Faculty Senate – November 11, 2019

Good afternoon, everybody. The meeting of faculty
senate will come to order. Welcome, everybody. And if you haven’t
already done so, make sure that you check
in using your mobile app or with Morgan in the
back right hand corner. We do have a quorum today. So we need to check in with
our satellite campuses. Potomac State, how
many are present? Two. And West Virginia Tech? West Virginia Tech has
two senators present. Two. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you. [INTERPOSING VOICES] I was a little confused. All right, so we
have a quorum today there is one change that we
need to make to the agenda. In our Jeffco report, the item
that is listed for information is actually needing
approval this afternoon. The minutes from last faculty
senate meeting that took place on October 14 have been
distributed as an annex to your agenda. Are there any additions
or corrections to the minutes from
the October meeting? Potomac State and West
Virginia University Tech, do you have any
changes to those? No, ma’am. No changes here. No changes. Thank you. So hearing no
changes, the minutes are approved as written,
and I think I just saw President Gee walking in. So with no further ado,
we’re ready for your report. Thank you, Emily. This is what you call
just on time, right? I walked in. You didn’t wait for me, did you? I was on– I’m only three minutes late. I can’t believe it. But anyway, she
did want my report. So tonight, Tara Westover
is going to be here, and she wrote the book
Educated, which of course was our university read,
and I hope that you’re going to have a chance
to come by and hear her. I think her lecture is– let me just see what time
it is, I tell you right now. Her lecture is at 7:30. So it might be an opportunity. Her book has been on The New
York Times bestseller list for some time, and I have
read it, and it’s compelling. And I hope you all have a
chance to take a look at that. On Wednesday, we’re going
to have our day of giving, the third annual. This event has become
a wonderful tradition and a unique opportunity
to support our university. The first day of giving
raise nearly $3 million. We were hoping would
raise a million. We raised three. And then last year, we
hoped we’d raise three, and we raised six. So that is an
upward trend, and I believe that is one worth
everyone looking at and seeing if they can do
something themselves. Our success, of
course, is important because these
unrestricted dollars go to support of our students,
our faculty, our staff, and obviously, our
research functions. And I must say that we have
one of the most successful days of giving in the country. I think that our 6.2
million last year was one of the highest of
any university anywhere. Wednesday, this week, is
also a day that our community will come together to mark what
was a very sad anniversary. Many of you can remember that. We’ll screen a special
documentary film, Breathe, Nolan, Breathe
on the fifth anniversary of the tragic death
of Nolan Burch, who was a student, a freshman
at the university, of course, died due to alcohol
poisoning and hazing. The Burch family will attend,
and a panel discussion afterward will include
internal medicine and pediatric specialist
Dr. Joshua Dower. The topics will include
the dangers of hazing, the role of bystanders,
and safety resources available on campus. The reason I think
this is important, we determined as a
university that we were going to take a major role
in terms of hazing prevention. We have been very
active in this. I have personally
been very active. I’ve spoken to a number of times
around the country regarding this issue. I think it is an
issue of our time. So the screening and
discussion will take place at the [INAUDIBLE] theater
with doors open at 5:30. I might also note, and
I think that I did this with some of you the
last time, but the issue of mental health of our
students is extremely important. I think I pointed
out to somebody, 10 years ago about 5% of
our students self-identified as having mental health
problems, now 35%. So we have an epidemic,
and we need to figure out how to deal with it. I wish I knew the exact causes. One of the things if you
take a look at the surveys, there are two things about
these students that are entering into universities now. One is the fact
they’re very anxious, a high level of anxiety. The other thing is the fact
that they’re very lonely. Have you thought about that? And I was just looking
as I was coming up, because it was a little– the classes were
changing, so people walking across the
street four breadths, they were all on
their cell phones. They weren’t talking with
each other, not communicating. And so in a time of immense
communication opportunities, they’re not talking
with each other. And so I think
that as faculty, we need to be very
concerned about what is happening with the mental
health issues concerning our students and our
faculty and our staff. If you take a look at the
academic medical center and the many academic
medical centers, the number one issue
confronting folks in academic medical
centers is burnout. And so I think the
health of all of us, at this time, with all of
the tumultuous issues going on nationally that we need
to be concerned and support each other in that regard. We had a board of governors
meeting last week, and I’m always grateful
to have one of those and when it’s over with,
if I still have a job. As you know, it’s touch and go. But we didn’t have
tri board meeting. The foundation board and
alumni board met together. We did a very deep
dive into the issues confronting higher education and
confronting our own university. I think we’re going to have that
with the educational advisory board, and an EAB is coming,
and I hope as many of you can come as possible,
because once you see the data and the
statistics that we’re dealing with
nationally, then you’ll have a better
understanding of how we can solve our own problems
and, more importantly, how we can stay ahead of
the curve as it exists. So saying all of that,
what kinds of questions can I answer for all of you? Yes, sir. Oh, there is a microphone. I’m sorry. I didn’t see it. Hello. [INTERPOSING VOICES] It’s a follow up question
to the state of university, and you will see why I
didn’t ask it the day. So in that day, in the morning,
CBS News, morning news, highlighted two universities,
Penn State, and LSU, for how they’re raising
tuition and then making all these nice luxury
apartments and da, da, da, and in case of LSU, how their
library is being run down with water in
basement and all that. So we know we don’t
have that problem, because I know in
Evansdale, we just did a [? mitigation ?] just
last summer to fix our library. And then they went on and said
LSU has this leisure river, that spell LSU, you know, those
lazy river, they build it. So I was wondering when can
we have one lazy river at WVU here on our campus? Are you kidding? Just kidding. Well, I tell you, I hate
water, I hate swimming. I hate all those kind of things. I am an Eagle
Scout, and I nearly didn’t make it
because of the fact that I hated the swimming
and the life-saving thing. Finally, I think my father
bought the badge for me. That’s all I can say for you. But anyway, I think funny
question, important point, is the fact that we want to
be very careful about how we do not create an environment
in which we are developing expectations that go beyond
both our ability to service, but also, more importantly,
I think that it’s always a balancing act. Some of you know my daughter
is the Secretary of Health for the state of Louisiana. She tells me that they
tend to put their money in strange and exotic places. I hope that we have the
right kind of balance. And so no lazy river. Maybe, you know, a little pond
out in front of engineering would be fine. Any other questions? Seeing none, Madam Chair. Now, we’ll have Provost Reed
come up and give her report. Good afternoon. So as the president
said, we met last week with our three boards, the board
of governors, the foundation board, and the alumni board for
what is known as the tri board meeting. And at that meeting,
I was able to provide the academic perspective
of the institution and to share the provost led
initiatives and priorities. The tri board was very
interested and enthusiastic about our collaborative efforts
to innovate, strengthen, and enhance the university’s
academic programming, including revamping the general
education curriculum. To that end, I just
received a first draft of a new general
education curriculum from the Jeff committee,
and it’s really the categories or the buckets
under which the courses will be listed, and I’m very
much looking forward to looking at that,
this very early draft, along with my team, to study it. At first glance, it
looks very exciting. Of course, the devil
is in the details, and we will need
to work together to ultimately
develop a plan that is both inspirational
and practical. So I’ve really
enjoyed the process. I do want to say working
with the committee and working with
the faculty senate, in general, I feel like we’re
developing a true partnership, and I think it’s terrific. So also, at that
tri board meeting, actually at the board
of governors meeting, the board of governors approved
several new graduate degree programs and certificates. They include a new
master’s degree in health care administration
that is being offered– will be offered by the
School of Public Health, and it is designed
to meet the growing demand for health care
administrators in the state and beyond. Three new graduate certificates
offered by the Chambers College in cybersecurity, they are
business cybersecurity data analytics, business
cybersecurity management, and business
cybersecurity foundations. And then a master’s degree
in athletic training, which is a reconfiguration of the
previous master’s degree that is currently
being offered by CPAS. And as you all
know, the entire– or you may know, the entire
athletic training program is being moved to the
medical school in part to comply with new
accreditation standards. On the international
front, we continue to evolve and strengthen our
partnership with the Royal University of Women in Bahrain. Last month, Vice Provost
Paul [? Kryder ?] and Associate Provost
Mark Gavin traveled to RUW where they worked on developing
an expanded series of 2 plus 2 agreements in such areas
as art and design, business, and engineering. The plan is to
eventually phase out the four year civil engineering
degree program, which is on the coed campus
there because it has had very, very low enrollments. After adjusting for some
typical fall attrition, WVU’s first time
freshman retention rate leveled off at 79%. Still, this represents
a 3% increase from 2018, which is significant. Our 2020 budget
model conservatively plans for a 1/2 percentage
point increase next year, which would put us at 79.5%. However, we think we can
do much better than that. On the academic
side, we are engaged in number of
retention activities that we hope will demonstrate
immediate results. And all of you, the
faculty as a whole received an email
earlier this month that outlined a few of them. And they include reforming
course scheduling to ensure that students are able
to access the courses they need when they need them, so they
can advance towards degree completion, and that begins by
allowing the STEM faculty to go first in populating the
schedule, since they typically teach the gatekeeper
introductory courses, such as Math 124 and Math 126. And we’ll be taking a hard look
at courses with high DFW rates to determine what more
we can do to reduce those rates by
working with faculty on strategies and solutions. And then finally,
creating major pathways for either undecided
students or for students who can’t get into
their preferred majors because they don’t meet
the admission criteria. Nearly, 1,000 of our
freshmen or 20% of them live in CLASS, which
most of you know is the Center for Learning,
Advising, and Student Success. Students in CLASS retain at
a significantly lower rate than freshmen who
have been admitted to specific majors, something
like 60% compared to 79%. So our goal is to
move these students into an academic home as
soon as possible, where they can begin again
progressing towards their degree completions. And those major
pathways will identify a number of curricular
options for students who can’t get into their majors. These new pathways
will include such areas as health care, business and
communication, and engineering and technology. Actually, there are
10 pathways in total. In the state of
the campus address last month, I talked
about the priority of retaining our R1 status
and strengthening our research reputation in niche areas. One of those we
strongly believe will be in artificial intelligence. As you know, AI is a
technology platform poised to dramatically transform
every industry and every aspect of our society. To that end, the
provost’s office in partnership with
the Office of Research will be searching for
a person to head up a new AI collaborative at WVU. This person will be tasked with
identifying particular areas of opportunity in AI
that WVU can be known for and will help to develop a
multidisciplinary approach to embedding AI across
colleges and programs. And last but not least, an
update on our ongoing dean searches. We are at the finalist stage
of the Statler College dean search. We have brought three
finalists to campus so far, with the fourth one
coming to campus this week. With input from the
search committee, faculty, senior leadership, and
other constituency groups, we hope to make an offer
to one of those candidates by the end of this month. There are some other dean
searches going on nationally, and we have been told
by the search firm that we really do need to
get on this very quickly, because if we wait
too long, then we might lose our
candidate that we want. And then we are beginning
in earnest for our searches for deans of the Davis College
and WVU extension service. The search committees
have been selected, and Greenwood Asher
and Associates will soon begin to solicit the
names of qualified candidates. And the Davis search is running
slightly ahead of extensions, but we hope to bring
to campus finalists for both positions in the
early spring semester, and that concludes
my report, singular. Any questions? Dave [INAUDIBLE]. The reporting on the board of
governors meeting, your report you gave to them indicated
you were looking to increase or expanded pathway for new
programs to come on board, responding to the
market conditions and things like that,
but also indicated you were looking at
sunsetting programs. Can you give us some
idea of the criteria for doing the and
the timeline by which you’re looking to do that? Absolutely, Dave. We’re not close to even
going through that process. I mentioned that in part, also,
because the board of governors wants to know that we
are being responsible, good financial citizens,
knowing that the challenges that we face. But the reality is we have
not developed our process yet. We will for identifying growth
areas and a process for how we helped to support that
growth with our limited funds in the office of the provost,
and then, at the same time, working with the colleges
to identify those areas that are not growth areas
and to determine whether, with a little bit
of an infusion of investment, whether we can help to
turn those programs around, whether there’s a strategic
value for continuing those programs, and if
not, the process for how we might sunset them. But that’s very early. I would anticipate by the
end of this spring semester, we will have the
formula in place, and we will be clearly
communicating that. Hello. Potomac State and Tech, do
you have any questions for me? No questions from Potomac State. No questions from WVU Tech. Anything else? Going, going, gone. Thank you. So first of all, I
would like to say happy Veterans Day to everyone. For those of you in the audience
that served or have relatives that have served
in the military, we want to thank you or them
for the service to our country. Don’t forget that there is
a flu shot clinic going on. It’s set up in the
[INAUDIBLE] conference room, and they’ll be remaining
open after faculty senate till probably least 5:45 or so. Oh, there you are, Gretchen. OK, ’till everybody is done. So please visit Gretchen after
the faculty senate meeting if you have not already
gotten your flu shot. One of the areas that I
wanted to talk briefly about is we’ve been hearing from
various committees and faculty senators and faculty alike that
effective communication within and amongst faculty
and administration has become a theme
that has resonated through several
faculty, like I said, committees and just kind of
issues over the last couple years. So Dave, Natalie,
and I had a pleasure to meet with Kimberly Becker,
of the provost’s office director of
communications, and we’re going to be trying some
new tactics in regards to communication. So first of all, following
all faculty senate meetings, I’m going to send out a brief
email recapping each faculty senate meeting that will
go all out to all faculty from my perspective, and the
provost may also at some point, she had volunteered that if her
office needs to do the same, that they would do so as well. While we know that
the agenda is posted before each meeting
and the videotaping is also available
after each meeting, that a lot of our
faculty and colleagues aren’t necessarily
looking at the agenda and reading the annexes
or watching the video, because we’re all super busy. So if we can do a brief
summary after faculty senate of the important issues that
we talked about, it can’t hurt. We’re going to give
it a try and see if that helps with
communication a little bit. In addition, similar to
the roundtables that we’ll be doing today with
the library committee, I’ll be working with
the faculty welfare committee within the
next couple of months to develop a similar exercise
on how we as senators can more effectively foster
transparent communication with administration,
and also how we can share with our
constituents what happens at faculty senate meetings to
better really kind of propel that idea of shared
governance ahead. I want to also remind everyone
that we do have our faculty senate website, and while
it might not be perfect– no website is perfect– it does have a plethora
of information on it. One of the pieces that
I want to point out to you is if you scroll down
to the very bottom of the page, there is a heading that says
Contact Us, and then it reads, “Do you have a
suggestion, question or concern that you would like
faculty senate to review?” That will take you
to a Qualtrics forum where you can submit
any question, concern that you have. It will actually go to the
faculty welfare committee chair, which is Scott
Crichlow this year. You can send that anonymously
without your contact information, or if
you would prefer to be contacted back
directly, you can also share your contact information. So please utilize that if you
have any questions or concerns that you don’t feel comfortable
bringing up to the floor or just feel like it’s
something that you want a question
answered quickly, that’s a really
great method, and I think it’s being underutilized. Scott, have you gotten any
messages from that site at all this year? Not since October. [INAUDIBLE] September. And then one last
thing, don’t forget that we have a new faculty
ombudsperson, Jodi Goodman. Jodi’s role is to be
confidential, independent, informal, and a neutral
resource for faculty members, and she has developed
a new website as well that is at
[email protected] Please reach out to her if
you need insight or thoughts from an ombudsperson. I’ve heard from those
that have utilized her services that she’s
really doing a wonderful job. And then my final
announcement is that we are going to be
having a representative from the education advisory
board, EAB, on December 9 faculty meeting. The presentation
will be on trends in higher education with
the focus on recruitment and retention strategies that
we can utilize here at WVU. While this will take place
as part of our faculty senate meeting, I also
want to encourage you to invite other faculty and
colleagues from around campus to come to that
presentation as well. So we’ll make sure there’s
plenty of spaces for visitors at our next faculty
senate meeting, so they can also enjoy
that presentation. And with that, does anyone
have any questions or comments for me? Potomac State? No questions, ma’am. And Tech? No questions. All right, with that, we will
have a curriculum committee report from Ed. Good afternoon. I have your approval
annexes 1, 2, and 2a. Annex 1 is new courses;
annex 2, changes; and annex 2a is a
pilot program, where the nature of this
program is for us to try to avoid
the delaying course review after the assessment
committee for those issues that doesn’t involve
curricular matters. So just to speed up a
little bit the process. We also have for your approval
a new major in music and health. Are there any
questions or points of discussion for
annexes 1, 2, or 2a? We’re going to lump
those together along with the new major in music
health, music in health, unless anybody objects. But at this point, are there
any questions or points of discussion for
any of these areas? OK, without any questions
or points of discussion, all those in favor of
approving annex 1, 2, 2a, and the major in music
and health please say aye? Potomac State? Two aye. And Tech? WVU Tech has two ayes. Those opposed please say no. All right, the ayes have it
because Potomac State and Tech, I think they voted all yeses. So annexes 1, 2, and 2a, and the
new major in music and health are approved. We also have the for
information item, which is a new minor
in entrepreneurship. Do you have anything to– No, that was the other
item for information. Are there any
questions or points of discussion for
this new minor? And this is only an
information item at this time. If none, thank you very much. Thank you, Ed. All right, and now we
have Lesly Cottrell with a Jeffco committee report. Hi, good afternoon. So we do have for approval
annex 3 that everyone has had a chance to see. We had an AEM 216
course that we’d like to put forth for approval. Are there any questions
or points of discussion for annex 3? Potomac State and Tech, are
there any questions or points of discussion? Tech? No questions. No questions from Kaiser. Thank you. All right, with no questions
or points of discussion, all those in favor of approving
annex 3 please say aye. Potomac state? Potomac State two aye. And Tech? WVU Tech has two ayes. Thank you. Those opposed say no. All right, the ayes have it and
annex 3 is approved as well. Madam Chair, if I may, I
promised an update and also on our processes just to
extend Provost Reed’s report if that’s OK. Please, go ahead. So each of you, in
our first meeting, we were talking about the
other pieces, in addition to the course additions. So as Provost Reed mentioned,
we submitted a report to her with only the focus areas
and the learning outcomes related to those areas. It is a draft, as she
mentioned, and that went out Friday afternoon a
little bit before 5 o’clock. The intent is for this to come
through the regular process, so I wanted to just extend
that a little bit more that in collaboration with Provost Reed
and her team as well as others. The intent is that it will
come through our curriculum, and it will come through– excuse me, our approval process. It might come in pieces so
that everyone gets a chance to look at it, but
definitely I wanted to mention that everyone will
get a chance to look at it. Thank you, Leslie. Does anybody have any
questions or discussion points for Leslie? All right, we’ll now
have a report from Ashley with a talk– Roy, where are you going? Ashley with the TACO committee. Going to beat you
to the microphone. Just a little update
from the TACO committee what we’ve been working on. We met for our November
meeting last week, and the committee
had been working on revising the
emails that would be sent to both
faculty and students prior to completing the SEIs. The proposed language
changes had previously been approved by the
executive committee, and they were slated to be
brought to faculty senate at our October meeting. A couple days before
our October meeting, I did receive an email from a
faculty member passing along information from another
faculty member concerned about the language, the
strong language that was used in the emails. So TACO did decide to look
at that language again. We did make some minor
changes, and that will be coming back
to exec for approval. So at our December meeting,
those final modifications to the language should
be available as an annex prior to the December meeting,
so everyone can take a look. And then the other update
was just that we’re still moving forward on
our collaboration with the curriculum committee. Thank you, Ashley. Are there any
questions for Ashley? All right, with that
we will have our report from Roy Nutter, who is our
faculty representative to state government. Oh, good afternoon. Roy Nutter Statler
College and your ACF rep. There is an annex in
the agenda that you may have looked at that is
the current advisory council of faculty, the West
Virginia group of faculty, of faculty legislative
agenda, and I would move to approve the
other if I can do that. Sure. Are there any questions
or points of discussion for annex 4? Potomac State, are there
any questions or points of discussion? No, ma’am. And Tech. No questions. All those in favor of
approving annex 4, say aye. Potomac State. Potomac State two ayes. And Tech? WVU Tech has two ayes. All those opposed please say no. All right, the ayes have it,
and annex 4 is also approved. The only other thing, just
to keep you up to date, I usually give you an
idea of what’s going on, and the biggest thing being
discussed among faculty around the state is
still the budget, that it’s looking like
a cut from the state. So don’t be
surprised, but that’s where the buzz is at the moment. Thank you, Roy. Are there any questions or
points of discussion for Roy? All right, and then
last but not least, we have our board of governors
report from Stan [? Holman. ?] So we met this past
Thursday and Friday. I was on the road,
but calling in. Emily was there. We actually had a
lot of discussion about a lot of things in
addition to the tri board meeting that we– at least Emily participated in. So there’s a lot of talk
about finances and tuition, a lot of things like
that, but the two things that we did talk about in the
public part of the meeting was that we did receive a
financial statement and audit report from
CliftonLarsonAllen, which is– they audit and look at all the
financial transactions or most of them at the university,
and they actually gave a very complimentary
clear audit for us, which was as good as we could do. They actually had very
little, if anything, I don’t think to say
in a negative sense, so it was a very, very
positive report from them. So the financial folks
here, [INAUDIBLE] and her office
and others, really have something to be
proud of because they did a very good job. Then the other thing,
you’ve probably seen a lot of bricks
being moved downtown. Stansbury is no longer,
other than the foundations. So that’s been moving
forward very well, and the new Reynolds Hall
will be under way soon. And then Hodges Hall is
undergoing a complete basically gutting and refurbishing,
so that is also on schedule. So hopefully that will continue
to move forward at a good pace. That’s it. And if I can just
add one quick thing because I know some faculty
have been concerned about this. The last thing that needs
to be removed from Stansbury is the pedestrian
bridge, and that’s going to be removed
over Christmas break. There probably is going
to have to be like one day where a Beechurst is
shut down, but they’re hoping to get that
done within like literally just a few hours. But other than that, most of
the work other than actually removing that bridge, which
would take maybe two hours, is going to be done
at night and hopefully with the least amount of
disruption to traffic patterns. But they did say that there
probably would be some lane closures while they
were working on this, so beware if you’re going
to travel be Beechurst during that period of time. Over Christmas break. Yep. Thanks, Stan. Any questions for Stan? OK, before we start our working
group exercise with the library committee, I would
like to ask if there’s any new business at this time. OK, is there any new
business from Potomac State? No, ma’am. Tech? No new business. All right. I will ask Karen Diaz,
the dean of libraries, she’s going to go through
a brief PowerPoint presentation with
us and then we’re going to do some
work in our tables. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thank you so much for
having me this afternoon. I’m Karen Diaz. I’m dean of the libraries. And I’m really happy
to be here today to start a new
conversation that we would like to have with
you around the materials that we buy to support
your teaching and research. And I’m especially excited
to have this opportunity to do this as a
tabletop exercise, so I’m not just talking
at you, but we’re getting input from you as well. So what we want to talk
about in particular today is scholarly publishing and the
purchase of research materials. So most often– not
always, but most often– scholarly output is in the
form of journal articles, and journal subscriptions
are far and above the biggest thing we spend money
on in the libraries in terms of purchasing materials. In the last three
years, we’ve had to change our approach to
accessing these journals from a just-in-case model
to a just-in-time model, and this means that
we want to have what you need when you
need it, but it might not mean that the item is sitting
around and available to you just in case you need
it, but that we will get the item for you
when you need it, either through purchase
or interlibrary loan when you need it. To accomplish this
approach, we have needed to take a very
data driven approach. In the print world, we needed
to ask you what you were using. In the digital
environment, we actually have access to data that tells
us what people are using. We can see when someone
downloads items and how often from WVU. We can also generate
data on where our faculty publish,
where you’re cited, and how often you’re cited. So the kinds of conversations
we need to have with you now have changed. The reason that
we’ve had to make these changes and
the reason that we’ve had to turn to
data to help us is that, along with the
rest of the campus, we had to manage a series
of budget decreases from 2016 to 2018. In the course of
this, we unsubscribed to a number of journal
titles in order to meet these
budget constraints. And because some
of the publishers had moved to selling us
journals in large bundles, it meant that we had to
unbundle these big deals and subscribe to individual
titles under new conditions. So this is just a very brief
budget snapshot of the spending that we have done for
library materials. And in this chart, you
can see that in 2015, the first year on the chart,
we spent nearly $10 million on library materials. By 2018, our budget
for library materials had dipped to just
over $6 million. What doesn’t show on
this chart is the fact that the journals that we
buy inflate every single year at an average of 3% to 6%. So that means that without
buying anything new, our costs increase
every single year. So it’s easy to
see on this chart that we’re not on a trajectory
to hold on to what we have had. It’s important to note that
you can look at library budgets around the country
and their trajectory. Even if the dollar
amounts are different, the trajectory will
look similar to ours. By and large, library
materials budgets are flat at best and
shrinking at worst. So it’s incompatible with
the ongoing price increases that we’re seeing
from journal vendors. The conversation that
we’re having with you today is not unique to our campus. This conversation is happening
at campuses across the country and, in fact, across the
planet in one form or another. And if you’re an
academic librarian, you can’t go to a conference
or open the journal literature without reading information
about this problem. This is the big problem
of libraries these days. So what we want to
do today is to begin to change the type
of conversation that we have with you about
how we buy scholarly material. We see this as a beginning,
and we are not here today to set policy or make
minute decisions of action, but we want to begin to ask
for the type of feedback that’s most helpful for us in how
we make the decisions that we make. So this is kind of the
beginning of a conversation. I mentioned earlier that we need
to move beyond title by title conversations and talk about
some larger directions. So we hope that today
gives us enough information to know where to
continue our efforts and to know what further
conversations to have with you. So the big three
issues that we’re going to be focusing
on today are going to be in
tabletop exercises, and we’re hoping to
get input from you. Each table will
only do one topic. So you’re not going to have
anybody be handling all three of these, but I
wanted to give you an overview of the three
big topics that will be managed across the room today. So topic one relates to
how we work with the data that we have for making
purchasing decisions. We have data such as
usage, cost per use, WVU citations, requests
from faculty for purchases, and more. We’ve tried to narrow
down all the data points that we can work with
to about 12 or 13 criteria that should guide our
purchasing decisions, and what we would
like for you to do is to help us rank those
in order of importance. What are the most
important things for us to be paying
attention to? The next topic might
seem unrelated, but it’s actually very
relevant to this overall issue, and it has to do with
the promotion and tenure requirements in
your field and how, where, and how often
you publish is affected by [INAUDIBLE] requirements. The reasons that publishers tell
us that the rates for journals continue to inflate is
because of the amount of scholarship being published. So growth of
scholarship is great, but we also wonder what
kind of flexibility you have in terms of
where you publish, and how flexible your field
is in terms of publishing in open access venues. And these sorts of
things can actually have a very direct
impact on our budgets and how we’re
spending our money. And then finally,
the third topic relates to how we negotiate
contracts with publishers and what will there
is on our campus to try to bring pressure
to publishers to change their pricing structures
towards open access models. There’s general
international concern that the current
economic structure of scholarly publishing
is unsustainable and needs to change, and some change
is already happening. But where do we need to be
in terms of putting pressure on this change? Historically, our
negotiations have focused on getting the
best financial deal, but increasingly, we
need to be thinking about a number of
other issues, including creating an economic structure
that’s sustainable for us all to continue our work. So I’m about to turn you over
to your table top exercises, but please remember these
activities are giving us preliminary information. We’re not gathering
definitive answers. We’re not making policy
based on what happens in this conversation today. This is kind of just to get
us a starting point for moving forward with your input. So while you work, we’re asking
you to try and reach consensus on the activities. That is going to
be what generates the conversation
is if you’re all trying to get on the same page. However, if you don’t get
on the same page, that’s OK. And what we would
like to know is that you couldn’t and maybe
what the sticking points around that were, because all of that’s
going to be information that’s going to be helpful for us. So I’m going to ask each
table to identify a recorder. We really want as much captured
from your conversations as possible. You have on your table a
folder that has instructions, and I think we’re
going to be passing out large sheets of
paper for the tables for recording the
conversations on, and so we want you to
be working on that. So identify a recorder. Get your big piece of
paper that’s coming. And then we have a whole slew
of folks from the libraries, as well as from the senate
library committee, here today to float to help
if you have questions, if there’s anything in the
instructions that are not clear. Or if even the nature of
the topic that we’ve raised is not clear, and you like a
little bit more information on it, we’d be happy
to provide that input. And so we will ask you to work
for about 20 to 30 minutes and then check back in with you. So thank you. [INAUDIBLE] Yeah. And Potomac State and Tech,
I believe the instructions were emailed to you by Emily. And so if you want to each
just take one of those topics and just work on one
topic of your choosing, that would be great. And then– And I just emailed them today. OK. OK, she just emailed
him today so you should have those in your email. Emily? Keyser, we’re going to
take a little bit of time to talk with a couple
other people on campus and then send you our
results if that’s all right. That would be wonderful. And Tech, you can
do the same as well, and then if you just
want to email them to me, I can forward them
on to Dean Diaz. OK. OK. Thank you. And like I said,
if you would prefer to just take one of the
topics and work with that, that’s fine. However you’d like to
approach it is fine. West Virginia Tech? The only thing
left on the agenda after our roundtables
is going to be voting on honorary
degrees, which we have to be in person to do that. So if we want to go ahead
and just sign off for today, we can go ahead and
do that, and you can send me your
results by email for the library discussions. OK. We’re going to go ahead and log
you off if that’s all right. Yes, that’s fine. All right, have a
great afternoon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *