1. Michael Engle of the Database Review Committee (DRC) and the committee’s work on Find it – Databases.
2. Q&A with University of Chicago on their Class Librarian Program

1. Jim Morris-Knower opened the Forum, and introduced the Forum agenda:
1. Michael Engle of the Database Review Committee (DRC) and the committee’s work on Find it – Databases.
2. Q&A with University of Chicago on their Class Librarian Program

2. Announcements:
1. It was announced that the Forum time, going forward, is 10:30 – Noon.
2. The topic of the November Forum was announced: WebVision Team and LibGuides.
3. Don Schnedeker introduced the two Cornell Library Fellows: Somaly Kim and Kavitha Reddy.

3. Michael Engle discussed the DRC and the Find it Databases project.
1. A proposal was made that the DRC take over the Find it Databases component of the Gateway—the DRC sought to take on curatorial responsibility for it.
2. Michael provided a handout that detailed the priorities of the project, and noted conflicting priorities, including A-Z versus Subject listings.
3. Currently, 471 databases, not all in subject categories.  Michael explained that all databases in Voyager are the main set, the 471 databases in the A-Z list is a subset of the main set, and the subject groups are subset of the subset.
4. DRC is working to identify the appropriate size for each set level—what’s in and what’s out?
5. There is a wiki at which librarians can provide feedback: http://wiki.library.cornell.edu/wiki/display/DRC/Webfeat+Review+Fall+2007

4. Questions for Michael.
1. How will the A-Z listing change?  DRC is considering between 400 – 500.  (We buy 500 federateable links from WebFeat).
2. Does WebFeat allow customizeable categories?  WebFeat sets categories, although Suzanne Cohen did speak to her experience setting up a customized database search.
3. Other items the DRC is considering: How e-books fit in; how would area studies be set up.  As well, the DRC will look at use statistics as a factor in decision-making.  

5. The Forum then turned to the University of Chicago Class Librarian Program.  A conference call was put through to UC.

6. The participating librarians at UC introduced themselves.
1. Rebecca Starkey, Reference and Instruction, Class of 2008.
2. Paul Belloni, Business Reference Librarian, Class of 2009.
3. David Pavelich, Reference and Instruction, Class of 2010.
4. Deb Werner, Science Reference Librarian, Class of 2011.

7. Program Background.
1. Idea originated in 2002 as a web portal system intended to provide customized information for classes at particular times.
2. Library sought way to connect to undergrads; already active subject specialists targeted to grad students and faculty.
3. Personal contact was considered key.
4. Program is introduced to students in their summer orientation packets.
5. Approximately 1200 students per class; 6 libraries on campus.

8. Questions posed to the Chicago librarians.
1. How many individual contacts are made with a given class? 

                                                               i.      David (2010):  First two years of a class are slow because students are focused on core curriculum, not research.

                                                             ii.      Rebecca (2008):  She experiences more of a steady stream.  1-2 questions per week.  Big boost in questions during senior year.

                                                            iii.      Deb (2011):  Experienced just a handful of questions, typically in response to a mass e-mail to the class.

                                                           iv.      Paul (2009):  Twenty-something questions per year.  Paul sees himself as a “concierge.”  He puts students in touch with resources.

                                                             v.      All of the librarians said that they will refer questions to other reference staff depending upon nature of question and librarian expertise.

2. Which channels do students use to communicate?

                                                               i.      Primarily e-mail, often via web form.

                                                             ii.      In person.

                                                            iii.      Very little by phone.

                                                           iv.      Not much via IM.

                                                             v.      Not using text messages, yet…

3. What about bulk e-mails?

                                                               i.      Sometimes students reply to bulk e-mails.

                                                             ii.      Librarians try not to “spam” students; so, bulk e-mails sent once a quarter, and sent as invitations to event—coffees, study breaks, special collection showings.

4. How does the program impact librarian workload?

                                                               i.      David (2010) experienced a 20% increase.  Workload changes because class questions become priority.

                                                             ii.      Event planning seems to be more time consuming than the reference flow, although consultations can be time intensive.

                                                            iii.      Class librarians also do web page updates.

                                                           iv.      Librarians do experience an increase in awareness of resources and student needs, as well as gain knowledge outside of subject specialty, all of which have a long-term positive impact on workload.

5. What impact has the program had on reference statistics?

                                                               i.      Numbers are up, but not tremendously.

                                                             ii.      Data is developing—now formally tracking program statistics, including website hits.  Peaks occur in sync with events and in response to bulk e-mails.

                                                            iii.      Program has developed good name recognition, which was quantified via an exit survey.  Also, the Class Librarian Program seems to have impacted undergraduate perceptions based upon recent LibQual results.

6. How is a Class Librarian chosen?

                                                               i.      Informal process.

                                                             ii.      Draw from interested individuals whom are often on the Reference and Instruction Committee.

                                                            iii.      The obligation fits better into a public services librarian’s workflow.  Requires a 4 year commitment, and an effort is made to balance involvement of libraries and departments.

7. How is the program promoted?

                                                               i.      Direct marketing with bulk e-mails and material included in the orientation package sent in the summer.

                                                             ii.      Bookmarks

                                                            iii.      Facebook

                                                           iv.      Student newspaper

                                                             v.      Posters, e-mails, and web links for events.

                                                           vi.      Table at student club fair in the Fall.

                                                          vii.      Work with college advisors.

                                                        viii.      Maintain a relationship with the Programming Office.

                                                           ix.      Provide a research guide that includes photos.

                                                             x.      Considering working with faculty, too.

9. Thanks were given to the University of Chicago librarians as the call was ended.  After the call, some Forum attendees wondered what kind of budget was available for the Class Librarian Program.

10. The Forum came to a close as Jim Morris-Knower thanked the attendees.