Minutes 2/18/20
Network e-resources meeting Feb. 18, 10a.m.
Present: Susan, Michelle, Noah, Liz, Jennifer
Liz volunteered to take minutes.
Michelle suggested that we review the working documents in Basecamp, to which some of us have added notes and questions.
First we reviewed the various e-resources listed for discussion, which are shared across the consortia:
- EBSCO - Because OLIS manages the joint subscription it seems like a natural candidate. Except that there are some campuses that do not want all of the EBSCO packages active. Michelle isn’t sure that they can be deactivated easily [for those campuses] once they’re activated in NZ. Should we explore surveying and having separate inventory groups? Technically, Michelle confirmed that we can have as many inventory groups as you want, but need to consider what the SLSS person is able to keep track of.
- NEJM - Might be good candidate, single activation, need to explore tracking of billing/acquisition may pose a challenge.
- ScienceDirect – Michelle thinks that we should hold off talking about this one due to ongoing negotiations. We believe that there’s a general SUNY number, which may help set up auto-holdings.
- JSTOR archival content – Trying to get SYS admin set up for them. Institutional negotiations occur for packages within JSTOR, so does it make more sense to instead focus on vendors where OLIS is aware of all changes, etc.?
- Chronicle of Higher ed site license- this one is unique and I’m not sure that many of us have it activated in Alma/Primo. Explore the linking, it's journal level linking, not article according to Jennifer.
- HeinOnline - Gun regulation is now in the CZ, which could potentially make these a candidate for central management. These are free and worth looking at, but not high on my priority list, says Michelle.
- SUNY Press 2003-2006 eBook Package – These live in dSpace, working on getting set up in CZ as custom package. Collection is possibly outdated, said a couple of task force members.
- STAT!ref - Relatively easy to centrally manage because we receive title changes at SUNY level. Michelle asked if we can think of a reason anyone might NOT want this collection centrally managed… No, everyone agreed. Michelle noted that this was tested with a pilot with a few institutions and would be her recommendation as a good place to start as a proof of concept.
- Annual Reviews – consortial agreement, has been part of recharge. Susan sent follow-up info: "I guess I thought more SUNYs participated in the consortial offering, so maybe it does not rise to the level for central management."
- NOVEL – This could be handy because re-activation list comes out once a year. But Gale databases are challenging for central management, each campus has own LOC id. Plus varied levels of activation – not everyone wants everything, especially secondary school content.
- OA Content – Until the linking and searching comes together, not sure if this is something we want to do. This may be something to revisit at a later time. Another challenge is new content added regularly.
Moved on to look at Questions for other Consortia document
After a brief review of the following questions, Michelle said she will send to Shannon today and see if he can forward it for us:
- Are you managing e-resources centrally? Why or why not?
- Has this affected campus ability to gather usage statistics for e-resources?
- Have there been any problems with central management?
- Have campuses been able to choose to hide centrally managed packages?
- If you only manage some packages centrally, how did you decide what to manage?
- If you manage centrally, what impact has that had on local acquisitions if campuses want to track their e-resource budgets?
Policy considerations:
Deciding the criteria to make choices about what to centrally manage is the most important charge of this committee. While Michelle can provide significant input as the lead SLSS staff in managing e-resources, showing a thorough consideration of criteria and input is preferred.
We looked over the following notes/questions for criteria together:
- Contract managed by OLIS/SLSS - stable contracts, easy to stay on top of because renewals/changes come to OLIS
- Percentage of SUNY campuses who participate - high percentage makes sense to make sure it's helping as many campuses as possible but start with smaller percentage for proof of concept
- How hard is content to manage? Should content that's harder to manage, like STAT!Ref (changes yearly) be managed centrally because it's such a pain for participating campuses to manage?
- Determine threshold for amount of centrally managed collections (or hours/week available for project) that’s feasible to start off? Start small and be willing to ramp up.
Michelle likes the idea of helping with collections that are more challenging to maintain, such as STAT!Ref, streaming media like Films on Demand are another example.
Jennifer asked: Is there typical troubleshooting that you are doing at SLSS that central management would help resolve? For example, fixing the same link resolver for many campuses, as opposed to just having to set it up centrally, once.
Should central management also involve staying on top of CZ additions and recommending central activation?
Focus on these two sections next meeting: How to generate campus buy-in/participation, and How will this work with Acquisitions?
Next meeting: Feb 25 @ 10a.m.