From the Dean
Last year, as part of budget reductions and the rebasing effort, the Libraries cut $180,000 from acquisitions, after several years of cutting the operations and personnel budgets more heavily. The Libraries chose to avoid making a permanent decision regarding this cut so that there was time for faculty input. Instead, we eliminated the amount of money we typically spent on one-time purchases (primarily books), backfilled that with one-time only Foundation funds, and piloted demand-driven acquisitions. Now the time has come to make the final decisions regarding how we will make the acquisitions reduction.
Let’s briefly review our budget numbers. Our state funded acquisitions budget for FY13 is $1,777,292. The Libraries are permanently reallocating an additional$40,000 annually from Foundation funds and revenues (books sales and fines) in an effort to reduce the impact of the cuts. That makes our total acquisitions budget $1,817,292.
Our projected expenditures are $1,911,010, taking into account a 6.5% increase for inflation and accommodations for new commitments. This places our actual budget deficit at $93,718.
To make this reduction, we have no choice but to reduce subscriptions. The other consideration is whether or not to add back a portion of the acquisitions budget for books. In my opinion, this is essential.
In order to balance the impact of this reduction, we took into consideration faculty feedback from a survey conducted in winter quarter. To questions regarding collection priorities, faculty responded that they preferred full text databases, online journal subscriptions, and books (see http://library.wwu.edu/assessment/survey_cycle_assessment for a summary of the results of this survey). As a result, we propose keeping all full text journal packages. For reduction consideration, we are providing you with four lists, based on usage during the past three years: Print subscriptions, single title electronic journals, standing orders, and low-use citation-only databases. All items selected for reduction show low use and high costs, in this case $100 or more per use. When you take into consideration that we can acquire any journal article or book for less money from interlibrary loan, Summit, or Copyright Clearance Center’s Get It Now service, we have to seriously ask whether continuing to pay for access to these items would be good stewardship of state resources.
You can find these lists, as well as an overview of the reductions, our methodology in proposing them, and frequently asked questions, at http://library.wwu.edu/acq_overview. If we were to cut everything on these lists, the total reduction would be $169,000. That would provide a little over $75,000 for books and other one-time purchases on an ongoing basis. We see this as an initial step towards having additional funds for books. We will look to increase the book budget commitment next year and beyond until the proper balance between books and serials is achieved.
We’d like your feedback and encourage comments from faculty, staff, and students on these planned reductions. Please send feedback to your college’s Senate Library Committee representative or to me, at Chris.Cox@wwu.edu, by 5pm, Tuesday, May 29. Please keep in mind that for every subscription listed here that we decide to keep, one or more subscriptions NOT on this list may need to be cut. The Senate Library Committee will collate comments and engage with the library in determining how the library will move forward on behalf of the university’s students and faculty to achieve the reduction.
This past week brought a compelling presentation by John Popko, University Librarian at Seattle University, explaining the process by which the Lemieux Library & McGoldrick Learning Commons came to be realized. I wanted to share my thoughts and reactions.
1. Concept: John presented the “big idea” he shared with his Provost to spur the renovation of Seattle University’s library – the learning commons: “The learning commons will enable new relationships and modes of service that will benefit students.” More specifically, the library would be a mix of the old and the new, a place and a presence, a repository and an active learning space, tangible and digital, traditional and transformative. A Wilson Library renovation has been talked about for a long time. What would you like to see in a new library renovation? What current needs would you like to see addressed? What opportunities do you see? What might we preserve? What might we change? Why would these preservations/changes be important for Western, especially for student learning?
2. Learning commons development: Over the last few years, Western Libraries have been pursuing a learning commons just as Seattle University and many other academic libraries have. While we have a different mix of partners (including support for faculty writing instruction, for example), we have also co-located various academic support programs from across the campus into one location. Like SU's learning commons, we also aspire to go beyond on-stop shopping to collaborative inquiry. Here's our mission statement: “a vibrant, interactive online and physical space in the Library, the Learning Commons at Western Washington University integrates teaching, learning, information, and technology resources for a community engaged in spirited dialogue, individual learning, and collective discovery.”
While co-location is the first step, the second is for the partners to further collaborate by integrating services, developing shared learning outcomes, utilizing common technologies, and assessing their impact on student learning at Western. We’ve created an advisory board led by Learning Commons Coordinator Carmen Werder to do just this. Have you visited the learning commons? Do you have any ideas for developing it? What other partners might you suggest for us to include in the learning commons if we were to expand it at some later date? How might we explore the creation of faculty spaces within the learning commons and what might those look like?
3. Designed for learning, but challenging to assess: Modern library renovations put the emphasis on learning. While this emphasis certainly includes more traditional library services like collections and services like reference, there is increased attention paid to emphasis on library faculty’s presence in the classroom and curriculum and to designing library spaces conducive to supporting learning. At the presentation a participant asked how we know if these changes to library spaces do advance student learning? Well, the answer is that it’s not easy to measure. Just as we know that assessing classroom learning is a complex and multi-layered challenge, the same is true of assessing the impact of co-curricular influences.
First of all, we do know that, just like other libraries, the changes we have made of integrating our learning commons partners, adding a café, etc., have increased our usage. Our gate count has risen from roughly 800,000 when I was hired to well over 1 million visits a year. Usage of the Writing Center has doubled and usage of the Tutoring Center is up 31%. Data also showed that students tend to stay longer in the Library as more and more of their learnign needs are supported in one place. Circulation of materials is also up, suggesting that students are visiting the library for one reason and end up checking out materials and utilizing our services. Also, the changes we are making in furniture and space configurations reflect the findings in other places such as studies done by scholars at libraries like the University of Rochester (see Gibbons and Foster “Studying Students,” https://urresearch.rochester.edu/institutionalPublicationPublicView.action?institutionalItemId=7044).
Lastly, studies have shown a link between such changes in library facilities and increased student recruitment and retention. The truth is, for years libraries have relied on statistics of usage alone (number of volumes, circulation, reference questions) to evaluate quality. Just like the University we are part of, libraries are being asked to assess what we do in terms of other qualitative impacts: student enrollment, student achievement and learning, faculty grants, faculty research productivity (see ACRL Value of Academic Libraries - http://www.acrl.ala.org/value/. We’ll be working with the Office of Institutional Assessment this summer to begin exploring what data already exist and what data we should be collecting to better measure how the library directly contributes to student and faculty success.
4. Where are the books? Another participant at the presentation asked John about the lack of pictures of books in the new library. There are books in the new Seattle University library, but the images he was emphasizing (because of the topic of his talk) were of the new, interactive spaces developed. Similarly, a few years ago, library consultant Scott Bennett did a presentation regarding library space. In his presentation, he explored how libraries have moved through three paradigm shifts: from reader centered, to book centered, to learning centered. With information more freely available and easily accessible, libraries have moved away from emphasizing collections in their spaces to creating spaces designed to foster learning, where students and faculty alike can access and interact with knowledge in all forms and make new meaning from what they find (see Scott Bennett - "Libraries and Learning: A History of Paradigm Change," portal: Libraries and the Academy. 9, 2 (April 2009), 181-197 (http://www.libraryspaceplanning.com/assets/resource/Libraries-and-learning.pdf). In order to more clearly and deliberately become an integral partner in the education mission of Western and to assist Western in achieving its strategic goals, the library will need to continue to assess our collections and explore off site shelving alternatives as appropriate.
5. Building community, maintaining sanctuary: Another goal of library renovations is the building of community and the creation of spaces which engender a community of scholarship among students and faculty alike. What might these spaces look like? What furniture might work well in this re-configuration? Acknowledging the diverse needs of Library users, how might we continue to devote spaces for quiet study and contemplation? What furniture and décor might we choose for these spaces?
In order to spur conversation, I wanted to share my reactions to Doug Way’s presentation last week. You can view it at http://library.wwu.edu/library_speakers.
1. Analyzing the data: I was particularly struck by the information Doug shared regarding collection use at other libraries, and what collections received the most use. One slide revealed that 55% of books purchased by Cornell since 1990 had not circulated once. At Western, only 36% of our collection has circulated since 1998. On another slide, Doug revealed even more shocking data – a recent OhioLink survey revealed that 6% of most libraries collections account for 80% of the circulation. What are we to make of this data? Are we selecting the right things? Are there better ways to make these selections? What 6% of our collection accounts for the most circulation here at Western? Are those materials easily accessible? What about the rest of the collection? Should we be marketing these materials better? Should we be assessing our collection more closely and moving some of our lesser used materials off-site?
2. Moving to eBooks: Doug mentioned that many libraries are moving to eBooks because they are more flexible and more cost effective. Although Western Libraries has not pursued the purchase of eBooks as aggressively as many libraries (the University of Washington has been particularly innovative in this regard), we are starting to see them requested by campus faculty more frequently. While eBooks offer ease of access - multiple users can access the same book at the same time, and they are available even when the library is closed - and also never get damaged or lost, they do present other challenges. As scholarly publishers begin to move more in this direction, we would like to hear from faculty about their questions and concerns regarding eBooks.
3. Mass digitization: Doug shared information about Google Books and the library equivalent HathiTrust. He mentioned that GVSU has joined the HathiTrust and is actively loading the full text of books in the collection into their library catalog, so that users can search the full text of these items. They claim that doing so will increase discoverability of these items. Western currently does not include such content in its catalog. Should Western Libraries join the HathiTrust? Should we load such content into our catalog? If so, should we remove the print versions of these books from our collection?
4. Open access: Doug also talked about the role libraries can play in transforming the publication landscape in supporting the rise of open access journals. Open access journals differ from traditionally published journals in that they are freely available and are funded either by a learned society or by fees charged to those who publish in them. Should Western be offering greater access to open access journals? Should we explore subsidizing faculty to publish in open access journals? Is publication in open access journals seem by academic departments as equivalent to traditional scholarly journal publication and acceptable for tenure and promotion?
5. Collection to creation: Western Libraries has been exploring the creation of a digital repository of Western student and faculty papers, preserving them and helping them to be discoverable in search engines like Google. In doing so, we’d be able to assist faculty and students in gaining more traffic for their works, potentially raising the profile of the University. Should Western Libraries create a digital repository? What types of materials might we want to include? Would you submit your work to be included?
Those are my thoughts. What do you think? Tell us by participating in the Viking Village Forum at http://forum.wwu.edu/topic/library-speaker-series.
Today marks the beginning of the “Redefining the Academic Library” speakers series. Some have asked me why we’re bringing these speakers in. I thought I’d share a little more of the context.
Over the last six months the library has been engaged in a new strategic planning process. As part of this process we have been conducting an external scan: reading reports, conducting faculty and student surveys over the last two quarters, examining educational trends, revising our SCOT analysis, and assessing new directions. If you want to see what we’ve looked at thus far, the strategic planning committee’s charge, our timeline, etc., please check out http://libguides.wwu.edu/strategic.
The idea for the speaker series stemmed from the Provost’s reading of a report produced by the University Leadership Council of the Education Advisory Board entitled “Redefining the Academic Library” (http://crl.acrl.org/content/early/2012/01/09/crl-309.full.pdf). She suggested I review it and share it with my staff. I referred it to the library’s strategic planning committee and we have been engaged in discussions related to it here in the library. We found it to be a great overview of the challenges and opportunities libraries currently face.
I suggested to the Provost that one way to engage the campus community in potential future directions for the library would be to bring to campus some of the librarians who were interviewed as part of the report.The idea of a speaker’s series of the same name as the Leadership Council report was born! We picked four speakers covering areas we felt would of interest the campus community – collections, library space, collaboration and library staff roles – and I asked my colleagues if they would be willing to come to campus and share their knowledge and what they are doing at their institutions. The Provost graciously agreed to fund the cost of bringing them to campus. In truth, most are coming free of charge as a favor to me.
The intent of these presentations is to share the challenges facing academic libraries today, library trends, and ways that other libraries are addressing these. We want to engage faculty in particular but also students in a dialogue regarding these, and that’s why all the presentations will be video-recorded and we will have online forums on Viking Village where people can share their reactions, opinions, etc. Members of the Libraries strategic planning committee and I are also willing to discuss the content of these presentations with individuals or departments as we work to determine our future directions and figure out exactly which are the right fit for Western.
Below is a list of the experts we have engaged to come to the campus, starting today with Doug Way who will be presenting at 4pm in the Library Presentation Room (Wilson 164).
- On May 2, Doug Way from Grand Valley State College in Allendale, Mich., will discuss how library collections are rapidly changing in support of scholarship as well as the evolving roles of academic librarians. The Grand Valley State College Library is the 2012 winner of the Association of College and Research Libraries’ (ACRL) Excellence in Academic Libraries Award.
- On May 9, John Popko from Seattle University will speak about the 10-year planning and construction project which has resulted in the Lemieux and McGoldrick Learning Commons, a world-class transformative space supporting academic endeavors at Seattle University. Popko will also talk about the value that a learning commons environment brings to a university.
- On May 16, John Helmer, Executive Director for Orbis Cascade Alliance, will talk about the benefits consortia participation brings to members through efficiencies and purchasing power. Helmer has been involved with library consortia for 20 years and is the 2012 winner of the Hugh C. Atkinson Award which recognizes him as a risk-taker and an effective leader and champion of new ideas and initiatives.
- On May 23, Lizabeth (Betsy) Wilson, Dean of the University of Washington Libraries, will speak about new roles opening up for academic librarians and how these will benefit teaching and learning through academia. Wilson was the 2007 Academic/Research Librarian of the year and under her leadership, the University of Washington Libraries was the 2004 ACRL Academic Library of the Year.
I hope that you and your colleagues can attend these presentations and participate in the dialogue, helping us determine new directions to best respond to the needs of you and your students.
Some have expressed concern over the Libraries’ proposal to significantly reduce its acquisition budget as part of the current budget reduction process. I wanted to share a little more detail regarding this potential cut, and the rationale of targeting acquisitions for reductions at this time vs. another part of the Libraries’ budget.
Just like you, I don’t relish having to reduce the library’s acquisitions budget by any amount. However, let me offer a little background of the situation we’re facing. At a potential 7% reduction, the Libraries’ reduction target is the largest to date - $455,907. Compare this to the total of the past three reductions - $597,695. What does this all mean? In the last three years we have lost roughly $1 million of the $5.4 million budget that existed in 2008 when I was hired.
During the first three reductions we concentrated on reducing operations, eliminating personnel lines, and enacting efficiencies. 74% of the first three cuts were to personnel, resulting in the loss of 11.7 FTE. The acquisitions budget was primarily protected. Only $87,000, or 4%, was cut. During this same time period, other Universities dramatically reduced their acquisitions budgets. The University of Washington, a major research university, reduced theirs by 20%. UC Santa Cruz reduced their acquisitions budget by $1 million.
With this large a cut, and after having examined staffing benchmarking data (attached), and seeking to preserve library hours and core services as much as possible, the acquisitions budget can no longer be sheltered. We are proposing an acquisitions budget cut of roughly $400,000 – a 19% reduction.
The Libraries seeks to mitigate this reduction in a variety of ways:
1. We will be using one-time money from a vacant position, as well as Foundation funds to backfill some of the cut in the first year of the biennium to allow us more time to work with faculty to make informed decisions.
2. We will be utilizing cost per use data from database companies to produce a list of journals which have a high cost and experience low use. This list will be posted for all faculty to review so that they may comment on what is included on the list and assist in decision-making.
3. You may have already read our plan for a new acquisitions funding model, which will combine database and journal funding with interlibrary loan, and move to an allocation model which includes primarily books and other one-time purchase, with monies distributed by college rather than department for increased flexibility.
4. We have implemented a number of new tools, including an electronic resource management system and a new book ordering system called GOBI, which allow us to monitor purchases and get better data.
5. We are working collaboratively with the other members of the Orbis-Cascade Alliance to do more with less, continuing to sign on to group purchases, and participating in a threshold pilot whereby we will scrutinize requests for items which are already held by three other Alliance libraries.
With the expansion of the information universe there is increased emphasis on access vs. ownership. Libraries can no longer seek to own everything and instead are working to create systems by which items can be quickly purchased and distributed when needed. Even Harvard has recognized this.
Research and scholarship are changing as well. More research is performed at the article level rather than at the journal level. Interlibrary loan, Summit, and document delivery are now more rapid than ever. We hope that in concentrating on providing convenient access to the scholarship that students and faculty require, we can offset these serious cuts. We also hope that, when the economy improves, the University will choose to reinvest in the Libraries so we can purchase those items which could not be purchased during these difficult economic times.
In the coming weeks we’ll be sharing more information with you. I urge you to share your thoughts with me or with our Collection Development Librarian Jeff Purdue. Also, please review the documents attached, which provide a more in depth rationale for the acquisitions cut and information on library personnel benchmarking.
Last week, over 50 students, faculty, and administrators came together for “Building the Library of the Future: A Dialogue.” The purpose of the dialogue was to discuss themes which resulted from our analysis of the results of last winter’s LibQual+ Lite survey of user expectations. The survey itself asked a number of questions to determine your satisfaction with Western Libraries in three key areas: service, collections, and the library facilities. If you didn’t partake, don’t recall the questions or want to see the results, they are available here. Western Libraries is always interested in hearing what our users think, and considering the current economic climate and our desire to “close the loop” when it comes to assessment processes, this gathering seemed the perfect way to get people talking about the Libraries.
We divided the participants into groups with a TLA (Teaching and Learning Academy) student at each table to facilitate the conversation and a scribe to record the results. The dialogue had at its heart these three questions:
1. Information Resources
On the LibQUAL survey, faculty indicated that they are less satisfied with library holdings than undergraduates, who in addition to being more satisfied with library holdings, are the largest user group using ILL (interlibrary loan).
Question: How do you think the Library might reconcile this difference between students’ overall satisfaction with Library collections and faculty’s dissatisfaction? Any ideas on what your colleagues think?
2. Library as Place
On the LibQUAL survey, students indicated they appreciate the value of the Library as a place to spend time but found it deficient in some respects while faculty, who visit less, had a lower level of expectation for the facility and felt that level was being met.
Question: What do you think would make the Library more attractive as a place for faculty, staff, and students? What do you think your colleagues might say?
3. Looking for Action
Steve Hiller, the University of Washington’s assessment officer and LibQUAL expert, advises that when looking to the survey results for what things a library needs to address, it’s a good idea to focus on the “big negative numbers.” That is, look at those survey areas with a significant “Superiority or Service Gap” - the difference between the desired level of service and the perceived level. A negative “Superiority or Service Gap” number indicates that the desired minimum level of service is not being met.
Question: Listed below are three LibQUAL areas that had the most significant “big negative number” for each user group. How concerned do you think the library should be about these user perceptions? Where would you suggest that we focus our attention and why?
a) Library as Place: Library spaces that inspire study and learning (-1.32 undergrad)
b) Library as Place: A gateway for study, learning or research (-1.73 graduate students)
c) Information Resources: Print / Electronic journal collections I require for my work (-2.12)
The dialogue was vibrant and both we and the participants were pleased with the engagement. We are now beginning to compile the results of this dialogue. Look for a summary to be posted in the coming months.
In the meantime, we’d like to know what you think. How would you answer the questions we asked of the dialogue participants? Feel free to send me or Frank Haulgren an email. We’re interested in hearing what you have to say. It will help shape what we do in the future!
A little less than a month ago I posted information regarding a proposal to consolidate the Libraries’ branches to fulfill the current budget reduction. In response to concerns raised by music faculty and students, the Provost and President have charged a task force to evaluate the decision and determine the most strategic and sustainable way to make the reduction. I also had concerns regarding the lack of time available to gather input from those who were most affected by these decisions, and support the Provost and President in their decision to provide a forum for that.
The Review of Libraries Budget Reduction Strategies Task Force is charged with evaluating four proposals for achieving a roughly $97,000 reduction to the Libraries budget. The proposals include three from the Libraries, and one from the music department.
Proposal #1: Reduce main library hours.
Proposal #2: Reduce library materials acquisitions funding.
Proposal #3: Consolidate the music library’s collections into the main library.
Proposal #4: Music department’s counterproposal to keep the music library in its current location.
The three proposals from the Libraries were all considered as part of the previous budget process and it was determined that, while it would impact members of a very important and valuable department on campus, consolidating the music library into the main library would result in the least impact for the majority of University students, faculty and staff.
As Dean of Libraries, I wish none of these reductions were necessary and appreciate the time and energy the members of the task force are dedicating to this. I look forward to seeing the results of their work.
By now you will have examined the proposed budget reductions that were posted this morning on the Planning and Budgeting web site. As part of that cut, the Libraries are proposing to consolidate its two branch libraries – the Music Library and Huxley Map Library. It was the Provost who ultimately made the decision regarding this reduction; a decision that was made very late in the game but which I very much support.
What do we mean by consolidation? This means we would be moving the two branches collections into the main library. This decision was made for a number of reasons.
First, because of the economy. The cut will allow the Libraries to reduce two positions, an hourly employee, as well as student help, saving a total of over $140,000 a year. It will also allow the University to consolidate some services from leased spaces and bring them back to the campus, saving approximately $50,000.
Secondly, it will allow us to provide what we hope will be even better service to our users. Why? Because the materials will be available longer hours than what is currently possible in the branches. Materials which have previously been restricted by policy and by geography will be more accessible and should get greater use.
Thirdly, usage of the branches has declined over the last several years. Three staff and several students serve a total of only 2.8 users per hour now in the Music Library. This is a lot of human capital to support a low-used service. A similar situation exists with the Huxley Map Library.
Fourth, it will allow the Libraries to preserve essential operations - information resources and research help – which are essential to all students and faculty success and scholarship.
Lastly, the consolidation of branches is a trend happening in academic libraries across the country, in an effort to save money and ensure high quality service. Just last year, UW chose to close three of its branch libraries. The reality is that these branches have become very expensive to operate and under the current economic climate, that expense can no longer be justified.
I’ve attached a number of internal reports which will provide data and statistics and help to make the case for what are painful but strategic reductions. One provides a more eloquent rendering of the rationale for consolidating branch libraries that I listed above. The second, concerning the music library, is an update of a document previously posted to this blog, with additional data included. Lastly, the third report is on the Huxley Map Library. This last report is an update of an earlier report I was asked to prepare for then Provost Dennis Murphy regarding the change of administration of the Huxley Map Library to the Libraries. It includes a lot of useful background information about the collection, as well as usage data and rationale as to why consolidation is a logical approach and one that will (hopefully) have little impact on service.
Currently, there is no expected timeline for this consolidation – we just know it will happen in the next year, and it cannot happen immediately. I’ll be working with the faculty and students in both Music and Huxley to determine the details.
One-time dollars are available to be used to move the collections and outfit appropriate space in the main library. We will be preparing an FAQ to answer some of the specific questions you may have about what all this will mean and when it will happen.
Eliminating the branch libraries and consolidating them into the main library is a difficult decision and one that will impact a number of loyal library users throughout the campus, but ultimately will allow the Libraries as an organization to continue to provide the high quality information resources and services that you, our students, faculty and staff of this campus, expect.
I look forward to your assistance and feedback in how we will manage and implement this decision. Also, if you have additional questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me.
I wanted to take a moment to discuss some current and upcoming reductions to hours both in the main library and in both the music library and the Huxley map library.
A few weeks ago, the Provost and President asked me to examine library hours to see if there were any cost savings and efficiencies to be found as we prepared for the current '10-'11 cut. I, along with members of the Libraries' leadership team, Rick Osen, Acting Assistant Dean for Collections and Technology, and Michael Lorenzen, Assistant Dean of Public Services, examined usage data, including circulation and gate count statistics, for all the Libraries. Based on this analysis, and looking at the times of lowest use, we came up with four scenarios for possible reductions:
1) Closing the main library on Saturdays
2) Closing the music library on nights and weekends (28 hours per week)
3) Reducing Huxley map library hours (7 hours per week)
4) Closing the main library additional days on eight holiday weekends, specifically Sunday and Monday of MLK weekend, President's weekend, Memorial Day weekend, and Veteran's Day.
A copy of the document that was generated as a result of that analysis is attached.
In the end, we decided the implement 2, 3 and 4. All resulted in significant cost savings and, while difficult decision to make, were the right thing to do considering our current economic situation. These hour reductions will be effective immediately. For now, the Libraries will continue to be open Saturday hours as the cost savings currently does not warrant a closure. In fact, we can save just as much if not more money by closing the eight holiday weekend days without significant disruption to University students, faculty and staff.
Concerning the music library hours reduction. I have attached a document which we prepared which outlines the data supporting the need to eliminate hours on nights and weekends. As you will clearly see, gate count and circulation statistics have dropped in recent years, and usage of the collections has also dropped. I have worked with members of the music faculty to come up with what I hope will be amenable solution regarding hours for the coming year:
M-TH: 8:45 - 5:45
F: 8 - 5
I do not take decision like this lightly, and know that members of the music faculty and staff will be impacted by this decision. Service will not be optimal, and I am sorry for that. But we are in a situation where tough decisions need to be made, and my goal in making them will be to to protect the core library services which are essential to student and faculty success.
Welcome to the new "From the Dean" Blog. In an effort to share my views on a variety of library initiatives and trends and in order to continue to be transparent, I wanted to start this blog to better communicate with all of you, the Libraries' users, those we serve and that I care about. Each week or so I'll be making posts, and I urge you to visit every once in a while to see what's being said. As always, I am also interested in what you have to say. If you have comments on any of the postings to this blog, feel free to email me directly at email@example.com.