2024-6-17 10am AASA-PT Meeting Notes

Chair: @Chan Li

Note taker: @Anna Striker

Attendees:

@John Riemer
@Anna Striker
@Lisa Wong
@Daisy Nip
@Chan Li
@Sarah Sheets
@Denusha Amaladas
@akshayagrawal
@Susan Boone
@Michele Potter
@Ellen Augustiniak

(regrets: Alison, Danielle)

	Item	Desired Outcome	Time	Who	Notes	Decisions	Actions

	Item	Desired Outcome	Time	Who	Notes	Decisions	Actions
1	Assemble: Note taker: Anna Recording		5
2	AL Survey Elimination from IPEDS	NCES decision and response	5		NCES has decided to continue with their plan to eliminate the AL Survey in IPEDS, citing the lack of budget to provide adequate staffing on their end and the lack of use of the AL Survey data. There is an additional short window for comments, if desired.	Decision: AASA-PT will not submit another comment responding to the proposal/decision to eliminate the IPEDS AL survey.
3	AASA-PT Work plan	AASA-PT work plan High priority items: review status from campuses Medium priority items: review status from campuses	20		High priority items: Thank you everyone for your responses so far! Still waiting on a few campuses to respond. A few additional questions have arisen for UCR, which will be followed up on. Medium priority items: Please let Daisy know if you have any additional changes you want to make to the medium priority items listed in the work plan. Withdrawn items: UCR suppresses all materials sent to the RLFs, so they are already excluded from NZ stats; UCM has not sent anything to the RLFs; UCSB needs to confirm with another unit; UCSC may suppress and then delete, but will confirm; UCSF has a temp location for NRLF transfers, but needs to confirm details of the suppression / withdrawal workflow; UCB does not count NRLF materials as withdrawn, just as location transfer (still part of the collection); UCLA does not count SRLF materials as withdrawn, just as a location transfer (still part of the collection) UCR is also investigating whether the “weeding date” would be a useful tool for tracking this info. UCI is also mindful that withdrawals are reported elsewhere as well (not just UCL/UCOP stats), interested in knowing whether there’s a job that will bulk-update the weeding date field to help support easier and more accurate reporting of this data (this is anticipated to be a long-term project, and may not be ready for integration into the NZ stats build until the FY25/26 stats run).		ACTION: @Daisy Nip will follow up with campuses that have not yet responded, and will follow up with campuses that have new questions that have arisen. ACTION: All - reach out to Daisy if there are any additional changes needed for medium priority items. (This is a “nice to have” action, if time and bandwidth permit.) ACTION: Daisy will reach out to the RLFs this week to affirm how to report campus counts; Daisy will cc Chan on the email to Tim at NRLF.
4	Holding with problem resource type	Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Physical Items marked Electronic review file Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Electronic Items marked Physical review file Do we want to review the data or clean up the record? Should the items reported as physical are marked as physical or electronic in the final report?	15		At the last meeting, the team decided not to rebin physical marked electronic or electronic marked as physical (we will report them as the resource type they are marked as in SILS). This will mean that some items in the Physical Items count will show Resource Type electronic, and some eResource items count will show Resource Type physical. Question for the group: Do we want to show in the stats summary that there are “physical” materials categorized as electronic and “electronic” materials categorized as physical?	Decision: AASA-PT will not rebin any electronic marked as physical or physical marked as electronic. We will likely see some changes in numbers compared to last year, and will explain that we undid a rebinning decision so that we are now reflecting the current cataloging in SILS. Decision: We will make a note in the public version of the final stats noting the change, and that this is why they may see physical Resource Types in the eResources stats and electronic Resource Types in the Physical Items stats.	ACTION: AASA-PT members should work with their local catalogers to identify items that need to be reviewed for Resource Type updates (necessary for risk management purposes).
5	Wrap up	Review actions and decisions	5				ACTIONS (all): continue to review high priority items (see email from Daisy); review medium priority items as necessary and able.
6	Parking Lot	Capture important topics for future discussion
7		Total