2022-12-08 AASA-PT Meeting Notes

Attendees

  • CDL @Daisy Nip

  • CDL @Danielle Westbrook

  • CDL @Gem Stone-Logan

  • Berkeley: @Chan Li (Steering Committee)

  • Irvine: @Ellen Augustiniak (Steering Committee)

  • LA: @John Riemer

  • Merced:@Sarah Sheets

  • Riverside:@Michele Potter (Steering Committee)

  • San Diego: @Heather Hernandez (Unlicensed)

  • San Francisco: @Susan Boone

  • Santa Cruz:@Lisa Wong

Regrets

  • Davis: @Alison Lanius

  • Santa Barbara: @akshayagrawal

Item

Desired Outcome

Time

Who

Notes

Decisions

Actions

Item

Desired Outcome

Time

Who

Notes

Decisions

Actions

1

Meeting notes, times, attendance

Previous meeting notes ok’d https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AASAPT/pages/2030862358

Tasks reviewed: https://uc-sils.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AASAPT/pages/2024177686

5m

Ellen

 

Decision: We agree that for meeting notes, we’re not seeking perfection but to capture major topics and decision/actions. If folks feel something has been incorrectly represented, they are welcome (and expected) to make the edit.

Action: All - in advance of each meeting, we will review the agendas and any documents circulated (which should be ready 2-3 days prior). Agenda links will be made available in email, calendar invites, and Slack.

2

Work plan draft review - discuss and share suggestions

Any agreed-upon Work plan elements are recorded.

Priorities for next meeting’s discussion & further work are developed.

If overall Work Plan is ok’d, Subteam membership is established for Harmonization Review and Survey Subteams.

 

40m

Ellen, All

  • Decision pages serve as the public repository for decisions.

  • A march deliverable will be centered around a report (see linked work plan narrative for proposed report components). We are also building out an overview (potentially a detailed table) of how we presently report data through Alma and how we propose harmonizing and what’s functionally possible (i.e., how/who reports it).

  • Activity: Based on what we know about our charge, does the work outlined in the work plan make sense? And, based on our timeline, does this feel doable? (The project team divided into 3 breakout rooms to discuss.)

    • Report-outs from the breakout rooms are available here:

Decision: Overall, the project team endorses the work plan; it represents what we’re charged to do.

Decision: The timeline is very tight; there’s potential to work within it; to the extent we also need to rely on others for collecting how we currently report in analytics (the data we’re pulling, filters, additional calculations, etc.) - we might need more time.

Decision: Harmonization review subteam 1: Danielle, Heather, Sarah, Michele

Creating survey instrument subteam: John, Chan, Lisa

Decision: The two subteams do not need to complete their work before winter break, but are expected to meet and make as much progress as is possible

@Ellen Augustiniak will confirm the end of April timeline extension with Lynne/SILS-LG
@Ellen Augustiniak + Steering, Danielle will update the timeline/workplan (pending the April extension is approved by SILS-LG)
@Danielle Westbrook will schedule harmonization subteam 1, to begin their work.
@Chan Li will schedule survey instrument creation subteam, to begin their work
3

Wrap up

Review actions and decisions

5

Danielle

 

 

 

4

Parking Lot

Capture important topics for future discussion

 

 

 

 

 

 

The SILS mission is to transform library services and operations through innovation and collaboration. The future is shared!
Question? Contact AskSILS-L@ucop.edu