Wednesday
15th March 2000
The Library and Information Commission
Present:
Philip Payne (Chair), John Sumsion, Biddy Fisher, Maurice Wakeham,
Noeleen Cookman, Alan Cooper, Ros Cotton, Bruce Madge, Pat Gannon-Leary,
Juliet Eve
Apologies
:Linda Banwell, Liz Hart, Clare Nankivell, Judy Palmer, Carolynn
Rankin, Isobel Thompson, Dorothy Williams, Steve Morgan
1) Welcome
to new committee members
New committee
list was circulated. New member Juliet Eve added to list. Liz Hart
stood down as Secretary, Committee thanks for efforts and contribution
to the role. Chair suggested establishment of Vice Chair - succession
planning and to split workload which is likely to increase in the
context of relationship with new professional body. Treasurer 'shadow'
also proposed for succession planning. Current co-options to committee
all formalised. Steve Morgan had expressed wish to continue as co-optee.
2) Minutes
of last meeting
Accepted, except
JS pointed out page 2 section 10 for LISU read LIRN.
3) Matters
arising - future strategy
Members of
LIRG - especially those belonging to neither LA or IIS - to be approached
about feelings with regard to relationship with new professional
body. AC referred to newsletter of Implementation Group www.la-hq.org.uk/unify.
This spells out timetable. PP to approach Chair of Working Party
looking at future of organisations in liaison.
4) Working
groups
Groups generally
perceived as unsuccessful. How to make for effective? JS commented
that Editorial group is a virtual one, an insurance policy and that,
as such, it has been successful. Publicity & Marketing to continue
website work. Committee feeling that all to be involved in central/core
activities. Fluidity the key - planning event; pulling people in
as/when required. Identify activities and identify those to be involved.
Agreed that too many people in group doesn't work. BF while endorsing
empowerment pointed out the only clearance necessary is when money
involved and Treasurer must be notified.
5) LIRN
76
JS circulated
outline contents of a 'thin' issue and requested advice on possible
inclusions, e.g. response to Shepherd Report from BAILER and LIC
Research Committee; relevant (research) section of MLAC consultation
paper. JS requested that Committee members contribute comments and
references about websites and journal articles that they feel others
should know about to an informal column. Discussion on getting articles
from LIS students who got distinctions for their dissertations and
how best to obtain these.
6) Awards
and prizes
NC requested
that PP post messages to discussion lists such as SCONUL and BAILER
to remind academic librarians about research for Daphne Clark prize.
Publicity to go to Public Library Journal - perhaps referring to
'innovations' rather than research? Elsevier prizewinner required
to make presentation on receipt of award with regard to intentions.
Committee felt that it might be desirable to get a post-research
presentation too. UG/PG prizes may need to be reviewed. BF reported
that the Daphne Clark account is now closed. BM is pursuing sponsorship
for awards and prizes. Committee signed off evaluation forms for
all prizes. These will be published in LIRN.
7) Events
i) Effective
Academic Library PP circulated a draft programme which received
some feedback. 3 one-day seminars envisaged, probably in London:
a) Benchmarking/performance
indicators (Oct?)
b) Impact
on Learning, Teaching and Research (May?)
c) Effectiveness
in electronic environment (Oct?) ii)
Museums Research
Debate ensued as to whether this was too hot a topic and should
be relegated to the back burner or whether it was too important
to ignore or defer! Event could afford an opportunity for a cross-sectoral
exchange. RC had already done some preliminary work on this, including
contact with Neil Chambers from Natural History Museum. She will
pursue.
iii) Research
Methods
BM will take
forward the Health-related event. BF pointed out need to adjust
costs to ensure profit since the original course was set up to
be an income generator and the London and York events ran at a
loss. Fees and numbers were critical. Consideration being given
to running event to minimise risk, e.g. a three day intensive
course to include at least a Saturday or Sunday. It had already
been suggested (from feedback sheets completed by participants)
that workshops one and five could be combined so the event was
reducible to four days. Long planning timescale necessary to pre-publicise.
Feb or Easter 2001?
iv) Annual
lecture 2001 Start thinking now of potential speakers and venues.
PG-L to get information about OU Conference venue.
8. Web pages
AC advised
on eligibility for LA grant. Submissions to be in by Sept. will
be considered and decided in Oct. Optimism expressed as to likelihood
of our bid to develop a website being successful. Maximum amount
of grant is �500 (about half estimated costs). This initiative would
replace existing site. AC to check out the current site and remove
out-of-date links, label as "under construction"
9. Research
Portal
MW attended
LIC Seminar on LIS research portal. David Haynes is producing a
report and will make a proposal to go to the LIC. LIRG should get
a copy of this. MW will circulate and put on next agenda. There
appears to be a potential role for LIRG involvement in this project.
10. Shepherd
Report
JS summarised
main issues:
a) Money
for BL/LIC to continue in some form or other?
b) Future
research agenda and how far it should focus on government priorities
such as lifelong learning, social exclusion etc. How far it should
be cross-sectoral. BF raised another issue, namely that money
might be available to the academic community but not to practitioners
or independent researchers. Points to be summarised and published
in LIRN since it seems too late to make a formal response.
11. AGM
The annual
lecture was to be given by Susi Woodhouse of the People's Network.
All prizewinners were able to attend. Michael Mabe from Elsevier
would present the Elsevier Award
12. AOB
BF delivery
annual accounts at AGM but gave Committee members a preview. JS
requested review of LIRN costs, although previous year's rise may
be accounted for by special e-Lib seminar issue.
|