Library Staff Papers and Publications

An important facet of the long-term usability of digital content is the trustworthiness of preservation metadata as it is migrated across successive generations of preservation platforms, accompanying the content it describes. There exists little investigation into and few practical examples of the implications of replacing preservation platforms, and on interchangeability of preservation metadata across platforms. PREMIS is a widely implemented standard for expressing metadata to support the preservation of digital objects and ensure their long-term usability. Like most standards, PREMIS has undergone some major revisions as well. This presentation addresses these issues in the context of concurrent migrations from Islandora version 7 to Islandora version 8 and from PREMIS version 2 to PREMIS version 3.

This session will introduce Ecocycle Planning as a qualitative method for collaboratively assessing a collection or portfolio of activities in order to understand the work as a whole, and to pinpoint blockages and opportunities for renewal. Ecocycle Planning is one of a collection of facilitation techniques called Liberating Structures, which are designed to be inclusive and to disrupt conventional or stale practices of working in groups. Liberating Structures can be employed in any situation that involves people working together, and many of them can be used or adapted for everyday evaluation and assessment practices. In Ecocycle Planning, a team or group works together to identify their work activities, projects, and initiatives, and position them within the ecocycle (birth, maturity, creative destruction, renewal). The exercise facilitates the team’s explorations of how to balance activities, set priorities, and identify opportunities for freeing up resources. The structure enables participation from every member of the team, and lets group members see their own work in the context of the team as a whole. In this workshop, participants will learn the essential design elements that make Liberating Structures successful. They will also understand how to facilitate Ecocycle Planning to assess a team’s activities and programs, and to develop strategies for using it with their working groups, teams, units, and collaborators.

Awareness of faculty research interests is an important aspect of a subject librarian's responsibilities. This paper illustrates the potential of Voyant Tools, an application in wide use among digital humanities researchers, to reveal word patterns in the research output of applied science faculty. A corpus of recent article citations from Web of Science from two engineering departments was obtained, and the articles' title field was extracted and uploaded to the application. The exercise indicated that articles on fuel cells dominates the research output of one department, and articles on optical coherence tomography dominates the other. Both the corpus of citations and its visualizations in Voyant Tools contribute to librarians' knowledge of their departments and historical spending patterns on specialized resources. This knowledge can be used in professional practice, including collection development and instruction. As academic subject areas become increasingly complex and multidisciplinary, this paper encourages librarians to engage with Voyant Tools to better understand the specialized language and concepts of these evolving fields.

As the Liaison Program continues to evolve in response to Library and University priorities, this brief survey is intended to:

- Identify and assess the strengths and challenges of the liaison program model;

- Elicit ways in which liaison librarians would like support in their roles;

- Determine the degree to which the liaison model and current liaison activities meet the emerging needs of the Library.

This 30 question survey was distributed online using SurveyMonkey to SFU liaison librarians (departmental and functional) in May 2018. Not all questions were mandatory, and librarians were told that their responses would remain anonymous. We received a total of 27 responses to the survey.

As the SFU Library Liaison Program continues to evolve in response to Library and University priorities, this brief survey is one element in a multi-faceted, continual evaluation process that intends to provide a snapshot of the overall program from the liaison librarians' perspective, as well as to identify 1) areas of success, 2) issues that require further investigation, and 3) new areas of growth emerging in the work.This 23 question survey was distributed online using FluidSurveys to SFU liaison librarians (departmental and functional) in May 2017. Not all questions were mandatory, and librarians were told that their responses would remain anonymous. We received a total of 24 responses to the survey, 21 of which were complete.

This paper aims to add to conversations on access, diversity, and representation in libraries by addressing the importance of language as a factor in library service and providing some of the first data on library workers’ language skills. Much of the literature on language in libraries focuses on issues of multilingual access and collection development, and there is less emphasis on the roles of staff and language skills in providing and mediating access. As well, while US librarians are less diverse than US library workers and the wider population in terms of gender and race, it has not been shown whether the same holds true in terms of language.

A pilot study of staff from three US public libraries sought to address these gaps in knowledge about staff language skills and representation and to generate further lines of inquiry. Responses were compared with US Census data to determine linguistic representation relative to the service population. The results indicated that while staff surveyed were more likely than the wider population to know another language besides English, they were not likely to use that language on the job, and those who did use a language besides English often reported low fluency. Responses also showed differences in language knowledge and use between staff with and without MLIS degrees. The results highlight the differences between language knowledge, fluency, and usage, offer implications for library service and professional values, and suggest many future directions for research.

With the creation of functional liaison portfolios to accommodate new areas of growth such as makerspaces, digital humanities, and data services, liaison librarian programs in Canadian academic libraries have changed significantly over the last few years. However, there are very few studies — especially in Canada — that evaluate liaison librarian programs. The research that has been done focuses largely on the return on-investment of academic library liaison programs, rather than liaison librarians’ perspectives and experience of the model that governs their work. In order to fully understand the effectiveness of liaison programs, we need to not only ask questions about outcomes, but also seek feedback and input from liaisons themselves about how they work and what supports they need. SFU Library's liaison program went through a redesign process in 2015 and assessment of the redesign highlighted the continually changing nature of liaison work, which led to the creation of the SFU Library Liaison Program Evaluation Working Group (continual with changing membership). In the 2016-2017 academic year, this working group developed a 22 question survey for all SFU liaison librarians. This survey was designed to provide a snapshot of the overall program from the liaison librarians' perspective, as well as a mechanism to identify both specific areas of success and pinch points that may need immediate attention, and to identify issues that require further investigation to find solutions. The working group intends to run this survey again in the future to allow for continuous monitoring and improvement of the SFU Library liaison program. Our poster will share the survey’s findings, highlight some strengths and weaknesses of the survey tool, and offer suggestions for further areas of investigation.

In May 2017, our library decommissioned our locally developed, open source knowledgebase and link resolver and adopted a vendor-provided one. This session will cover the pros and cons of being a service provider for other libraries. 

Canada is at an interesting point in its history, where the atrocious assimilation practices that were in place until the mid-1990s are being acknowledged in the hopes for a better relationship between Canada’s Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. Both the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report, and the Canadian Federation of Library Associations/Federation Canadienne des Associations de Bibliotheques (CFLA/FCAB)’s report from its Truth and Reconciliation Committee (n.d.) have an emphasis on education, to address the changes needed. Where do academic libraries fit into this? I first discuss the colonial history of libraries, as extensions of education institutions, followed by a look at how library curriculum falls short in preparing students for working with Indigenous peoples and items. Finally I examine how libraries can decolonize their services. Canadian academic libraries are beyond the point of it being acceptable that staff are ill-equipped to serve Indigenous students and faculty.