...
Item | Desired Outcome | Time | Who | Notes | Decisions | Actions | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Welcome | Catch-up and gather together | 3 min | all | |||
| 2 | Announcements | Inform | 2 min | all | Please add announcement to our meeting notes prior to the meeting. | No announcements. | |
| 3 | Discussion topic: responses from PPC to PSELG questions | Inform final decision page | 10 min | all | Document for reference: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kXDexq-0_VpRhDZuLppSV7RmODvCgEt1zLsdA_T-npw/edit?usp=sharing Framework for discussion: Does PSELG see themes in the responses? What conclusions can PSELG draw from the responses? | Based on PPC feedback, it seems several groups are discussing this issue but not necessarily with each other or toward a clear resolution. We feel PSELG is unlikely to be able to resolve this so should seek to pass these questions to those groups. High level points from PPC feedback are now incorporated into the “DRAFT decision page - PSELG decision page re OA discovery” | |
| 4 | Discussion topic: draft decision page | Identify next steps and timeline | 20 min | Document for reference: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jp_ujJtV624ZvLkv22mm_Qx4HmLEkdXfuZBukZ_WRhU/edit?usp=sharing Framework for discussion: This document is an effort at reorganizing the original work document to better follow the Decision page framework. There are a couple of areas that need a bit of further work. | Review of the draft document. The recommendation will be revised based on separate discussion at this meeting (see below). Section II. UC OA Cataloging policy section will be further revised. Still unsure if our document is synthesized enough for clarity. One key area is the list of questions remaining to be answered which are gathered at the end. | Beth C and Rikke to provide to Sarah T and Cynthia the groups consulted about the UC OA Cataloging policy by Weds, 2/24. Sarah T and Cynthia will revise the II. UC OA Cataloging policy section to incorporate the group names that provided feedback, the new responses from JSC, and to turn into synthesized narrative to match the style of the other sections by Tues, 3/2. All are invited to revise their sections further to help tighten the prose and reduce unnecessary duplication by Tues, 3/2. Rikke and Beth C will review a final time to create a draft for PSELG review by Weds, 3/3. All will review the final draft and provide comments/edits online by Sun, 3/7. The final review and approval of the document will be on the agenda for Mon, 3/8. | |
| 5 | Discussion topic: Recommendation | Consensus on recommendation | 15 min | Framework for discussion: Purposed recommendation: PSELG recommends the SILS governance framework include a cross-functional team (composed of representatives from scholarly communication, technical services, and public services domains) to manage the CDI. PSELG also recommends their first action include 1) developing a system wide policy/procedure on how and when OA resources (books, journals, articles, databases, datasets, etc.) are included in CDI and 2) conduct a review of the Policies and Procedures for Shared Cataloging, Linking, and Management . | Perhaps identify any key issues to be addressed as part of MVP criteria. Discussed the two versions of the recommendation proposed. Suggested revisions include: the cross-functional group be formed specifically to focus on CDI during the testing phase rather than wait for post-implementation; envision this as a bridge between the current and future governance structures; possibly identify any key issues to be addressed as part of MVP; and phase to be less prescriptive. | Rikke and Beth C to draft a newly phrased recommendation to share with PSELG for confirmation by Tues, 3/2. | |
| 6 | Wrap-up and next steps | Review actions and assignments | 5 min | BC, BD & all | |||
| 7 | Parking Lot | Capture important topics for future discussion | |||||
| 8 | Total | 55 min |
...