- Conference Theme
- Hotel & Local Info
- Reports | Minutes | Presentations
- Past Conferences
Currently viewing the tag: "SALALM56"
Executive Board Meeting II, July 27, 2010
Minutes as corrected.
Present, Executive Board: Fernando Acosta-Rodríguez, Adán Benavides, David Block, Hortensia Calvo, Jane Garner, Darlene Hull, Sean Knowlton, Nerea Llamas, Martha E. Mantilla, Lynn Shirey, Roberto C. Delgadillo (Rapporteur). Also present: S. Lief Adleson, Anne C. Barnhart, Paloma Celis Carbajal Patricia Figueroa, Melissa Gasparotto, Pamela M. Graham, Nashieli Marcano, Richard Phillips, Cecilia Sercán, Rafael Tarragó, Gayle Williams
I. The meeting was called to order at 3:45 p.m. with Llamas presiding.
II. Conference Reports
1. President (Llamas). Llamas began her report by opting to not repeat the previously announced committee chair assignments. She nicely acknowledged Pamela Graham’s leadership of the e-SALALM Committee. Llamas noted her intention of continuing the work of the e-SALALM Committee with the creation of a small group, led by Alison Hicks, tasked with looking into the committee’s charge and issues stemming from committee-related proposals. This group will work closely with the Membership Committee and enlist other members as it sees fit. Llamas announced her intention of including a program panel celebrating the Enlace Committee’s 25th anniversary. She finished her report by noting the creation of another small group charged with the planning and execution of a libreros pre-conference. This group will be comprised of Linda Russo, Carlos Retta and John Wright.
2. Vice-President/President-Elect (Shirey). No report.
3. Past-President (Acosta-Rodríguez). No report.
4. Executive Secretary (Calvo). No report.
5. Treasurer (Garner). No report. No report.
6. Rapporteur General (Delgadillo). No report.
1. Mantilla (2008-2011). Mantilla conveyed positive feedback from several international participants that felt very welcomed by the SALALM membership. She relayed a member’s request that the Executive Board critically revisit the organization’s mission statement in light of future technological and economic trends.
2. Delgadillo (2008-2011). No report.
3. Benavides (2009-2012). Benavides noted the imposed and increased time and energy constraints faced by members and committees as a result of having three scheduled receptions in a row. He observed that next year’s conference should not feel compelled to have three receptions.
4. Knowlton (2009-2012). Knowlton briefly echoed Mantilla’s report regarding the need to review SALALM’s mission statement and possible subsequent strategic plan to cope with the aforementioned future technological and economic trends.
5. Block (2010-2013). Block noted several members’ concerns regarding changes to the written criteria for the José Toribio Medina Award. He noted that these members felt the present award criteria favored the monograph over the journal article. Block finished his report by conveying that the present criteria did not adequately allow for the inclusion of electronic formats.
6. Hull (2010-2013). Hull conveyed the same members’ concerns that Block reported. Brief discussion ensued with Garner and Williams reviewing the history and evolution of the present Medina Award criteria. Llamas deferred additional discussion until New Business, after which Williams noted two proposals that Orchid Mazurkiewicz would have presented, directly addressing the concerns noted by Block and Hull. At this point, lengthy discussion ensued with Garner, Calvo, Block, Benavides, and Llamas regarding:
What would and or should constitute SALALM’s mission statement;
The legal and tax implications of rewriting language that appears to serve as the organization’s mission statement and its non-profit status;
The possible steps and associated membership notifications that would need to be taken for these changes to occur;
The role and on-going revisions by the Constitution and Bylaws Committee that would address the concerns raised by discussions about SALALM’s mission statement and need for a strategic plan.
At this point, Llamas paused the meeting and, after consultation with the Executive Board, requested that Tarragó present his committee report and that discussion of a strategic plan be deferred until New Business.
Access and Bibliography (Tarragó). Tarragó began his report by announcing Luis Alberto Retta as the new Chair of the Cuban Bibliography Subcommittee. He noted the Subcommittee’s work toward the creation of a digital bibliography of Cuban-born authors publishing outside of Cuba. Tarragó continued by conveying several Subcommittee members’ desire to explore the possibility of turning the bibliography into an on-going open access project accessible from the new SALALM webpage. Tarragó next summarized the principal discussion of the Official Publications Subcommittee. He reported that those present discussed the fact that some government agencies in Latin American countries do not publish the same information in their web pages that they publish in the final print editions of their official documents. Tarragó expressed concern that the digital version of a Latin American government report may not include addenda or supporting statistics and graphs that appear in its printed version. Tarragó concluded his report by briefly conveying two items of discussion from the Electronic Resources Subcommittee. The first of these originated from Ruby Gutiérrez, of HAPI, when she announced that from this year on, HAPI will be published online only. The second came from Tracy North, of The Handbook of Latin American Studies, who discussed the continuation and improvement of this digital bibliography. She showed how the new interface facilitates finding introductory analysis to its disciplinary sections. Unfortunately, this long standing bibliography of the literature in the arts, humanities and social sciences will cease covering economics in future volumes.
C. Executive Board Committees
1. Local Arrangements (Figueroa). Figueroa announced conference profits of approximately $12,000.00.
2. Constitution and Bylaws (Garner). No report.
3. Policy, Research and Investigation (Williams). Non report.
4. Membership (Marcano). Marcano reported the committee as having undertaken a lengthy discussion on the subject of honorary membership and possible ways of recognizing deceased members. Additional discussion focused on how to make the current web page more dynamic by including member profiles and how to make better use of technology, such as the Newsletter, other publications and webinars.
5. Editorial Board (Mazurkiewicz; not present). Williams, speaking on behalf of Mazurkiewicz, announced that Molly Molloy’s papers from the 2007 meeting will be published by October 2010. John Wright’s papers from the 2008 meeting will be published by February 2011. Pamela M. Graham has not yet submitted the papers from the 2009 meeting. Williams also noted that her Bibliography of Latin American and Caribbean Bibliographies, 1990-1999 will be completed by the end of the year. She finished her report by conveying that possible future publications include Beverly Karno’s Frieda Kahlo Bibliography and Peter Stern’s Bibliography of the Mexican Muralists’ Movement.
6. Finance (Phillips). Phillips reported the Committee as having had a lengthy meeting that focused on the Secretariat’s budget and discussed:
the advantages of moving to electronic publishing of the Newsletter;
and the savings gained from last year’s utilization of e-ballots for the SALALM elections.
The Committee endorsed the Secretariat’s proposed budget, the e-newsletter proposal and other e-concepts. Barnhart was welcomed as incoming Treasurer. The committee brought up the need to add Barnhart’s name as new Treasurer to all SALALM business, tax, banking, investment and other such documents by September 1, 2010. The committee also discussed:
SALALM’s move to an e-newsletter and its significance on SALALM finances,
the possible impact on ad revenues;
the legal implications over ethics in advertising;
visibility of sponsoring institutions,
and ad space for the libreros.
Phillips then briefly explained the purpose of the committee’s Investments Working Group (IWG). He noted its decision to give SALALM’s holdings a cautious posture that would still generate income via dividends and capital gains, with less emphasis on growth strategies. Phillips concluded his report by announcing Laura D. Shedenhelm as the new Chair of the IWG.
7. Nominating (McCann; not present). No report.
8. Web Page (Gasparotto). Gasparotto briefly noted a fifteen percent increase in web page views with the majority of visitors coming from Spain.
9. Enlace/Outreach (Celis Carbajal). Celis Carbajal began her report by detailing the Committee’s creation of a poster and accompanying tri-folds with information about Enlace. These materials, she explained, were created to promote among the conference attendees Enlace’s objective, this year’s award winners, and also to encourage attendees to support the committee by purchasing raffle tickets. Celis Carbajal continued by noting the Committee’s decision to upload the aforementioned poster and tri-folds on to Enlace’s Web Page. She then happily announced this year’s Enlace raffle garnered approximately $1,800.00. Celis Carbajal then mentioned the committee’s efforts on organizing a commemorative activity and gathering materials to celebrate Enlace’s 25th anniversary during next year’s meeting in Philadelphia. She finished her report by citing professional and time constraints for her decision to step down as chair of the Committee.
III. Old Business
A. Revised Proposal to Form the SALALM Communications Committee (Graham). Graham requested an Executive Board vote of the revised proposal after the first version had been discussed during the first meeting of the Executive Board. Lengthy discussion during that meeting led to a request that Graham revise the proposal to include language ensuring the inclusion of a non-appointed committee member. Acosta-Rodríguez made a motion to accept Graham’s revised proposal. Benavides seconded the motion. Llamas called for a discussion of the motion. No discussion occurred. Llamas called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Proposal for Web-Based Version of SALALM Newsletter (Mazurkiewicz; not present). Knowlton presented Mazurkiewicz’s proposal after consultation with the Executive Board. The proposal calls for the cessation of the printed SALALM Newsletter and the integration of its unique content into the SALALM Web Page. Additional comments by Llamas, Calvo, and Garner led Knowlton to modify Mazurkiewicz’s proposal to include that SALALM will cease printing its Newsletter effective October 2010, at which time SALALM will link to an online PDF version of the Newsletter accessible via the organization’s web page. Knowlton made a motion to accept the revised proposal. Benavides seconded the motion. Llamas called for a discussion of the motion. Lengthy discussion ensued by Block, Calvo, Acosta-Rodríguez, Knowlton, Shirey, Adleson, Barnhart, and Gasparotto expressing support and concerns ranging from:
the need for gradual and timely notification of long-time Newsletter advertisers and general membership;
privacy concerns stemming from online publication of member photographs;
to the compilation of web page statistics to assure advertisers that their target audiences are being reached.
Llamas called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously.
IV. New Business
A. President’s Timeline/Checklist (Hull). Hull announced that the checklist would be included in the Policy, Research and Investigation Committee’s review of the Operations Handbook.
B. Initiation of SALALM Strategic Plan Discussions (Llamas). Llamas asked Garner which existing SALALM entity should be tasked with initiating discussions of a strategic plan. Garner recommended that Llamas create an Ad Hoc committee comprised of Members-at-Large charged with this assignment.
C. Editorial Board Proposals (Williams). Williams succinctly summarized two proposals stemming from lengthy Editorial Board discussions. The first proposal seeks the following changes to the “José Toribio Medina Award Criteria for Nomination” posted on the SALALM website at <http://salalm.org/honors/criteria.html> (formulated, January 1988 and updated, October 1994):
Change the sentence “One prize may be offered each year for a book-length publication.” to “One prize may be offered each year for a noteworthy publication.”
Change the sentence “Format is not a criterion: online databases, electronically published works, films, microforms, and other non-print materials will be considered as well as published books.” to “Format is not a criterion: online databases, electronically published works, films, and other non-print materials will be considered as well as published books and journal articles.”
Hull made a motion to accept the proposal. Acosta-Rodríguez seconded the motion. Llamas called for a discussion of the motion. Brief discussion ensued by Benavides, Adleson, Knowlton, Calvo, Williams, and Hull expressing concerns ranging from:
the paucity of electronic-born submissions;
the need to increase award publicity;
to the lack of non-print submissions.
Llamas called for a vote on the motion. It passed unanimously.
The second proposal requests that SALALM members be permitted to repost papers originally published in SALALM conference proceedings three years after they have been published by the organization. Thus, individuals who wish to do so will be able, with permission from the SALALM Secretariat, to regain copyright ownership of their scholarship. It is understood that such re-acquisition of copyright will be granted solely for non-profit, open-access purposes. Knowlton made a motion to accept the proposal. Hull seconded the motion. Llamas called for a discussion of the motion. No discussion occurred. Llamas called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously.
D. SALALM Archives (Llamas). Llamas initiated open discussion regarding the role and succession planning for SALALM Parliamentarian and Archivist. Garner, who currently holds those positions, indicated that they are unofficial and as such no action is needed to appoint successors. Brief discussion by Calvo, Benavides, Garner and Acosta-Rodríguez underscored the need for established archival guidelines and a timeframe for transferring materials from the Secretariat in New Orleans to its archive in Texas.
Llamas moved the meeting be adjourned.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:14 p.m.
Roberto C. Delgadillo
University of California, Davis
Sunday May 29, 9:00 – 10:00 AM.
Attending: Joseph Holub (Chair), Peter Altekrueger, Kent Norsworthy, Peter Stern
IAI’s Web harvesting: The IAI conducts periodic targeted Web
harvesting of documents, mostly PDF files, from Latin America. Peter
estimates that they acquire between 2,000-3,000 documents
per year, as many as one third of which may be official
publications. Due to copyright and intellectual property issues, a
two-tiered access system is used for these documents. The downloaded
document is cataloged and stored locally on IAI systems, where it is
subject to their preservation process. Local users who get access to one of these documents as part of their search results receive a link to the IAI locally stored version of the document. External or public users who find one of these documents in their search results get a link to the original document at the URL where it resided at the time it was downloaded by the IAI. Over time, when these links go bad; they are deleted from the IAI record.
The University of Texas, Austin, has run a Web archiving program to
capture the contents of Latin American government websites since 2005.
Approximately 275 sites from 17 Latin American and Caribbean countries
are crawled four times per year using the Internet Archive’s
Archive-It service. The resulting Latin American Government Documents
Archive (LAGDA) collection contains thousands of born digital official
reports from government ministries in the region, as well as the
website context in which the reports were published. The collection
can be browsed by country and ministry, then by date of the archived
website copy, or full-text searched. While this broad-based approach
succeeds in harvesting a large volume of government documents, it is
sometimes difficult for users to locate the material as they have to
browse the archive collection as if they were browsing the actual live
The United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) announced via a written report submitted to the meeting that it expects to complete digitization of its historic archive of
publications covering the period since its founding in 1948 through
1986 by December 2011. Links to the digitized full text versions of
these documents will be availible to the public through ECLAC’s online
The IAI and the Benson Latin American Collection have a long-standing
exchange agreement under which once per year Peter Altekruger travels
to Austin, and Adan Benavides to Berlin, to examine duplicate items in
each library. Several thousand (over 40,000 to date) items are acquired per year through this mechanism for the cost of shipping plus travel.
Submitted by Joseph Holub, Peter Altekrueger, and Kent Norsworthy
Meeting, May 28, 2011 4:00 – 5:00pm
In Attendance: Fernando Acosta Rodríguez (Princeton), Adán Benavides (UT Austin), Sarah Buck Kachaluba (FSU), Hortensia Calvo (Tulane U), Donna Canevari de Paredes (U Saskatchewan), Teresa Chapa (UNC-Chapel Hill), Paula Covington (Vanderbilt U), Melissa Guy (Arizona State U), Gerarda Holder (NALIS), Peter Johnson (Emeritus, Princeton U), Jana Krentz (U Kansas), Eudorah Loh (UCLA), Mei Mendez (U Miami), Ricarda Musser (Ibero-American Institute, Berlin), Eudoxio Paredes-Ruiz (U Saskatchewan), Laura Shedenhelm (U Georgia), James Simon (CRL) Rafael Tarragó (U Minnesota), Gayle Williams (FIU), John Wright (BYU).
Sarah Buck Kachaluba opened the meeting with a summary of what she hoped to accomplish. She explained that as a relatively new SALALMista and member of the Committee, she thought it would be useful to have a panel and discussion exploring the collection survey process that this committee coordinates. This would be aimed at relatively new professionals (sort of a how-to) but could also engender a discussion about broader theoretical and methodological issues. She asked two more seasoned Latin Americanist librarians (Laura Shedenhelm and Teresa Chapa) who have extensive experience doing the assessment/survey as well as really interesting feedback about this process to talk about their:
- collection assessment methodology (how they’ve done it, problems they’ve run into, how it’s changed with the conversion from the card catalog to the OPAC/ILS)
- what the uses of such assessment statistics/data are (for Title VI applications, for example)
- how the utility of such data is changing with the rise of digital technologies and new formats of materials
Sarah reviewed the different categories of the survey and summarized her own attempt to do a comprehensive survey during Fiscal Year 2008.
She explained that she views the “collection survey” as two projects:
1. calculating the total amount of new acquisitions for Latin America over the previous fiscal year (how much has been purchased – both monetarily and in terms of volumes/information units)
2. estimating the institution’s total Latin American Collection size.
The first project is not significantly difficult as she is the Latin American Studies bibliographer and can add up her allocations and/or firm orders to determine how much has been purchased.
The second project is much harder for her. When she attempted a collection assessment during Fiscal Year 2008, she ran title counts for different call number ranges for Florida State, University of Florida, and Florida International (for example F 1201-3799 – Latin America/Spanish America and PQ 7081-8560 – Spanish Literature in Spanish America – Books). She then compared FSU’s numbers in each range with those of FIU and UF and determined what percentage of FIU and UF’s numbers FSU held. She averaged these percentages and then took that percentage of FIU and UF’s entire collection (since estimates for FIU and UF’s entire collection exist).
Some of the limitations of this methodology are:
- The fact that a title count does not equal a volume count
- The fact that there are many different classification/call number systems: LC, Dewey, and government document, plus separate collections that may not be included in a general library search.
- The fact that call number ranges reflect classification systems which are more comprehensive for certain areas than others
- The fact that FIU’s total estimate seems a bit low, considering that FIU reports that their LA collection is 67,000, yet their specific call number runs average 41% of UF’s (450,000), which would be 184,500.
This count was supplemented by additional shelf reading and catalog searching by subject to capture statistics for film/media, maps, and microform and by assistance from the Serials Acquisitions librarian to count Latin American subscriptions.
Sarah also laid out the different formats indicated by the survey and suggested that these might be updated at some point. These include:
- Print serial and monograph volumes
- Computer tapes/diskettes
- CD Roms
- Electronic news sources
- Manuscripts and archives (measured in linear feet)
- Cartographic materials
- Graphic materials
- Audio materials
- Film and video materials
Teresa Chapa followed. She explained that her collection assistant is the one who calculates the annual survey for her, but that she has been unclear on how to answer letter “F,” of the items “A-G” on question number “2” on the long form:
“Please break down Latin American expenditures in the following categories, if possible:
a. Monographs (firm orders) __________Amount in 2009/2010 not supplied on blanket orders and approval plans in c, d, e, and f below
b. Serials (Periodical Subscriptions and Standing Orders) __________Amount in 2009/2010
c. Blanket orders and approval plans from Latin America __________Amount in 2009/2010
d. Blanket orders and approval plans from the U.S. __________Amount in 2009/2010
e. Blanket orders and approval plans from other than the U.S. or Latin America __________Amount in 2009/2010
f. Materials paid from funds not specifically targeted for Latin American materials __________Amount in 2009/2010
g. Travel expenses for field acquisitions __________Amount in 2009/2010”
The question, Teresa explained, is how to come up with a figure for letter “F,” especially if one is using a mixture of Latin American and Iberian funds?
Teresa asked whether it would be helpful to alternatively report allocations and firm orders by describing the funds as we do in our institutions? For example, should we report the total amount of acquisitions purchased with title VI funds?
Teresa also explained that she doesn’t count packages or bundles, because to separate out the Latin American portion would be very difficult. She asked how others handled this issue.
She also asked about serials not specific to Latin America (for example, subject specific periodicals dealing with all regions). The consensus was that these are not counted.
Dora Loh responded that the survey attempted to gather the best count possible, with the goal of leveraging what we can to our administrators to get funds.
Teresa Chapa indicated that she understood this and agreed but thought it would be good to try to develop the same standards to the best extent possible.
Melissa Guy shared that Arizona State has totally revamped its acquisitions process and no longer has fund codes. She asked what are the call number ranges that Teresa and I had referred to for Latin America.
At this point, Teresa Chapa and Sarah Buck Kachaluba pointed to Laura Shedenhelm, whose MLS thesis was creating a conspectus of call number ranges for Latin America.
Paula Covington shared that she has wrestled with the survey four times over the years. She explained that the figures she has gotten vary considerably and are crazy. Doing a physical estimate is impossible. Yet the national resource center wants exact numbers every year.
Adán Benavides explained that every library at the University of Texas likely collects Latin American materials but the count provided by UT-Austin reflects only the Benson LAC. While the survey figures may be inexact and inconsistent across institutions, a consistent response from a single library may indicate its long-term trends. Regardless, he analyzed the five largest collections to answer the SALALM survey for about a decade. Interesting results in comparison to UT-Austin allowed a basis to justify its continued funding at a high level.
Several LASERistas pointed to Miguel Valladares’s method of running reports in WorldCat without using WorldCat Collection Analysis. This method uses location codes in the subject and publisher fields as an alternative. James Simon is also familiar with this methodology.
Teresa Chapa observed that the survey works for us as a tool for comparison, even though it is wonky. The problem is that it is very time-consuming.
Gayle Williams explained that she, Scott Van Jacob, and Dan Hazen had minimally revamped the survey a few years ago, and that was why diskettes, for example, were still up there as a format.
In her presentation, Laura Shedenhelm explained that Georgia has not done the form since she arrived because she does not have time. When she came to Georgia, the Latin American position went from Full-time to Half-time. In Portuguese and Spanish language, the focus is on literature and social science, and since most of the material comes in through the English/American approval plan, there is no way to count it. Furthermore, acquisitions in art, for example, are not necessarily known, so end up not always being counted; going to every bibliographer is not feasible.
What Laura Shedenhelm did when she put together applications for Title VI funds was to estimate the size of the Fs and the PQs. In the past, In the past, she would have gone to the card catalog and estimated that one inch of cards equaled an appropriate number of volumes. What she has recently done is constructed a list of all Latin American countries and regions and ran those through the catalog in subject heading searches. The head of Collection Development then spent twenty-five hours de-duping and picking out strings of subject headings and turned these into volume counts. But for some reason the numbers given to the Latin American center were halved when they went into the Title VI application. The process was massively time-consuming, even with automation. She was also told not to include special collections or audio-visual materials. They only wanted print.
Dora Loh suggested using OCLC to get some information.
Peter Johnson asked what the quality of the information being collected is.
Paula Vanderbilt added that in the LASER WorldCat study one can look at the overlap/uniqueness as one indication of quality. Presumably something unique to a library would be of high quality (or value).
Sarah Buck Kachaluba wanted clarification on the question about the “quality” of information – did information refer to the “quality” of the collection survey data being collected? If so, how does the quality of the data relate to the purpose of gathering the data? Presumably the quality should be adequate to meet the purpose. Or did Peter mean the “quality” of the information materials (books, etc) being acquired, which were counted in the collection survey data?
Peter Johnson stated that he thought the source of the materials was an important indicator of quality. He wanted to know what percentage of the materials came through a blanket order, what percentage came from field research (buying trips), what percentage came from specialized dealers, and what percentage came from faculty requests.
Adán Benavides explained that new categories of information had recently been added to begin developing a qualitative element in the survey.
Gayle Williams added that these qualitative issues are what we are trying to address in LARPP regional distribution assignments.
Rafael Tarragó explained that a search by call numbers in the LC system can provide a rough estimate of what areas given collections are strongest in.
Laura Shedenhelm says it depends also on who (ie which cataloger) put in the call numbers. For example, if the cataloger left an extra space in the call number tag, a book won’t be counted.
Adán Benavides brought up the importance of using such statistics to get an idea of how we have been collecting over time – over ten years, for example. He suggested that we might want to think about putting together a book-length work – for example, looking at 20 libraries – how have they done collection development and collected for Latin America?
James Simon followed up by saying that Asian Studies librarians just did this in the book Collecting Asia.
Fernando Acosta Rodríguez said he liked that idea – we could look at what we are doing now in terms of archival collections.
Sarah Buck Kachaluba asked to what degree the book would look at the history of collecting and strategies for collection development and to what degree it would review the collection statistics we’ve gathered.
Melissa Guy said she thought the narrative of collecting would be more interesting.
James Simon said that the East Asian librarians were very committed to their statistics. Vicky Dahli from Kansas compiles the numbers and statistics.
Jana Krentz said that Vicky presented at a Mollas meeting.
Dora Loh observed that East Asian collections are distinctive in certain ways and can be separated more easily than Latin American collections.
Jana Krentz said that one can also limit collection analysis to East Asian languages.
Adán Benavides suggested that we could limit Latin American collection development analysis to the past year.
Dora Loh said that our collection surveys also indicate a low reflection of collection size in OCLC, suggesting that there is a huge catalog backlog.
We concluded the meeting by deciding that we needed to revise and simplify the survey somewhat and pursue a book project. Sarah Buck Kachaluba noted the names of people interested in contributing to these two projects:
Committee For Survey:
Sarah Buck Kachaluba
Committee for Book:
Fernando Acosta Rodríguez
Sarah Buck Kachaluba
Florida State University
Sunday, May 29, 2011 10:30am – 12:00pm
The Subcommittee sponsored a “Libreros Workshop” which was held immediately prior to this meeting. The Workshop was created in response to requests by some libreros at last year’s conference for support in the technical services. Tony Harvell (UCSD) gave a presentation on EDI (electronic data interchange) and Stephanie Rocío Miles (IADB) demonstrated the “Libreros SALALM” website she created. This website contains links to training materials, videos, etc. that could be of use to libreros in creating bibliographic records and in learning about emerging acquisitions services. A lively discussion followed. Those who attended reviewed the Workshop expressed interest in continuing this collaboration with the libreros. We will continue building the website and designing bibliographic and technological training for presentation at future conferences; these are things that catalogers can help to provide in support of the libreros’ work. John Wright (BYU) described Brigham Young University’s experiences as a beta test site for RDA implementation, focusing on preparing staff and highlighting best practices. He demonstrated the RDA Toolkit, and following discussion of RDA, there was a brief demonstration of VIAF (Virtual International Authority Database).
Saturday, May 28, 2011 9:00 – 10:00am
Participaron 15 personas.
Se entregó un informe impreso de Lynn Shirey (de Harvard University) sobre el proyecto piloto sobre “Digitalization of U.S. Holdings of 19th Century Cuban Monographs.”
Eudora Loh (de UCLA) y Teresa Chapa (de University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill) hicieron un reporte sobre un viaje de adquisiciones realizado a Cuba en febrero/marzo de 2011 y entregaron un informe impreso “Cuba Contacts”, con nombres y direcciones de librerías, centros de estudio y editoriales de Cuba.
Mei Méndez (de University of Miami) informó sobre un importante trabajo que está realizando University of Miami sobre “Teatro Cubano.”
Se intercambiaron ideas y experiencias sobre los problemas de los envíos de libros desde Cuba al exterior.
Luis A. Retta
Nuevo e-mail : firstname.lastname@example.org
Saturday, May 28, 2011 4:00 – 5:00pm
Present: Adan Griego; Suzanne Schadl; Lief Adleson; Anne Barnhart; Marisol Ramos; Sarah Aponte; Socrates Silva; Barbara Belejack (U of Arizona Lib School Stdt); Alma Ortega (Chair); Berlin Loa (U of Arizona Lib School Stdt); Mercedes Tinoco Espinoza (Enlacista); Graciela Barcala de Moyano (Enlacista); Peter Altekreuger.
1. Action: Everyone who is part of ALZAR will have a chance to vote on the proposed bylaws via e-mail at a later date
2. There have been a variety of issues with the Listserv set up at West Georgia University (WGU). The group decided to create a Yahoo! Groups listserv. Everyone currently on the Facebook group page will be invited by Alma to join the Yahoo! Group.
Action: Alma will create new listserv.
Action: Everyone currently on WGU listserv will be invited to join new list on Yahoo! Groups
3. Marisol Ramos (University of Connecticut) created a Hispano/Latino Resources Google Doc that she shared with the group via LALA-L a few weeks ago but got very little response with that initial announcement.
The goal is to have members of ALZAR fill it out so we can facilitate resource sharing as well as use it when we need to benchmark at our institutions. Anne suggested converting the Google Doc spreadsheet into a form to make it easier to use by those filling it out. The next time this document gets distributed on LALA-L and ALZAR Facebook’s page it will be as a Google Form.
Some felt that some of the questions asked were a bit sensitive when it came to asking for acquisitions spending amounts. On the new ALZAR site it will be possible to create a login so that sensitive information is not readily accessible. The list of resources, such as Libguides and online collections would still remain accessible freely to anyone cruising the ALZAR page.
Action: Marisol will convert the spreadsheet to a form
Action: Marisol will distribute the new form on the ALZAR Facebook page and on LALA-L
4. Newsletter. The group decided that changing the name from Alzar Corner to ALZAR Zone was a good idea. Alma will report this to Daisy Dominguez. There are six (6) issues and we need to be in almost all, if not all, the issues.
Action: Alma to report name change to Newsletter editor
5. Combo meeting. Given the variety of attendance at these meetings from very large to very small, ALZAR wishes to restructure its meetings. There was a general consensus that the ALZAR meeting try to be part business meeting and part presentation or demo of a timely software, resource or program beginning with the meeting held in 2012.
Action: Alma will plan for the next meeting to be half business meeting and half demo meeting
6. Future website. This summer Adán will be migrating the ALZAR page on the SALALM site to a Stanford University server. The new ALZAR site will be managed via Drupal. Suzanne, Marisol and Alma have already worked out what they want to be on the new site regarding the homepage, the mission, goals, etc. This file will be sent electronically to Adán by Suzanne so this work can be incorporated into the new Drupal site.
Action: Adán will migrate the page from the SALALM server
Action: Suzanne will send recommendations for website files to Adán
7. Announcement of new co-chair. Suzanne M. Schadl (University of New Mexico) will be the new co-chair of ALZAR with Alma. Suzannne will be the junior chair/apprentice for 2011-2012.
8. RCL-Latino Studies. Via an e-mail, Ana María Cobos (Saddleback College) announced that there was a need for a new editor/s to oversee the reviews in the RCL. Suzanne volunteered to do it.
Action: Alma will make sure Suzanne and Ana María get in touch during this SALALM meeting.
9. New Business.
Panel for 2012 conference. Marisol charged herself with the effort to organize an ALZAR sponsored panel for the next SALALM meeting. It is hoped that the 2012 theme (Popular Culture) will attract presenters. There were panels in 2008 in New Orleans and 2009 in Berlin, both of which were well attended, but there were not any for 2010 in Providence or 2011 in Philadelphia.
Action: Marisol will put out call for 2012 conference.
Saturday, May 28, 2011 2:00-3:00pm
Two members of the Gifts & Exchanges Subcommittee attended the meeting. They were Martha Mantilla, the current Chair, and Ricarda Musser, the new Chair of this committee. They talked about the purpose and relevance of the committee given the lack of interest and the decrease in membership. Currently, there are only two members listed in the Committees and Committee Members, 2010/2011 SALALM official list, which is based on membership renewals. For the last four years only three or four people have consistently attended the meetings. This subcommittee has lost its purpose given the fact that the Gifts & Exchanges programs have been eliminated from almost all the libraries represented in SALALM. Ricarda and Martha were in agreement that this subcommittee should be eliminated and recommend that the proper procedures be followed to this end.
Martha Mantilla, Chair
University of Pittsburgh
Saturday, May 28, 2011 9:00-11:00am and Tuesday, May 31, 4:00-5:30pm
Members present: Richard Phillips, Paula Covington, David Block, Peter T. Johnson, Hortensia Calvo, Eudorah Loh, Martha Mantilla, Laura Shedenhelm, Angela Carreño, Alma Ortega, Anne Barnhart, Pamela Graham, Barbara Tenenbaum, Fernando Acosta-Rodríguez Others: Daisy V. Domínguez, Orchid Mazurkiewicz, Nerea Llamas, Lynn Shirey, Elmelinda Lara, David C. Murray, Joe Holub
Finance met twice in Philadelphia, covering a wide range of policy and fiscal matters and endowment/investment topics. Several new members were welcomed: Alma Ortega (San Diego), Angela Carreño (NYU), and Fernando Acosta-Rodríguez (Princeton). A goal of the Committee has been to broaden participation, so these newcomers were truly applauded!
A review of the organization’s future (short & long term) was given by Treasurer Peter Johnson and by the Executive Secretary Hortensia Calvo. Topics included boosting SALALM’s name at ALA accredited library/information schools (and recruitment of new personal memberships in SALALM) by the creation of a new scholarship to market SALALM and its benefits to new incoming professionals in our field. The longstanding Marietta Daniels Shepard Scholarship is being fully turned over to the University of Texas after more than 25 years of contributions by SALALM. This thus fulfills SALALM’s pledge. Frustration with the lack of recognition given to SALALM was voiced.
$1,000 (plus $500 for start-up publicity) will be taken from SALALM’s dividends to initially launch the new scholarship. Member donations will sustain it in the future. This new scholarship will be fully coordinated and promoted directly by SALALM to all library schools.
The Treasurer also touched upon SALALM investments, urging more vigilant and proactive work by Finance’s Investment Working Group (IWG) – which held an early working breakfast session and is coordinated by Laura Shedenhelm. Other topics included credit card fees, CPA charges, use of PayPal, updates to the SALALM website, webinar offerings. Other operating dynamics were also discussed and funded and these were sent on to the Executive Board for consideration and approval.
Additional business included receipt of a $1,000 boost to SALALM’s endowment from an anonymous donor, who thereby matched contributions from a challenge made to SALALM members at the end of the Providence meeting. It is hoped that more challenges and donor opportunities will follow; SALALM’s “Endow our Future” theme is taking off.
Also, approval was given to offering a 3-year prepaid membership option that would lock in current membership fees.
Pending is the matter of changing SALALM operations to a calendar year in an effort to align SALALM with the fiscal year used by most others. Also open for further review is the matter of moving more funds to the endowment from institutional sponsorship payments.
The Secretariat highlighted its current budget and proposed budget. Invoice processing of institutional members is being scrutinized; there is concern that there must be a smoother way for institutions to pay their bills to SALALM. Other matters were very positive reports from the Providence and Philadelphia conferences. Discussion of the 2012 Trinidad & Tobago conference was also upbeat, with projected expenses and revenues reviewed and local arrangements eyeing sponsorships. The new chair of Finance will be Paula Covington.
Richard Phillips, Chair
University of Florida
Saturday, May 28, 2011, 11:00 AM – 12:30pm
Attendees: Members: Laura D. Shedenhelm (University of Georgia); Paula Covington (Vanderbilt University); David Nolen (Mississippi State University) ; Richard Phillips, Peter S. Bushnell, Paul Losch ( University of Florida); Adan Benavides, David Block (University of Texas at Austin); Gayle Williams (Florida International University); Hortensia Calvo ( Tulane University); Sarah Buck Kachaluba (Florida State University); Meiyolet Méndez (University of Miami); Holly Ackerman (Duke University); Teresa Chapa (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) Non-members: Tomás Bocanegra (Colegio de México); Gerada Holder (NALIS); Sofía Becerra-Licha (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill); Margarita Vannini (IHNCA, Universidad Centroamericana)
Teresa Chapa (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill), the LASER Convener, opened the meeting by remarking on the gratifyingly large number of attendees. Introductions followed. A list was circulated for attendance and for those who want their names added to the LASER listserv.
Holly Ackerman moved that minutes of the last meeting be accepted. Laura Shedenhelm seconded and minutes were unanimously approved.
Teresa reminded the group that institutional updates will not be reviewed at the LASER meetings but will be sent out on the listserv.
Teresa announced that this was the 25th anniversary of ENLACE and encouraged our participation.
Teresa reviewed the themes from out last meeting – collaboration and cooperation in collection development. How to achieve greater coordination is the key. David Block summarized our efforts to date. In New Orleans we agreed to share information on whether we would purchase offers sent from one vendor for Andean publications. David pointed out that we do not need 12-20 copies of a work. Following the meeting in New Orleans, David sent out offers for collective consideration and we initially were indicating the intention to buy an item. It seemed that we were not reducing the number of institutions acquiring titles. As the experiment progressed we felt comfortable indicating that we would not buy an item. Gayle Williams asserted that it was still too early to judge the success of this experiment.
Richard Phillips questioned what the relationship of this experiment was to the Farmington Plan wherein universities had committed themselves to collecting along lines of faculty and institutional strength. Richard added that under the Farmington Plan, Florida has been committed to collecting on the Caribbean for so long that it would make no sense for them to alter that pattern or to reduce the amount they buy. Teresa pointed out that, in contrast to the Farmington commitments, our current efforts are regional rather than national and that they are informal. She reminded the group that we had also discussed dividing up deep collecting by choosing to collect comprehensively on selected Mexican states. Mai Mendez suggested that we also do this by publisher and/or state in Argentina. She offered to draw up a list of publishers derived from the approval plan from her university and to circulate it to LASER members.
David felt we needed more specificity as far as what our specialties include. Phil MacLeod suggested that we define a core and then divide up the more detailed subjects. Adan Benavides pointed out that some vendors’ catalogs, for example those from Books from Mexico, show which institutions have received a book on approval thus allowing us to see the extent to which a book is held in our region. Paula Covington thought that we need to focus on lists earlier in the selection process. David recommended that we organize around some benchmarks such as assuring that one institution has the national gazette and a major newspaper for each country. The need for coordination among SALALM’s regional groups was also discussed and Teresa Chapa agreed to talk with the conveners of the other regional groups to let them know what we are doing and to see what collaborative efforts they may have in place.
David suggested we select a country for which no LASER library has collecting responsibility and try a cooperative experiment to avoid overlap and to increase uniqueness. The possibility of a Central American country was discussed. Phil and Laura described the cooperative efforts they have in place with Emory buying in the social sciences and Georgia selecting in the Humanities. They compare invoices and identify duplication and core authors and subjects and are now coordinating their plans through Vientos Tropicales.
Laura agreed to coordinate an experiment on Paraguayan imprints. Participating institutions are Duke, Emory, Texas, U. Georgia, U. Miami, UNC. Laura will contact the group regarding next steps.
Paula reminded us that the LASER website is now at Vanderbilt and that she would like to receive suggestions on features to be added to the site. She demonstrated a website constructed in Omni software. She would like to convert the LASER page to an Omni format but does not want to do so unless other LASER institutions have OMNI so that the site can move to another institution with minimal difficulty. Members will check with their institution and report back to Paula. Suggestions for website additions included: a listing of digital libraries; a chart showing institutional collection strengths; acquisitions news; lists of OP vendors by country; and a LASER blog. Paula requested that members send updates to their microfilm union list this summer.
The meeting adjourned at 12:30.
Teresa Chapa, Convener
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Tagged with: Affiliated Group Report/Minutes • Chapel Hill • David Block • Duke University • Emory University • LASER Minutes • Meiyolet Mendez • Paula Covington • Philip S. MacLeod • Richard Phillips • SALALM56 • Teresa Chapa • University of Georgia • University of Miami • University of North Carolina • University of Texas
Saturday May 28, 2011 2:00-3:00pm
The subcommittee convened at 2:00 on Saturday May 28,2011 in the Cherry Room. The majority of the meeting’s time was devoted to product demonstrations.
Phil S. MacLeod (Emory) did a brief presentation about the Spanish language/Latin American content of the Google News Archive and showed a Lib Guide he put together at Emory with links to all the titles available (http://guides.main.library.emory.edu/content.php?pid=20775&sid=1657140).
David Block (U Texas) did a brief presentation about the Archivo Historico del Arzobispado de Mexico a scanned collection of documents of colonial church records. Books from Mexico is the authorized dealer.
Ray Abruzzi (Gale Cengage) did a presentation on Gales’s World Scholar Latin American Portal describing the primary and secondary source content.
Paula Covington (Vanderbilt) gave a brief update on LAPOP.
There was also discussion of what would happen with the content of Paper of Record now that Google has discontinued the project.
Philip S. MacLeod, Chair
TagsAdán Griego Alison Hicks Anne Barnhart archives art audiovisual cataloging Committee Report David Block digitization documentaries Ellen Jaramillo Executive Board Meeting Minutes Fernando Acosta-Rodríguez Fernando Genovart Finance Committee Report Human Rights Interlibrary Cooperation Committee Report John Wright keynote Lisa Gardinier Lluis Claret Lynn Shirey Marisol Ramos Meiyolet Mendez Melissa Gasparotto Melissa Guy Mexico Paloma Celis Carbajal Paula Covington Peter Johnson rapporteur reports Richard Phillips Roberto C. Delgadillo SALALM56 SALALM57 SALALM 58 SALALM58 SALALM59 SALALM60 SALALM61 Sarah Buck Kachaluba Sarah Yoder Leroy Suzanne M. Schadl Teresa Chapa