’s Committee on Program Evalu­ ation and Support (COPES). ACRL m em bers Carla Stoffle, Richard Olsen, and Patricia Schu­ m an represented COPES. The Board endorsed a report to the ALA Execu­