University Libraries > Libraries & Departments > Systems > Chinook Corner > ERM Task Force Minutes

ERM Minutes

7-10-2007

Present: Callahan, Culshaw, Gobrecht, Graber, Holladay, Jobe, Kellsey, Moeller, Wakimoto, Wicht

• Find Articles and More—the subject group (Callahan, Graber, Jobe, Knievel, and Wicht) presented their proposal. Key points:
• Top level page would be arranged in a two or three column format ala University of Washington Library. This will enable the Libraries to keep the top level page fairly small.
• The ERM Committee is responsible for the list of subjects on the top level pages. Proposals for additions should be submitted to the committee with justifications for inclusion.
• Bibliographers, at their discretion, may opt for one of two possible approaches at their discretion:
• Discipline—Most Useful; Discipline—Also Useful; link to subject guide. The original proposal from the subject group used Discipline—Best Bets and Discipline—More. When this terminology was previewed to selected individuals, they expressed concern about whether international students would “get” this American slang. After discussion the group settled on the approach described at the start of this bullet.
• A more granular approach to the discipline. Top level=Discipline, lower level discipline broken down into smaller areas.
• Bibliographers may choose one or the other or neither. In the latter case the discipline listed on the Find Articles and More pages provides the only point of subject access to the field.
• Bibliographers may include one link for subject guides, either to a specific guide or to an umbrella page for a collection of guides.
• After the group endorsed the concept, there was some discussion of workflow issues. Knieval’s draft proposal for web-based forms will be implemented as soon as possible. Three liaisons (Graber—Social Sciences, Jobe—Sciences, and Knievel—Humanities) will work with disciplines in these domains to make changes to the general subject fields after bibliographers select the appropriate approach and terms. Bringing this up by mid August will require close coordination between Wicht (new subjects in ERM), Callahan (modifications to Find Articles and More page) and liaisons (changes to resource records) and the individual bibliographers.
• After initial deployment, Wicht’s New and Trial Databases e-mail will include a link to the web-based forms. Bibliographers will be asked to monitor the e-mails for potential additions to the subjects for which they are responsible and to request additions via the online forms.
• The group also discussed strategies for presenting this information to the bibliographer’s meeting. Knievel will take the lead on this.

• Codes for ARL statistical reporting purposes—After a brief discussion Wicht, Wakimoto and Kellsey were given the go ahead to use a one of the unused fixed fields in resource records to indicate status (paid, free, etc.) for ARL reporting purposes. After assessing their needs the subgroup will inform the group about the values they have selected for the fixed fields.

• New and trail databases—After a brief discussion the group agreed to terminate the manually-maintained new and trial databases in favor of ERM-generated pages. Holladay agreed to add the general subject New Databases with a tickler reminder to remove the heading after 6 months for all new databases added to the manual page within the last 6 months. Holladay, Wicht, and Wakimoto will discuss this issue with the WebPac Pro group.

• MARC Records—Wakimoto expressed frustration with current uncoordinated process for assessing/obtaining MARC records. She would like a field designated to document the process in resource records. In a follow up e-mail, it was agreed to use W for MARC records. Culshaw will follow up with III.

Next meeting: Wednesday, July 25^th, 1:00-2:30 pm, N410