Folke Bernadotte Memorial Library
Annual Report
2000/2001
The Year in Review
Progress
Collections / Staff / Services, Technology, Facilities / In
Summary . . .
Assessment
Senior Surveys / Analyzing Student Papers
Looking Ahead
Appendix A:
Selected Staff Activities
Appendix B: Statistical Summary
At the end of this millennial year, it seems that libraries are caught up in dramatic, unprecedented changes. As more of our collections come to us in digital format, as higher education changes in response to electronic developments, and as the Internet and electronic publishing alters the information landscape, it sometimes seems as if the only thing we can predict is more change.
Yet one thing that has remained remarkably stable through the years has been the fundamental mission of the library to have a significant, even life-changing impact on students as we support their learning. We were reminded of the enduring nature of this mission when the long-time Gustavus librarian Odrun Peterson, died this past March. She was a Gustavus librarian from 1944 to 1973, serving as its director for most of those years. She left her mark in many tangible ways. At the end of the 1940s, she participated in the move to the original Folke Bernadotte Memorial Library (now the Anderson Social Science Center) and planned and carried out the move into the current library in the beginning of the 1970s. The building we are in now reflects her belief that libraries are fundamentally about teaching and learning. A planning document she wrote in 1965 included the statement “interest is more on student learning and less on faculty teaching”—an endorsement of active learning that rings true today and “the library is primarily a teaching library”—a value that seems positively trendy in 2001 as information literacy programs take shape in institutions across the country. She even recommended installing ducts in the flooring to “permit later installation of electronic carrels”—a remarkably clairvoyant view of what the library would need in the next millennium. Her emphasis on student learning as the purpose and product of the library persists. It frames the work we do and provides direction as we change.
The year opened with a two-day summer institute for librarians in the region on “Information Literacy and the Liberal Arts” at the beginning of June. Librarians from St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict, Augustana (Rock Island), Carleton, St. Olaf, and Macalester colleges spent two days at Gustavus working on common issues relating to information literacy in a liberal arts setting. A week later, we held a week-long workshop for fourteen Gustavus faculty. Both programs were funded by a grant from the federal Institute of Museum and Library Services. We were honored to be the first liberal arts college ever awarded a grant from this agency established by Congress in 1996. Participants found the programs worthwhile, making comments in the evaluation forms such as “seldom do I attend a workshop where I feel as though the entire experience was worthwhile, but that was certainly the case with this one” and “this was one of the most productive, enjoyable, well-engineered, focused, etc. etc. workshops I have attended—and I have attended a significant number in my career. It was truly excellent in every way.” We were able to reconvene the first group of faculty with faculty accepted into a workshop for this summer to continue conversation; we also sponsored a panel discussion on student/faculty research in the spring. This project and its results thus far were presented in a paper and a panel presentation at the Association of College and Research Libraries national conference in March and will be profiled in a future issue of the Journal of Library Administration.” A Web site, http://gustavus.edu/Library/IMLS/, provides ongoing information about the project and is one of thirteen case studies featured at the Association of College and Research Libraries Institute for Information Literacy Web site.
In the fall, librarians worked with faculty in our electronic classroom to provide hands-on learning of research skills. Two of the librarians responsible for much of the instruction in previous years were absent—Sandy Fuhr left employment with the college (though she continued as a part-time consultant for the IMLS grant) and Barbara Fister was on sabbatical leave. However, all of the librarians pitched in with such enthusiasm they actually set a record for the number of students and classes coming to the library. Some of that might be due to increased publicity for the program, particularly with First Term Seminars, and due to increased visibility of the library and its instructional program because of the IMLS grant. Another instruction-related development was the Patti Lindell project this year, directed by Don Zhou and Howard Cohrt in the spring. It focused on designing online exercises for research in the disciplines. These exercises, and supporting documentation, will be made available for librarians and classroom faculty on the Web.
Several enhancements were made during the year that were intended to make this complex hybrid print/electronic thing we call a library more accessible. A new Web page was designed and tested through the fall. Students were invited to comment on the new design, filling out a survey on its usability in exchange for a candy bar incentive. Their comments were taken into account in redesign. In order to make updating and maintenance easier, Don Zhou designed a database-driven system that places changes where they need to be throughout the Web site. He also wrote a program to import lists of full-text periodicals into a database-driven program which generates a union list of electronic titles. For the first time, this gives us a clear picture of what is available in full-text databases—currently totaling 6,794 titles, dwarfing our print collection.
In the spring, the campus debated the problem of external access through a modem pool. As on other campuses, this access is being swamped and increasing the modem pool is a costly venture. The Information Infrastructure Advisory Committee ultimately recommended that resources be directed toward increasing bandwidth to the campus rather than increasing modem access. This had serious implications for the library, as much of our collection is now delivered over the Internet, identifying users with IP authentication. Fortunately, our online catalog system, PALS, added a new service this year, handling proxy service sing PALS username and password authentication. Taking advantage of this inexpensive service means we can continue to provide access to most of our electronic resources even as faculty and staff migrate to other ISPs.
We have tied up some long-term loose ends by bringing the music library online with automated circulation this year, doing away with the last of the paper shelf list, barcoding serials so that the lost and missing records, formerly in a card file, are available online, and making significant strides in cataloging our government documents collection. Other technical advances this year include the library serving as a test site for wireless network access. We now provide three kinds of connectivity: public computers, plug in access for Ethernet card users, and wireless.
In the spring, the College Librarian contacted science departments to discuss solutions for our inadequate support for the sciences. We have always been frugal when adding new journal subscriptions because of their double-digit annual percentage increases and have rigorously weeded our list as titles grow too expensive or are not in high demand. In recent years, this has had particular impact on the sciences. Previously we relied on interlibrary loan to meet those needs we couldn’t meet locally. Now we find ourselves paying copyright fees as our fair use of certain science titles is exhausted, sometimes within the first month of the calendar year. Additionally, we are increasingly able to access citations to the primary literature through improved database coverage—but then are unable to access the actual articles. Libraries everywhere are seeking ways to cope with what is generally called the “serials crisis.” We met with the chairs and library liaisons in each of the science departments to discuss their curriculum and what the library needs to do to support it, changing patterns in faculty and student research, the enduring need to have core journals available for browsing, and ways to maximize our resources. In turn, the library explained some of the constraints that are making science literature difficult for libraries, particularly small ones, to obtain. Though we haven’t solved the problem, it was a fruitful discussion and an issue we will continue to focus on in the coming year. A summary of the discussion can be found at http://gustavus.edu/Library/ScienceMemo.html .
In the last two days of May, we
hosted a second Summer Institute for librarians at regional liberal arts
colleges. This year we had librarians from all of the original institutions
attend, adding four librarians from Concordia College (Moorhead). The focus for
this Institute was assessing student learning. With the help of Gustavus
faculty members Eric Eliason, Mike Miller, and Bruce Johnson, librarians from
the seven liberal arts colleges discussed ways to effectively measure learning
outcomes and use them in their ongoing assessment efforts. It was a taxing but
stimulating two days. As with last year’s Institute, we provided a reward in
the form of a poetry reading: Joyce Sutphen and Phil Bryant read the first
year, and John Rezmerski this year, in a duet with St. Paul poet Phebe Hanson.
The librarians were impressed that Gustavus has such a surplus of fine poets
and, in the words of one, they enjoyed “being reminded why we do this work in
the first place.” Our final subject of discussion—what’s next for this group
now that our grant funding has run out?—led to a rousing endorsement of
continuing the gatherings. Participants enjoyed having an on-campus experience
and found the concentrated focus on a topic of common interest and the emphasis
on practical ideas they could use at their institutions more useful than many
other conferences in the field.
Progress Report
The notes below are organized in
categories used in our Strategic Plan of 1998: collections, staff, services,
technology, and facilities. Though the plan has been helpful, we have begun to
lay the groundwork for rethinking our goals since so many of them have been met
and, in some cases, specific priorities have shifted. What follows is an update
on our progress.
The collection was increased by 8,654 volumes this year, bringing the total number of volumes to 273, 748. We continued to process the Holmer gift, a significant addition to the collection, and received other gifts including a substantial collection in history from former faculty member Peter Yackel and a superb science fiction collection developed over the years by retiring English professor John Rezmerski. Additionally, we received the works of composer Jan Bender through the efforts of David Fienen, making our collection an important national resource for scholars of his work. Among electronic resources added this year are CIAO: Columbia International Affairs Online and a new edition of the New Grove Encyclopedia of Music, both in print and electronically. Through the MINITEX consortium, we have also been able to add full text newspapers through Proquest Direct, electronic versions of all of the journals published by the American Chemical Society, and electronic access to slightly over 700 Elsevier journals. These last two additions have improved our access to science holdings dramatically, though they are not permanent but depend on legislative funding, a common agreement in the consortium that they are priorities, and willingness by the publishers to continue licensing arrangements. We had immediate feedback from the Chemistry department when the ACS journals became available. The contract with MINITEX was signed during the Association of College and Research Libraries conference in March. Before the College Librarian returned to campus, chemistry faculty had discovered the journals were accessible and were already using them—even though they weren’t certain the access was intentional rather than a fortuitous technological glitch. In addition to e-journals, over 1,600 electronic books, mostly from university presses, have also been provided through a MINITEX purchase; these have now been added to our catalog.
Assessment of the collection is an ongoing process. We continued to fine-tune our periodicals collection, wrapping up some loose ends from our review of the entire collection last year and reviewing recent requests during the spring. We also tried to include a systematic review of relevant holdings in departmental reviews with, as usual, mixed success. The reviewers for the department of Economics and Management did spend time going over the collection with the College Librarian and their self-study included a review of library holdings and services, but other departments did not involve the library. Further, the outside evaluators’ comments regarding the library are not routinely shared with the library. Tying collection assessment to department reviews makes a great deal of sense, but we need to work on a smoother process for integrating the library’s collection analysis with the departmental review cycle and ensuring we are able to use the data to make positive change.
In addition to working with departments and filling in gaps, we have set aside funding to develop area studies. Each librarian has a geographic area to work on, a process that has helped us build areas that tended previously to fall through the cracks. Fortunately, funding from the Hasselquist family has assisted in this endeavor and, thanks to having money budgeted for acquisitions, we have been able to fill many of the shelves in the International Studies room provided by their generous gift. We are continuing our review of special collections, a project that will continue in the fall as Edi Thorstensson joins us on a part-time basis.
The collection is nearing the size for which the building was designed—300,000 volumes. With this in mind, we have increased our efforts to do some systematic weeding. Some back runs of journals available through JSTOR have been withdrawn from the collection to make needed room for new publications. The government documents collection has been weeded substantially. As for the book collection, we experimented in the spring with creating PALS reports by subject area limited by publication date, using those for quick decision-making in those areas where such decisions can be made relatively easily. As a pilot project, one department—physics—has been provided a “weed list” of pre-1960 titles in the hope they will be able to help us sort out the classics from the chaff. Other areas that aren’t tied to a particular department—sections of PE (writing instruction), S (agriculture), T (technology), U and V (military science), and Z (library science)—were weeded by librarians using this protocol. We will need to do more of this in the future not just because shelf space is growing tighter but more importantly, to improve the quality of what is on the shelves
In summary, we’ve made progress on
all of our strategic plan goals for collections with the exception of
increasing the percentage of E&G going to the library—a goal that has been
rendered somewhat moot by the changes in calculating E&G. We will also be
falling back next year on coping with a flat-funded budget, a situation that
coupled with increases in costs means less growth in the collection. We need to
continue to improve liaison relationships in order to strengthen our collection
analysis program both for building collections and maintaining them. Finding
ways to build a stronger science collection will remain a focus for next year.
The process begun in the previous year of examining paraprofessional positions and requesting position upgrades proceeded, with seven of nine positions receiving some sort of improvement in their status. Six of the nine positions were moved from non-exempt hourly status to administrative. One non-exempt position was moved to a higher grade. The remaining two positions that were initially denied a change in grade will be reexamined by a new committee this summer. We also piloted a new process for annual reviews and did away with our previous, not-very-functional supervisory relationships, both innovations proving successful. The new staff development policy was implemented, with all staff taking advantage of allocated funding. (See Appendix A for a summary of staff activities.) The organization chart developed last year and the collegial model it describes was presented at a national conference in March in a paper on collegial leadership models. It was encouraging when Library Journal, previewing the conference, highlighted this contributed paper with a starred review, ending with the admonition: “An important alternative to hierarchic models. Don’t miss it.” In fact, around 200 people took that advice, resulting in a standing-room-only audience.
Though we have made significant progress in redefining our working relationships and in gaining recognition for the responsibilities of the paraprofessional staff, we have not made a dent in a most pressing problem: we don’t have enough staff. The comparative analysis presented in our Strategic Plan is still pertinent. We have a much smaller staff than the institutions we like to compare ourselves to. It’s not likely, given the current climate, that we will see improvements in this area, yet many of the goals we set will be unattainable simply because we don’t have enough people to give them adequate attention.
As mentioned earlier, our instructional program was successful this year in terms of meeting with a record number of classes and students. Over fifty course-specific Web pages were added to our Web site in support of the sessions. Librarians benefited from having the two-day Summer Institute with librarians at similar colleges to stimulate their own teaching skills, and the fourteen faculty who participated in the summer workshop reported they changed not only the courses they brought to the workshop, but other courses they teach as well. The Communication Studies department, which had three members participate, has integrated their experience into department-wide discussions. Though the long-term benefits of the IMLS grant program remain to be seen, it seems to have been very effective in its first year.
We have taken several steps toward making the hybrid print/electronic
environment easier to navigate, including creating a database of full-text
periodicals, redesigning our Web page, and creating better ways to maintain the
information available on it. We have been able to keep our electronic classroom
up-to-date by making it our lynchpin for a replacement cycle. As we upgrade
machines in that location, the older machines are cascaded into other areas of
the library. This year that meant having new computers in the main classroom
and nearly-new computers in the catalog cluster and in the smaller electronic
classroom, increasing the availability of instructional spaces and
public-access computers in the library. Though this requires a large
expenditure from the library budget, it is essential to have adequate access
within the building to our growing digital collection and hands-on facilities
for learning how to use them.
Interestingly, the library as a
physical place remains important to students at Gustavus even though much of
the material they use is available through network connections in their dorm
rooms. The number of people passing through the entrance increased nearly 8%
over last year. The library as a physical space is in excellent shape since the
improvements made after the tornado. This year, one additional improvement was
made: attractive new signage was installed.
Of the strategic plan goals set in 1998, most of those under technology and facilities have been met as well as many of those laid out in services. We are still struggling with finding better ways to embed research skills more effectively into the curriculum, something that requires collaboration with faculty in the departments. The IMLS-funded programs have helped. We have not developed credit-bearing courses, but instead will try to support the FTS program by offering a course annually. Mike Haueser has developed an FTS course that he will be teaching in the fall. Though most of our facilities needs have been met, storage remains an issue, particularly for archives and special collections. And we still have no comprehensive standards for technology proficiency for staff, though we do have regular in-house training opportunities and improved funding for development.
With so many hurdles cleared since
our strategic plan of January 1998, it’s time to look forward and articulate
new goals. We started that process with our annual end-of-year retreat by going
through the new Standards for College Libraries adopted by the Association of
College and Research Libraries in 2000. These standards will help focus our
discussions for planning and preparation for the upcoming North Central
accreditation visit.
Finding ways to assess the impact of the library on student learning remains a vexing issue for us. Though we have an assessment plan in place, gathering and analyzing information is time-consuming and requires the cooperation of others. This year we focused on surveying seniors and looking at finished products for evidence that students are learning the things we hope they learn. We continued to add material to our database of student research, surveyed students and faculty involved in instruction sessions, and held focus group discussions with sophomore students, continuing a process started last year. One lesson learned so far is that we need to work harder to build a more coherent process for gathering and using this information into the rhythm of the academic year.
Rather than try to schedule interviews with seniors, a short open-ended survey was pretested and then sent to seniors in eight capstone courses and to seniors working in the library. We received disappointingly skimpy results—only six responses! Seniors are the least likely of students to participate in evaluations, we have learned, and we sent it out too late in the year. We will work on improving our timing and providing some incentives next time.
The first of four
questions asked students to reflect on their four years and tell us how they
have grown as researchers. Responding seniors reported they feel they had
gained both skills and confidence in their four years. Two of the six mentioned
feeling great anxiety as first year students, with their comfort level
increasing over time. Three mentioned that they learned that librarians were
helpful resources. Learning how to use the online catalog and interlibrary loan
were mentioned by most of the respondents.
We asked if students wished they had learned things earlier in their college experience and if there were things they still wished to know. Two mentioned that they wished they had learned more about accessing journal articles earlier. Another said that her FTS library session was not as helpful as a session she had later on in an upper-division course because it focused on a limited assignment. One student said she didn’t know much on entering college, but it was “easy to pick up on with the help of the librarians.” Another said “I feel fairly comfortable in any library now. I know the basics of how they operate and have the ability to locate the materials I am looking for. Locating the libraries in my new city and getting a library card is at the top of my things to do when I move for work this summer”—a sign that for this student at least, libraries are part of life-long learning.
We asked if students felt the library as a place is still important. All of them said it was. One said it was too much a social center and distracting for studying, but another described it as a great meeting place. According to one student, “the library is more important than ever. Internet options do provide a wealth of information and sources but many of them might be questionable and make less than authentic research possible. The library resources not only provide a greater wealth of better material, but teaches/reinforces important research skills.”
Finally, we told them that fewer
students were asking for help at the reference desk and asked if they have any
suggestions about how to make reference services more effective. All of the
students reported they found our reference assistance helpful. Three suggested
that the easy availability of information on the Web might be resulting in
fewer questions asked. Another thought perhaps students were picking up what
they needed in our library course sessions or finding things more easily on
their own because of the Web page redesign. Several also mentioned that novice
researchers are anxious about asking for help and one even suggested that the
highly public location of the desk may be a barrier—that perhaps younger
students were embarrassed to be seen seeking help from a librarian. Two
suggested that students might make use of reference services more if faculty
recommended it to their students.
We collected thirty-seven finished papers from a variety of courses, most of them taught by faculty involved in the IMLS grant program. The assignments ranged from fairly traditional thesis-driven research papers to grant proposals and campaign speeches. We are working on developing a rubric for looking at these finished products for evidence of the students’ ability to find valuable information to support their work and put it to use effectively, but it is a work in progress and will probably have to be tested for some time before it proves reliable.
Though our
instrument is still under development, some initial observations can be made.
First, students can distinguish between types of sources (e.g. scholarly v.
popular) but that ability appears (from our initial sample) to develop over
time. First year papers in our sample for which scholarly sources would be
appropriate and effective evidence used a mix of scholarly sources and less
credible advocacy Web sites and popular press articles. Second, some of the
difficulties students demonstrated in writing from sources suggests students
are not always sure of the purpose of research. In one case, quotations were
obviously used as the scaffolding for the paper, which ended up being what
Gretchen Moon has called an “info-dump,” a pastiche of source material with
little original thought. A third area of concern—one that was as problematic
for seniors as for first year students—was in documenting sources found on the
Web or in full-text databases. The MLA has only recently added models for
full-text articles in their most recent edition of their style manual; a new
edition of the APA manual will be published in June 2001. It may be a useful
service, until these are addressed clearly in writing handbooks, for the
library to provide a handout and Web page providing models for these
commonly-cited works.
Our assessment plan is a work in
progress. We will continue to refine ways of gathering evidence of student
learning and plan to expand the plan next year to include other areas of
library activity in order to measure ourselves against the new Standards for
College Libraries and improve the many disparate functions that, added
together, support student learning. As part of the process, we will be
developing a new set of goals now that those in our strategic plan have largely
been met.
We have another IMLS-funded faculty workshop this summer, this one bringing together 17 faculty across the curriculum. We also will continue the research projects begun as part of the project—developing and testing a rubric for assessing information literacy skills and studying the research processes of undergraduates working in a hybrid print/electronic environment.
In the fall we will start the year with a department retreat to work on
our assessment plan and goal-setting. We will begin compiling information for
the NCA self-study. We will try to tie our assessment of collections more
firmly into the department review process and will develop more focused weed
lists for parts of the collection. We will continue to work with science
faculty to improve our science holdings. In October, Charles Priore, science
librarian for Carleton and St. Olaf, will visit our library as an external evaluator
to help us assess our science collection.
Balancing the growing need for information in the sciences and other fields with a flat-funded budget will be a challenge in the coming year. We have already pared our subscriptions to journals and continuations to the bone. The fund raising activities of our spectacular friends group, holding another “Royal Affair” in the coming year will help, but not immediately. We also will need to be clear about priorities when it comes to staff time. One major development looming on the horizon is our migration to a new online catalog system. The PALS system, in use now for more than fourteen years, will be phased out in the next few years as the state’s libraries go onto the Aleph system. Our migration, scheduled for the Fall of 2002, will absorb an enormous amount of time and effort since it not only affects cataloging operations, but also acquisitions, budget management, circulation, reserves, interlibrary-loan, periodicals, government documents, reference and instruction—in short, it will have an impact our infrastructure in a myriad of ways. As we set goals in the coming year we will have to be mindful that with our small staff we will have to be realistic about priorities.
Plus ça change . . . Though we are facing many changes in the year ahead, we benefit from having had for many years a singular view of an unchanging mission: to provide excellent support for teaching and learning. That focus was clear to Odrun Peterson as she planned our current facility many years ago. In the coming years, we will continue to seek ways to fulfill that mission in a continually changing environment.
Lynn Burg attended a conference, “Eek-It’s E-Books”
at the University of Minnesota in September; She also attended a conference for
women in Minneapolis and the Enhancing Quality Staff conference at the
University of Minnesota in May.
Diane Christensen attended the “Eek-It’s E-Books” conference
as well as a conference for women in Minneapolis and the Enhancing Quality
Staff conference at the University of Minnesota in May. She also served as
Chair of the campus-wide Staff Personnel Committee.
Howard Cohrt contributed several book reviews to Lutheran
Libraries and served as secretary and treasurer of the Gustavus chapter of
Phi Beta Kappa.
Barbara Fister coauthored two papers at the
Association of College and Research Libraries conference in March and served on
a panel on implementing standards for information literacy. She continued to
serve on the advisory board of ACRL’s Institute for Information Literacy. She
worked with Diana Hacker on revisions to the Bedford Handbook (6th
edition) and Research and Documentation in an Electronic Age (3rd
edition) and published an article, "Elmore Leonard's Legman: A Full-Time
Researcher Helps the Reknowned Mystery Writer Keep it Real." American
Libraries 32.4 (April 2001): 82-84. In May she conducted a workshop for
faculty at Concordia College (Moorhead) on assessing student learning as part
of a pilot project on information literacy.
Kelly Francek attended three seminars: Supervision of
People, Conflict Resolution, and How to Stay Calm and Productive Under
Pressure.
Sandee Georgacarakos was elected to the ExLibris
Migration Advisory Group to represent circulation subsystem users. She also
served on an ad hoc PALS evaluation group for electronic reserves and completed
a graduate course.
Mike Haeuser served on the College Libraries Committee
of the Council on Library and Information Resources. He also served on the
campus Judicial Board and on the selection committee for the Guild of St.
Ansgar.
Jan Jensen was elected as a staff member to serve on
a college-wide Board of Trustees planning committee.
Kathie Martin facilitated a session on time
management at the annual conference of the Minnesota Library Association in St.
Paul and attended the MINITEX Interlibrary Loan conference. She served as the
Interlibrary Loan Subsystems Group representative to the PALS User Council. In
addition to working with the SSPIN membership committee, she was involved in
planning BranchOut 2001.
Dan Mollner served as College Librarian/Department
Chair during the Fall and January terms. In addition to attending several state
and national conferences, he gave a presentation on assessing student learning
outcomes in academic libraries at the Minnesota Library Association Annual
Conference. He served on the Faculty Senate and was elected to a college-wide
Board of Trustees planning committee.
Jay Nordstrom served as a Serials Subsystem Group
representative to the PALS User Council and was reelected to serve in the
upcoming year. She also completed two courses toward a degree.
Sylvia Straub attended a conference for women in
Bloomington in November as well as the Enhancing Quality Staff workshop at the
University of Minnesota in May. She also served on the selection committee for
the Outstanding Administrative Employee Award and was co-coordinator of the
Campus Cancer Support Group.
Michelle Anderson Twait attended a conference,
“Eek-It’s E-Books” at the University of Minnesota in September as well as
“Creating Partnerships, Creating Scholarship,” a JSTOR conference sponsored by
the Minnesota Private College Council. She also presented “Search and Ye Shall
Find: Effectively Using the Internet” on campus in November, January, and
March. She was awarded a Research Scholarship, and Creativity Grant to pursue
research on the relationship between women’s club movements, women’s trade
unions, and libraries.
Don Zhou attended the annual MINITEX Interlibrary Loan conference.
|
1999-2000 |
2000-2001 |
|
Collection
Statistics |
|
|
|
books,
scores, cd-roms, continuations |
|
|
|
volumes
added |
7,974 |
8,654 |
|
volumes
withdrawn |
1,055 |
2,583 |
|
volumes-total |
267,677 |
273,748 |
|
microtext |
|
|
|
microfilm
added |
150 |
143 |
|
microfilm
total |
10,892 |
11,035 |
|
microfiche
added |
297 |
4 |
|
microfiche
total |
20,639 |
20,643 |
|
audio-visual |
|
|
|
audio-visual
added |
667 |
502 |
|
audio-visual
withdrawn |
13 |
88 |
|
audio-visual
total |
14,993 |
15,407 |
|
government
documents |
|
|
|
paper
added |
1,541 |
2,102 |
|
microfiche
added |
8,801 |
5,971 |
|
electronic
added |
198 |
190 |
|
paper
withdrawn |
1,485 |
3,267 |
|
microfiche
withdrawn |
8,563 |
6,613 |
|
electronic
withdrawn |
70 |
95 |
|
paper
total |
107,968 |
106,803 |
|
microfiche
total |
168,854 |
168,212 |
|
electronic
total |
170 |
265 |
|
periodicals |
|
|
|
current
subscriptions |
1,061 |
1,020 |
|
periodicals-total
titles |
1,990 |
1,986 |
|
periodicals-electronic
titles |
229 |
6,794 |
|
|
|
|
Service
Statistics |
|
|
|
audio-visual
services |
|
|
|
video and
DVD purchased |
232 |
231 |
|
AV
classroom use (AV I and II) |
1,469 |
1,298 |
|
AV
classroom use (preview rooms) |
1,928 |
1,351 |
|
library
instruction |
|
|
|
orientation
tours-new students attending |
503 |
n/a |
|
orientation
tours-new faculty attending |
9 |
n/a |
|
course-related
sessions-students attending |
1,546 |
1,832 |
|
course-related
sessions-number of sessions |
90 |
108 |
|
other
tours and workshops-people attending |
64 |
40 |
|
circulation
services |
|
|
|
circulation-general
collection |
29,743 |
29,499 |
|
circulation-browsing
collection |
348 |
1,252 |
|
circulation-reserves |
8,454 |
10,289 |
|
circulation-gov.
docs |
93 |
50 |
|
circulation-AV
materials |
2,613 |
2,393 |
|
circulation-GAC
circulation |
49,667 |
51,461 |
|
circulation-external
circulation |
2,371 |
2,231 |
|
discharges |
45,739 |
47,618 |
|
circulation-total |
53,976 |
63,704 |
|
exits |
286,231 |
308,536 |
|
interlibrary
loan |
|
|
|
from
Minitex and PALS-books |
2,467 |
4,037 |
|
from
Minitex and PALS-articles |
5,037 |
3,769 |
|
from TdS
and out of state-books and articles |
149 |
168 |
|
total
requests made by GAC |
7,653 |
7,974 |
|
from GAC
to Minitex and PALS-books |
2,141 |
2,498 |
|
from GAC
to Minitex and PALS-articles |
154 |
178 |
|
from GAC
to TdS and out of state-books |
259 |
271 |
|
from GAC
to TdS and out of state-articles |
11 |
5 |
|
total
requests filled by GAC |
2,565 |
2,952 |
|
total
interlibrary loan activity |
10,728 |
11,357 |
Budget
figures
|
budget 1999/00 |
budget
2000/2001 |
actual
spent |
over/under |
|
Budget
Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries,
Wages, Benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
faculty
salaries |
$328,808.00 |
$340,492.00 |
$340,491.87 |
$.13 |
|
support
staff wages |
$228,049.00 |
233,121.60 |
245,676.70 |
(12,555.10) |
|
student
assistant wages |
$121,824.60 |
136,885.27 |
136,885.27 |
-- |
|
student
assistants summer/holiday |
$27,612.00 |
35,235.00 |
29,858.43 |
5,376.57 |
|
academic
assistant stipends |
$550.00 |
550.00 |
550.00 |
-- |
|
allocated
benefits |
$177,453.13 |
186,130.61 |
186,130.61 |
-- |
|
total
salaries |
$884,296.73 |
$932,414.48 |
$939,592.88 |
$(7,178.40) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrestrictedbudget |
|
|
|
|
|
acquisitions—books |
$- |
$- |
$258.17 |
$(258.17) |
|
acquisitions—films |
$2,000.00 |
$- |
$(64.75) |
$64.75 |
|
acquisitions--government
docs |
$500.00 |
$- |
$- |
$- |
|
acquisitions--microforms |
$15,400.00 |
$13,940.00 |
$17,749.35 |
$(3,809.35) |
|
acquisitions—recordings |
$3,500.00 |
$3,500.00 |
$3,229.46 |
$270.54 |
|
acquisitions—periodicals |
$168,250.00 |
$172,475.00 |
$155,688.85 |
$16,786.15 |
|
acquisitions--standing
orders |
$48,591.00 |
$25,658.00 |
$48,454.29 |
$(22,796.29) |
|
acquisitions—electronic |
$45,091.00 |
$55,600.00 |
$58,465.07 |
$(2,865.07) |
|
unres.
acq. Subtotal |
$283,332.00 |
$271,173.00 |
$283,780.44 |
$(12,607.44) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
archives
office supplies |
$1,400.00 |
$1,400.00 |
$584.92 |
$815.08 |
|
archives
meetings and wks. |
$500.00 |
$500.00 |
$110.99 |
$389.01 |
|
audio
visual services |
$200.00 |
$250.00 |
$28.25 |
$221.75 |
|
av film
rental |
$150.00 |
$150.00 |
$(26.61) |
$176.61 |
|
bibliographic
services |
$19,950.00 |
$20,000.00 |
$25,277.00 |
$(5,277.00) |
|
book and
periodical binding |
$9,000.00 |
$9,500.00 |
$9,919.82 |
$(419.82) |
|
computer
equipment |
$21,124.00 |
$34,000.00 |
$33,506.30 |
$493.70 |
|
computer
supplies |
$1,500.00 |
$1,000.00 |
$1,240.05 |
$(240.05) |
|
computer
software |
$1,000.00 |
$500.00 |
$625.45 |
$(125.45) |
|
consultants
and honoraria |
$250.00 |
$250.00 |
$- |
$250.00 |
|
copying
equipment |
$12,500.00 |
$12,500.00 |
$4,603.79 |
$7,896.21 |
|
dept.
chair fund |
- |
$2,600.00 |
$2,600.00 |
$- |
|
dues and
memberships |
$1,000.00 |
$850.00 |
$875.00 |
$(25.00) |
|
Entertainment |
$500.00 |
$500.00 |
$1,433.91 |
$(933.91) |
|
equipment
repair |
$1,500.00 |
$1,500.00 |
$1,554.86 |
$(54.86) |
|
library
equipment |
$16,100.00 |
$5,000.00 |
$11,907.70 |
$(6,907.70) |
|
library
supplies |
$5,000.00 |
$6,200.00 |
$6,236.55 |
$(36.55) |
|
Lutheran
church college su. |
$500.00 |
$500.00 |
$208.91 |
$291.09 |
|
meetings
and workshops |
$2,700.00 |
$2,700.00 |
$1,656.60 |
$1,043.40 |
|
office
supplies |
$2,000.00 |
$2,000.00 |
$2,803.11 |
$(803.11) |
|
Pals |
$43,000.00 |
$45,000.00 |
$41,679.00 |
$3,321.00 |
|
Postage |
$500.00 |
$ 900.00 |
$846.22 |
$53.78 |
|
printing
and reproduction |
$4,000.00 |
$4,000.00 |
$5,285.49 |
$(1,285.49) |
|
Telephone |
$1,000.00 |
$750.00 |
$603.12 |
$146.88 |
|
Travel |
$3,000.00 |
$3,000.00 |
$3,266.62 |
$(266.62) |
|
subtotal
op.budget |
$148,374.00 |
$155,550.00 |
$156,827.05 |
$(1,277.05) |
|
total
unres.budget |
$431,706.00 |
$426,723.00 |
$440,607.49 |
$(13,884.49) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
restricted
budget |
|
|
|
|
|
C&M
Johnson Heritage |
$2,257.07 |
$2,661.07 |
$- |
$2,661.07 |
|
Emeroy
Johnson Fund |
$6,984.18 |
$6,403.20 |
$- |
$6,403.20 |
|
Adolphson,
George |
- |
$2,885.00 |
$2,472.48 |
$412.52 |
|
Alexis
Library Fund |
$874.00 |
$1,049.87 |
$1,037.48 |
$12.39 |
|
Almen
Vickner Fund |
$2,100.00 |
$12,260.29 |
$2,005.88 |
$10,254.41 |
|
Bush
Library Endowment |
$23,837.25 |
$29,452.93 |
$27,358.76 |
$2,094.17 |
|
Carleson,
E.M. |
$2,590.04 |
$2,672.15 |
$24.50 |
$2,647.65 |
|
Ebba
Carlson Biology Fund |
$3,008.92 |
$2,896.68 |
$2,390.04 |
$506.64 |
|
Florence
Frederickson Fund |
$2,001.00 |
$2,323.85 |
$2,262.24 |
$61.61 |
|
Gustavus
Library Assoc. |
$ 74,014.25 |
$97,773.96 |
$81,518.38 |
$16,255.58 |
|
GLA
Diversity |
$3,823.44 |
$4,000.00 |
$3,534.53 |
$465.47 |
|
General
Edowment |
$102.36 |
$729.92 |
$662.19 |
$67.73 |
|
Lundholm/Hasselquist |
$10,000.00 |
$48,434.79 |
$12,174.02 |
$36,260.77 |
|
Maria
Sigurdson Fund |
$562.00 |
$615.00 |
$405.78 |
$209.22 |
|
Misfeldt
Library Fund |
$107.00 |
$128.58 |
$74.78 |
$53.80 |
|
Moe
Edowment for MN Stat. |
$2,136.00 |
$3,848.54 |
$1,437.14 |
$2,411.40 |
|
NEH
Challenge-Curriculum |
$50,538.64 |
$64,450.97 |
$50,582.21 |
$13,868.76 |
|
Surdna/Women's
Studies |
$5,948.44 |
$6,871.47 |
$6,407.28 |
$464.19 |
|
Lolita
Paulson Fund |
$19,505.28 |
$25,212.93 |
$16,954.02 |
$8,258.91 |
|
Scandinavian
Studies |
$15,050.46 |
$19,904.33 |
$11,236.93 |
$8,667.40 |
|
Beilgard
Int'l Business |
$2,637.75 |
$898.56 |
$257.48 |
$641.08 |
|
Johnson
acquisition |
$200.00 |
$200.00 |
$- |
$200.00 |
|
Lutheran
Heritage Room |
$865.82 |
$865.82 |
$- |
$865.82 |
|
Special
Library Acquisitions |
$7,781.46 |
$4,395.43 |
$2,215.09 |
$2,180.34 |
|
subtotal
restricted |
$236,925.36 |
$340,935.34 |
$225,011.21 |
$115,924.13 |
|
total
acquisitions |
$509,950.29 |
$601,978.25 |
$506,319.17 |
$95,659.08 |
|
total
acquisitions and operations |
$668,631.36 |
$767,658.34 |
$665,618.70 |
$102,039.64 |
|
total
with salaries and benefits$1,552,928.09 |
$1,700,072.82 |
$1,605,211.58 |
$94,861.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last updated, 8/21/01
Back to Library Home Page