1.  PSEC’s request for feedback on our committee’s structure/charge

2.  Drafting the committee’s proposal to PSEC on its future usability efforts and needed support

Attendance – Adam Chandler, Kathy Chiang, Nan Hyland, Melissa Kuo, Linda Miller, Maureen Morris, Deb Schmidle

1.  PSEC’s request for feedback on our committee’s structure/charge:

As our liaison to PSEC, Kathy requested feedback.  The group feels the committee is working well – that, at least for the time being, the charge is sound, and the departmental representation is good (should continue to have representation from LTS, IRIS RAS, and staff central to Web design efforts).   It was suggested that minutes should be distributed to CU-LIB in the future.

Action items:

• Kathy will write up a summary of the discussion of PSEC’s request by early June for the committee’s review.
• The committee will take minutes each meeting, and post them at their site and on CU-LIB.  The job of minute taking will rotate between committee members alphabetically.

2.  Drafting the committee’s proposal to PSEC on its future usability efforts and needed support

The committee continued drafting its proposal, which is being built at the Confluence site.

Sections 1 and 2 - Core values and Benefits (KC):

• It was noted that the section on core values should indicate why usability is of particular relevance now.
• Kathy will continue to look for quotes from the general and CUL literature about the benefits of usability studies.

Section 2.2 – Stakeholders:

• The committee agreed it would be a good idea to work with the WebFeat group this Fall, and added it to its list of stakeholders.  Three members of this committee are working on that project.  The committee feels this Library-wide project would be a good test case.

Section 3A – Requesting -- Financial and administrative support (NH):

• Added a note that the committee might be able to recruit test subjects using non-monetary incentives such as class credit or using library student staff.

Section 3D – Requesting -- Equipment (MK):

• It was noted the Morae software and equipment is a priority for next year if not this year.  Melissa will get the estimates for the equipment costs.

Section 3E – Requesting – Statement of support from LMT (KC):

• For the June 14^th meeting with PSEC, we should have a list of what issues we would like to see in the statement of support, but Kathy will request that PSEC draft the statement.  Kathy will take the lead on this issue.

General:

• Deb agreed to be the master editor – to create a prose version of this proposal by June 7^th.
• Section assignees agreed to complete their work by the first of June so that Deb would have time to edit the document.
• The committee will review Deb’s draft at its June 8^th meeting.
• The committee will complete the draft by June 9^th, or June 12^th at the very latest, to be sent to PSEC members on June 12^th.
• Kathy and Maureen will attend the June 14^th PSEC meeting to present the proposal.
• Kathy will contact Anne Kenney about getting on the agenda.

Action items:

• Section assignees will complete their work by June 1^st.
• Kathy will continue to search for quotes from the literature about the benefits of usability studies  (user productivity/loyalty, money saved by making needed changes earlier in the design process, etc.)

• Deb will create a prose version of the proposal by June 7^th.
• • The committee agreed to supply milk chocolate as needed.
• The final draft of the proposal will be completed by June 12^th at the latest.  We will aim to have it ready by June 9^th to give PSEC members more time to review it.

• Kathy will ask Anne Kenney if she and Maureen could present the proposal to PSEC at their June 14^th  meeting.  [Done - on the agenda for 10 minutes.]

3.  Other business

Adam reminded the committee that David Banush (selector for bibliography and information and library science) welcomes suggestions for titles for review for purchase, and that the committee should make some recommendations in the areas of assessment and usability.

Adam asked if anyone is using the blog the committee started and whether we should continue to maintain it.  It was noted that it cannot be used for the ongoing census of assessment and usability projects.  The committee decided to maintain it for another year to see what use it receives.  

Action items:

• Adam will forward David the list of resources Brenda Reeb and David Lindahl created for their workshops.  Melissa will send David some titles on Web accessibility.  Other members will forward titles for David’s consideration as they run across them.  The titles will be cataloged for the regular stacks.