Interview with
Dr. Bill Nelson
Library Director at Augusta State University
by Scott Cohen
July 2003
The issue is not as much a matter of the new SACS standards being better or worse, rather they are different from the old ones. The superceded standards were very prescriptive, with well over 400 "must" statements, twenty-two relating directly to libraries. The new (2004) standards are much less prescriptive when stating library and institutional requirements, using subjective terms such as "appropriate resources," "appropriate facilities and services," "adequate library resources," "sufficient collections and resources," "sufficient number of qualified staff–with appropriate education or experience," and "adequate physical facilities."
I view the new SACS standards as both a challenge and an opportunity. On the one hand, there is much room for disagreement when an institution attempts to determine "adequacy" or "sufficiency" of library resources. If there is disagreement between the library and the administration, the library viewpoint will certainly not prevail without additional data. On the other hand, I see an opportunity for the institution to do a comprehensive review of the academic library using the ACRL "Standards for College Libraries (2000 edition)" or its successor, ACRL "Standards for Libraries in Higher Education," which is now in draft form and expected to be approved in 2004.
By using this comprehensive, national academic library standard librarians have the opportunity to review all aspects of the academic library, not just those mentioned in the SACS standards. My suggestion is that academic libraries nearing a regional accreditation review use the ACRL standards to comprehensively evaluate the library. The results of the evaluation can then be used to draw conclusions regarding the adequacy and sufficiency of library resources. The conclusions are then supported by the data collected and analyzed during the evaluation. The SACS review committee thus will have a comprehensive and coherent evaluation and supporting data on which to base its own evaluation.
b. How can institutional effectiveness become seamless in the academic library? What are the ways that setting goals and objectives and measuring them can become a part of everyday library management?
Academic librarians must recognize that "student success" is the ultimate measure of institutional effectiveness and the library must actively contribute to this effort wherever and whenever possible. It is virtually impossible to "prove" that a student is better off as a result of attending an institution for four (or more) years; proving that the library made a measurable difference is even more difficult. However, the academic library should identify and use multiple measures that indicate in a positive or negative way that the library is making a difference. Where such indicators together point to a "positive" outcome, then one can assume the library is doing an adequate job in that area. However, in areas where multiple measures indicate a "negative" trend, the library must decide if this area is important enough to pursue the root cause. If so, then focus groups or other more precise (and more expensive) measures should be employed to determine the nature of the problem and its severity. Based on this knowledge, targeted plans for improvement can be made.
Libraries are already collecting some data that can be used in outcomes assessment. The academic library should make a comprehensive review of what is being collected and the usefulness of the data. One way to take advantage of collected input and output data is to convert them to ratios. This will help to avoid a strictly "numbers game" and facilitate meaningful peer comparison.
My suggestion for incorporating planning, measurement, and assessment into everyday library management is to use the ACRL library standards (as discussed below) as the basis for a continuous improvement cycle.
c. How can the use of the ACRL Standards for College Libraries 2000 Edition improve the management of the library?
This edition of the ACRL standards for College Libraries was the first ACRL standard to incorporate outcomes assessment, which is now almost universally required by regional accrediting associations and specialized accrediting bodies. By using this comprehensive, national academic library standard libraries have the opportunity to review all aspects of the academic library, not just those specifically mentioned in the SACS standards. Use of these standards can provide the library evaluation required by all of the groups that accredit a particular institution. The conclusion and supporting data from application of the Standards can then be reformatted as necessary to meet the particular reporting requirements. This would relieve the library of the necessity to collect and evaluate the specific data and present it in the specific format required by each accrediting body. It allows the library to conduct its own coherent and ongoing evaluation plan, reporting the data as needed to meet accreditation requirements.
Use of these Standards also facilitates the comparison of data among peers because all peers using the standards would be collecting the same data. Furthermore, once one library in a group of peers aggregates and analyzes the data, it is available to all other members of the peer group. This onerous task of collecting and aggregating the data can be shared among institutions. For example, in a group of five peers, a given library could accomplish the comprehensive collection of data once every five years, or each library could collect only a fifth of the total each year.
d. What do you feel are the main trends affecting academic libraries today?
(1) Graying of the Profession and Recruitment - The large number of librarians nearing retirement must be replaced with new recruits to the profession. This must be a top priority for all librarians and library organizations.
(2) Staff Training - Professional development for librarians and staff development for paraprofessionals is a continuing need in order to meet the challenges of technology and to train new recruits.
(3) Low Salaries - Library salaries are generally low for the degrees, training, and expertise required. This makes recruitment even more difficult.
(4) Library Funding - Adequate library funding is a challenge in good economic times and a critical problem when institutional budgets are lean.
(5) Collection Development - Libraries are faced with escalating costs for electronic resources while simultaneously facing the necessity to maintain print collections.
(6) Advocacy - There is a continuing need to advocate for the library within the institution. Librarians must develop more expertise in outreach. Leading and/or actively participating in a campus information literacy initiative is one way librarians can serve and influence the institution while being an advocate for libraries.
(7) Planning and Assessment - Higher education institutions are expected to be accountable–to parents, to funding bodies, and to regulatory and accrediting bodies. The institution and the library must continually plan, assess outcomes, and produce a revised plan based on the assessment. Budget allocations should be based on planning priorities. Ideally, this would produce continuous improvement, which will please all constituents.
e. What is the future of the academic library? How can we maintain our role in the forefront of of the campus?
In the future (as in the recent past) academic libraries will change. My opinion is that the change will affect different institutions and their libraries in different ways. I believe that part of this will be due to the attitude and beliefs of the campus administrators, but part of it will also depend on the librarians. Libraries who are actively involved on campus and informed on the challenges and opportunities that higher education institutions face, will likely meet the most success in impacting their own institution and in shaping the library facilities and services in the most beneficial way. In the end, "student success" is how institutions (and their associated libraries) are measured. Visible contributions to advancement of the vision and goals of the institution will be a necessity to maintain viable library services, and is a necessity for a leadership role in the institution.
Libraries and librarians are generally well accepted on campus, but tend to come under more pressure during tough economic times. A book mark in my possession has the following statement, "Libraries will get you through times of no money better than money will get you though times of no libraries." This and similar ideas should be shared with the campus leaders before the institution is in the midst of a budget crunch. At the same time librarians must ensure that library services and personnel are indeed making tangible contributions to the campus.
William Neal (Bill) Nelson
Dr. Bill Nelson has been Professor and Library Director at Augusta State University in Augusta, Georgia, since 1993. He received B.A.s from Centenary College in both English and History. Post-graduate degrees include an M.A. and a Ph.D. in Latin American Studies, and an M.L.S., all from Louisiana State University. He has also served as library director at Mobile College, Carson-Newman College, and Samford University. His research and publication interests include ALA and ACRL standards, SACS accreditation, and the GALILEO Project (Georgia Library Learning Online). Bill chaired the GALILEO Steering Committee for two years and just completed two years of service on the GIL (GALILEO Interconnected Libraries) Steering Committee. He currently chairs the ACRL Committee on the Status of Academic Librarians and the ACRL College Libraries Section (CLS) Standards Committee. Bill was also a member of the ACRL Task Force on Academic Library Outcomes Assessment.
The CLS Standards Committee produced the current edition of the Standards in 2000. Bill has been appointed to the new ACRL College and Research Libraries Standards Task Force where the CLS, ULS, and CJCLS sections are working together on a common set of standards for all academic libraries. In 2003 the task force has produced a final draft of the ACRL "Standards for Libraries in Higher Education," which will replace all type-of-library standards once all suggested modifications have been incorporated and approved.
email: wnelson@aug.edu
phone: 706-737-1745
fax: 706-667-4415