...
Item | Discussion Points | Time | Who | Notes | Decisions | Actions | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Assemble
| Notetaker: Ellen Augustiniak | 5 | All | ||||
2 | Walkthrough of draft review files | 30 | Daisy | |||||
3 | "Special" library category designation | Question from UCB - how is this designation determined? General question: Do we still need to delineate stats from the NZ by special collections locations (SCA) and non-SCA locations? This was part of the original prototype; it is not used in UCL/UCOP annual stats. With AASA-PT’s original report, our recommendation was that special collections stats should not be generated from the NZ (this was endorsed by CoUL). If a few campuses do use this data - should we provide it to them separately, as opposed to part of this process (that way, everybody doesn’t need to confirm SCA locations each year - reduce workload)? | 10 | All | ||||
4 | Should we remove the “electronic” and “physical” designation from the resource type labels? (if time) | Sample output of what this would look like: | 10 | All | ||||
5 | Wrap up | Review actions and decisions | 5 | |||||
6 | Parking Lot | Capture important topics for future discussion | ||||||
7 | Total | 60/60 |
...