Annual Report 2016

CONUL Staff Training & Development Committee

December 2016

1

CONTENTS

ANLTC Committee 2016 2

Key Activities 3 - 4

ANLTC Programme Review 5 - 13

Hon. Treasurer’s Report 2016 14

Appendix 1: CONUL Conference Summary 16

2

ANLTC COMMITTEE, 2016

Ellen Breen, (Dublin City University): Programme Evaluator

Sally Bridge, (Queens University Belfast): Website Editor

Ciaran Creggan, (University of Ulster): Committee Member

Bernadette Cunningham, (Royal Irish Academy): External Liaison & Communication

Helen Fallon, (Maynooth University): Chairperson & Co-ordinator of the Library Assistant Bursary and Chairperson CONUL Conference

Ursula Gavin, (Dublin Institute of Technology): Website Editor

Valerie King, (University College Cork): Committee Member

Elizabeth Kirwan, (National Library of Ireland): Assistant Minute Taker and Secretary to the CONUL Conference Committee

Jessie Kurtz, (Trinity College Dublin): Treasurer

Ciara McCaffrey, (University of Limerick): Minute Secretary

Ann Mitchell, (National University of Ireland, Galway): Committee Member & Co-ordinator

of the ANLTC Research Award

Kathryn Smith (Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland) Committee Member

Carmel O’Sullivan, (University College Dublin): Committee Member and programme co-ordinator of the CONUL Conference Organising Committee

3

Key Activities

2016 was a busy and productive year. The Committee met at regular intervals, four times, in

the course of the year on 9 Feb, 18 April, 16 June and 28 November and ran a total of 8

training events. In addition, the committee led the organisation of the CONUL conference

and designed and planned the inaugural Dublin ERASMUS Programme and ran the

biannual Library Assistant Award and the Librarian Research Award.

Library Assistant Award

This award was for a blog post of 500-800 words. A high number of entries was received

from across the ANLTC member institutions. The themes explored included new

technologies, blogging, open access, buildings and collections. First, joint second and joint

third prizes were awarded and the judging panel highly commended five entries. The prize-

winning and highly commended entries were published on the libfocus blog. The overall

winner was for a post entitled Tradition and technology and the Glucksman Library by Seán

Cafferkey, University of Limerick. The prize was presented at the CONUL Conference. A

detailed article on the award, written by committee member Katherine Smith, was published

in SCONUL Focus.

Research Award

The biannual Research Award received six submissions. The winners of the €2,000 bursary

were Johanna Archibold (RCSI) and Michelle Breen (UL) for their submission entitled

‘Amplifying CONUL’s voice: Exploring how Ireland’s research libraries can be ‘heard’ in

national and international contexts.’ The Award was formally presented at the CONUL

conference.

CONUL Conference

The ANLTC Committee appointed 3 members to the 2016 conference organising committee:

Helen Fallon (Chair), Carmel O’Sullivan (Programme Organiser), Elizabeth Kirwan

(Secretary).

In addition CONUL institutions nominated the following representatives to the committee: Elaine Bean (Maynooth University); Justine Bennett (University of Limerick);Jack Hyland (Dublin City University); Allison Kavanagh (Dublin Institute of Technology); Eoin McCarney (University College Dublin); John McManus (Trinity College Dublin); Martin O’Connor (University College Cork)

The Committee met nine times on the following dates;

15 October – TCD

25 November – TCD

20 January – TCD

24 February – TCD

20 April – National Library

03 May – TCD

18 May – National Library

30 May – Sheraton Hotel, Athlone

23 June – Post-conference meeting, National Library

13 July – closing meeting with CP – National Library

4

A programme sub-committee was established and this group met six times to progress the

programme.

As with 2015, a commercial company – Conference Partners (CP) was employed. They continued to manage finances, registration, liaison with the conference venue and other conference-associated tasks. Their role was extended to managing the conference website and the conference abstract system.

The conference took place in the Sheraton Hotel, Athlone, on 1st and 2nd of June 2016. It

was attended by 157 delegates (including 34 company/sponsor representatives). All CONUL

institutions were represented.

The conference theme was ‘Going Further Together: Collaboration in Irish Academic and

Research Libraries’ and the call for submissions invited 20 minute and 10 minute

presentations and poster presentations. The call resulted in 47 proposals. 41 submissions

were accepted from a total of 16 institutions – all 13 CONUL Institutions were represented

and three non-CONUL institutions (Irish Hospice Foundation, Galway-Mayo IT and The

Marine Institute)

The final structure of the programme comprised:

1 x 60 minute CONUL Director’s forum (plenary)

2 x 45 minute presentations for the two invited keynote speakers (plenary)

2 x 10 minute presentations for the two gold sponsors (plenary)

15 x 10 minute presentations (all parallel)

15 x 20 minute presentations (8 plenaries and 7 parallel)

11 x poster presentations (including the winning CONUL Bursary poster)

17%

15%

12%

8%8%

7%

7%

7%

4%3%

2%2% 1%

Attendees By InstitutionUCD (21)

TCD (18)

MU (15)

NUIG (10)

UCC (10)

DCU (9)

NLI (9)

UL (8)

DIT (5)

RCSI (4)

QUB (3)

RIA (2)

UU (1)

OTHER (8)

Cork Institute of Technology (1)Galway Mayo Institute of Technology (1)Health Service Executive (1)Irish Film Institute (1)Irish Hospice Foundation (1)Marine Institute (1)Marsh's Library (1)

5

Overall satisfaction was rated very high by the delegates with 92% of respondents rating the

conference as either ‘Excellent’ (56%) or ‘Very Good’ (36%)

The CONUL Bursary – for a first time presenter - was won by Lynne Gault and Mark Bennett

from Queens University Belfast.

There were two invited Keynote Speakers, Dr Susan Gibbons, University Librarian and

Deputy Provost for Libraries and Scholarly Communication, Yale University and Ivy

Anderson, Director of Collections at the California Digital Library.

The programme included a CONUL Director’s panel Q&A Session. The CONUL Strategy

‘Ireland’s Memory. Ireland’s Discovery’ was also launched during the conference.

A full conference report was submitted to the CONUL Directors in August 2016.

CONUL Strategy

Two members of the group, Carmel O’Sullivan and Ciara McCaffrey, together with

Christopher Pressler, University Librarian, DCU, led on CONUL’s strategic objective to

review the structure and membership of all existing CONUL special interest groups and

committees in line with the strategy 2016-2019. This work resulted in a recommendation to

the CONUL Board on the 8th of December 2016 on the number, type, structure and

composition of CONUL sub-groups which was approved by the Board.

Dublin Erasmus Week

MU, TCD, DIT, UCD, DCU, NLI, RCSI agreed to explore having a collaborative ERASMUS

week and initial scoping work was done in the reporting period.

Training Events

Eight training events were run over the course of 2016 at venues across the country, with a

total attendance of 197 participants. This was a decrease on the previous year and may be

accounted for by the fact that 9 events were run in the previous year; two of these were

innovation days which attracted significant attendance. Quite a number of the committee

were also very actively taken up with organising the Dublin Erasmus Week and three

members served on the CONUL conference committee.

Full details of the training events offered, along with related feedback and analysis, are

included, courtesy of Ellen Breen (DCU).

Finance

During the year under review ANLTC achieved a healthy balance sheet with was €15,829.61

to hand at year end.

The committee was delighted to welcome Kathryn Smith to the Committee at our April

meeting. Finally, may I take this opportunity to thank all my ANLTC Committee colleagues

for their untiring work, good humour, commitment and support throughout 2016. It has been

a great pleasure and a wonderful learning experience to be part of this committee for the last

16 years.

Helen Fallon, Chair, 201

6

ANLTC Programme Review 2016

The 2016 programme was very successful with 197 participating in 8 training events. The

reason for a decrease in numbers on the previous year likely because one innovation day

was held, rather than two, which was the case in the previous year and there was one event

fewer.

The following (compiled by Ellen Breen) is a listing of the courses and seminars offered in

2016. The review of events is based on data and information compiled from course

evaluation forms completed by attendees.

Event Title and Date Host &

Location

Participants

Using multimedia tools to present information 21st

January 2016

UU 10

Developing a marketing and promotion focus in Irish

Libraries: what is it and are we really doing it?

19th April 2016

UCD (at

TCD)

31

Digital Marketing Toolkit

29th April 2016

DIT 19

Advanced Search Strategy Design

3rd May 2016

NUIG 19

Collection Management in CONUL Libraries – Sharing

Experiences

21st November 2016

RCSI

/UCD (at

RCSI)

29

Exploring the Changing Role of the Subject Librarian 7th

December 2016

MU 43

Academically Valid Speed Reading

16th December 2016

DCU 18

7

Innovation Day 2016: What’s New @ The National Library

of Ireland

12th December 2016

NLI 28

Course Attendance

Year Number of Events Number of

Participants

2016 8 197

2015 9 296

2014 6 121

2013 8 160

2012 3 55

Overall Response to the 2016 Programme

The overall response to the programme this year was extremely positive. In the case of all

courses, 100% of respondents agreed or agreed strongly that they were satisfied with the

course.

80

82

84

86

88

90

92

94

96

98

100

ANLTC01

ANLTC02

ANLTC03

ANLTC04

ANLTC05

ANLTC06

ANLTC07

ANLTC08

8

When asked if their objectives for attending the course were met, responses ranged

between 90 and 100 percent.

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

ANLTC01

ANLTC02

ANLTC03

ANLTC04

ANLTC05

ANLTC06

ANLTC07

ANLTC08

9

Individual Course Evaluation: Summaries

1. Using multimedia tools to present information

“Great to get Phil Bradley”

“Demonstration of media tools, networking with librarians form other libraries was most

useful”

2. Developing a marketing and promotion focus in Irish Libraries: what is it and are we

really doing it?

“5 Stars to Ned Potter as a presenter who demonstrated good knowledge of subject” “This was a fantastic course, really well planned and absolutely necessary to the needs of

libraries. More like this, please!”

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Content /Design

Presentation Venue /Admin

OverallSatisfaction

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Content /Design

Presentation Venue /Admin

OverallSatisfaction

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

10

3. Digital Marketing Toolkit

“Fantastic day again with Ned Potter…he really knows his stuff. Really helps you choose what will work best for your library. Thanks” “Really practical and interesting”

4. Advanced Search Strategy Design

“Course was excellent – good pace, good mix of activities “ “Text mining tools – very useful”

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Content /Design

Presentation Venue /Admin

OverallSatisfaction

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Content /Design

Presentation Venue /Admin

OverallSatisfaction

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

11

5. Collection Management in CONUL Libraries – Sharing Experiences

“Very useful day, great to hear about other libraries and the challenges they face regarding

Collection Management”

“Very important that all grades could take something out of it”

6. Exploring the Changing Role of the Subject Librarian

“The two keynote speakers were really well picked and suited the topic perfectly”

“Very enjoyable and informative seminar”

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Content &Design

Presentation Venue &Admin

Overall

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Content &Design

Presentation Venue &Admin

Overall

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

12

7. Academically Valid Speed Reading.

“Very useful course loved the way Steve used the white board”

“Excellent course - very practical and thought provoking”

8. Innovation Day 2016: What’s New @ The National Library of Ireland

“Very interesting and informative”

“It was a pleasure to visit the NLI and see how committed the staff are “

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Content /Design

Presentation Venue /Admin

OverallSatisfaction

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Content &Design

Presentation Venue &Admin

Overall

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

13

Future Events – Suggestions

Below is a list of the suggested themes and topics for future events received via the course

evaluation forms:

Collection Development

More information on library management systems and information on e-book platforms

Serials

Collection Development Policies – a comparison

Reading Lists

Event(s) focused on digitization functions and processes within Libraries and Archives

Marketing / Outreach/Communication

As my new role is in marketing and engagement I would like more courses/seminars/workshops in this area. Maybe good examples of what has actually worked in different areas e.g. outreach, community engagement, co-operation with other college services, 1st year orientation.

More on digital communications and new marketing tools/projects x 5

More on marketing

Video production - editing

Promotion of the library

We need to discuss relationship between library and lecturers

Blogging skills

Research and Information Support

Searching for qualitative studies

More on advanced searching methods and search strategy design x 4

Advanced Searching on core databases such as Embase, Medline and comparing results for a similar search topic

Detailed database use

Authorship and ownership – negotiating recognition for search strategies

More sessions on other aspects of systematic reviews Teaching and Learning

Student transition to HE and student retention

Developing digital literacy skills

IT / Quality Management / Analytics

How to implement and maintain a Quality Management System in a Library

Perhaps something on web analytics or something more web technology based in general

Workshops on optimizing libraries’ positions in web searches

14

Training on working with library statistics, both for systems librarians and for those working with websites and social media. SEO.

Search engine optimization – practical workshop x 2

More IT based courses

Multimedia courses e.g. Camtasia

Use of digital imagery

Patron metrics, SCONUL stats.

Strategy planning

Strategy Planning Day

Project Management would be useful

More high level accredited strategic management courses

Innovation Days/Exchanges / Visits

Visits to other libraries (to view other library management systems and see how staff areas are laid out)

More similar information days from other National bodies – Museum, Nat Archives, RIA etc.

Opportunities to exchange experiences between libraries

Events such as Innovation Days – enjoyed meeting other Library Assistants

General

Career Development Planning

Employability

Examples of librarians impacting outside library field/how to do this etc.

Something on the changing role of the Librarian / Library Assistant to tie in with ‘Innovation’ theme

Creativity

Critical Writing

15

Hon. Treasurer’s Annual Report 2016

During 2016 there were 8 ANLTC courses/events as listed below, and total of 197 participants took part in the courses. Course fees remained at €120 for all regular one-day courses; €60 for seminars; no cost for Library visits [with ANLTC paying refreshment costs]; and specialist courses priced to cover costs. Bank balance at 31st December 2016 was €15,829.61 compared to €19,078.39 at year end of 2015, with 109 transactions in all (57 payments received, 52 outgoing expenditure). The ANLTC also paid for CONUL Conference Committee meeting expenses and CONUL Conference prizes (including the €2,000 Research Award. TOTAL = €2,794.58 . Bank Activity

Lodged Withdrew Bank /Gov’t charges

€ 12,430.00 € 14,929.55 € 161.82

ANLTC courses 2016

Course Library Library Costs Income Outcome

2016/01 Using multimedia tools to present information (10)

UU €1,373.75 €1,000.00 -€373.75

2016/02 Advanced Search Strategy Design (19)

NUIG €5,452.48 €2,850.00

-€2,602.48

2016/03 Developing a marketing & PR focus (34)

UCD at TCD

€1,956.99 €3,200.00 €1,243.01

2016/04 Digital Marketing Toolkit (19)

DIT €1,734.78 €2,280.00 €545.22

2016/05 Collection Management - Sharing Experiences (24)

RCSI & UCD

€855.11 €1,440.00 €584.89

2016/06 The changing role of Subject Librarian (32)

MU €1,184.26 €2,240.00 €1,055.74

2016/07 (Academically Valid) Speed Reading (18)

DCU €1,327.00 €1,080.00 -€247.00

2016/08 Innovation Day 2016 (29)

NLI €469.25 €0 -€469.25

TOTAL 2016

185

€13,498.51

€12,650

Loss of: -€263.62

Respectfully submitted by:

Jessie Kurtz, ANLTC Treasurer

16

Appendix 1 CONUL CONFERENCE SUMMARY

August 2016

17

CONUL CONFERENCE

Planning for the CONUL 2016 Conference began in summer 2015. The ANLTC Committee

appointed 3 members to the conference organising committee: Helen Fallon (Chair), Carmel

O’Sullivan (Programme Organiser), Elizabeth Kirwan (Secretary). Ellen Breen, who held the

post of Programme Organiser in 2015, stepped down as an ANLTC representative on the

committee.

The Conference took place in the Sheraton Hotel, Athlone, on 1st and 2nd of June 2016. It was

attended by 157 delegates (including 34 company/sponsor representatives). All CONUL

institutions were represented.

ANLTC Representatives

Helen Fallon (Chair)

Carmel O’Sullivan (Programme Organiser)

Elizabeth Kirwan (Secretary)

CONUL Institutions Representatives*

Elaine Bean (Maynooth University)

Justine Bennett (University of Limerick)

Jack Hyland (Dublin City University)

Allison Kavanagh (Dublin Institute of Technology)

Eoin McCarney (University College Dublin)

John McManus (Trinity College Dublin)

Martin O’Connor (University College Cork)

Conference Programme Sub-Committee Members

Carmel O’Sullivan, ANLTC (Chair)

Allison Kavanagh, DIT

Elaine Bean, MU

Eoin McCarney, UCD

Jack Hyland, DCU

John McManus, TCD

Conference Partners Representatives

18

Gráinne Earley

Sinead Lawlor

*Note: not all CONUL institutions opted to nominate a representative

CONFERENCE SURVEY REPORT

There were a total of 123 attendees with representation from all 13 CONUL institutions with

97 responses to the survey.

ATTENA ATTENDANCE

17%

15%

12%

8%8%

7%

7%

7%

4%

3%2%

2% 1%

Attendees By InstitutionUCD (21)

TCD (18)

MU (15)

NUIG (10)

UCC (10)

DCU (9)

NLI (9)

UL (8)

DIT (5)

RCSI (4)

QUB (3)

RIA (2)

UU (1)

OTHER

Cork Institute of Technology (1)Galway Mayo Institute of Technology (1)Health Service Executive (1)Irish Film Institute (1)Irish Hospice Foundation (1)Marine Institute (1)Marsh's Library (1)RCSI Research Unit (1)

19

Q1&2: What was your overall satisfaction rating for the Conference?

Overall satisfaction was very high with 92% of respondents rating the Conference either

“Excellent” or “Very Good”.

Q3: Which part of the Conference did you find most useful?

The presentations were found most useful by 30% of respondents. The variety of the topics

addressed in the presentations also got specific mention (13%).

Several responses indicated that the keynote talks – particularly Susan Gibbons – were most

useful (29%).

The good networking opportunities that the conference provided were also mentioned as

particularly useful (15%).

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Overall Satisfaction Rating

Excellent (56%)

Very Good (36%)

Good (5%)

Fair (2%)

Poor (1%)

20

Q4: Which part of the Conference did you find least useful?

A large number of respondents indicated that all parts of the conference were useful (43%).

10% of respondents indicated that some presentations were not relevant to the theme –

collaboration – of the conference, relevant to their own needs or were too specialised.

The sponsor exhibition and sponsor presentations were rated least useful by a small group (8%).

The tight schedule and the short amount of time available for exhibition and poster viewing

was also highlighted by a small group of respondents (8%).

Feedback in relation to the CONUL Director’s Session and Strategy Launch was mixed. A

relatively small proportion of the survey respondents (6%) indicated that the session was the

most useful part of the conference. However, a similar number (7%) did not feel that the session

worked and indicated that it was the least useful part of the conference.

30%

29%

15%

13%

6%

Most Useful Part of ConferenceTop 5 Mentions as % of Overall Response

Presentations

Keynotes

Networking Opportunities

Variety of Presentations

CONUL Director's Session

21

Q5: Have you any suggestions for improvements to the Conference?

A significant number of responses indicated overall satisfaction with the conference and did

not provide any suggestions for improvements (18%).

There were some suggestions around both the conference venue and the hotel space (21%).

Several respondents felt that a location that is more accessible for delegates from outside

Dublin should be considered and Portlaoise was identified as a potentially suitable alternative

to Athlone. It was also noted that the layout of the conference space over two floors of the

Hotel was not ideal. The main conference rooms and the exhibition and poster space should

ideally be located on a single floor and in close proximity to one another in future.

Suggestions around the Programme (15%) included continuing with a rigorous selection

process to ensure quality papers and potentially supplying a template in order to maximise the

43%

10%8%

8%

7%

Least Useful Part of ConferenceTop 5 Mentions as % of Overall Response

All Useful

Some of the Presentations

Sponsor Exhibition & Talks

Schedule - Too Full

CONUL Strategy Launch

22

impact of presentations. It was also suggested that the conference might benefit from the

inclusion of some workshops.

In relation to the schedule, several attendees felt that the schedule was very tight and that the

days were too long. It was suggested that the second day in particular should finish earlier

(15%). Some also felt that more time should have been allowed for lunch and for breaks (13%)

facilitating increased opportunities for networking and more viewing time of the exhibition and

poster space.

Q6: Are you interested in attending future CONUL conferences?

Over 85% of attendees expressed an interest in attending future CONUL conferences. There

was just one response in the negative, reflecting the high overall satisfaction with the

conference.

21%

18%

15%

15%

13%

Suggestions for ImprovementTop 5 Mentions as % of Overall Response

Location\Venue

None

Programme

Schedule

Longer Breaks

23

Q7: What theme(s) would you like the CONUL 2017 Conference to discuss?

This question elicited a very wide range of responses with Staff Professional Development

achieving the most mentions (16%). This was followed by collections, in particular special or

unique collections and preservation (15%). Open Access (12%), User Experience (9%) and

Outreach & Engagement (7%) were also suggested as potential themes by multiple

respondents.

Q8: Have you any other comments or suggestions?

Most respondents expressed their overall satisfaction with the conference. Comments included

“excellent conference”, “even better than 2015” and “really great conference, talks were

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Interest in Future CONUL Conferences

Yes

Maybe

No

16%

15%

12%

9%7%

Suggested Themes for 2017Top 5 Mentions as % of Overall Response

Professional Development

Special Collections

Open Access

User Experience

Outreach

24

excellent and the opportunity to chat to colleagues is always enjoyable”. Several attendees also

remarked that the event was very well organised and expressed their thanks to the committee

(18%).

It was suggested that the schedule would benefit from longer break times and more time for

networking with peers (14%), echoing the responses to Question 4 (Least Useful) and Question

5 (Suggestions for Improvement).

There was some criticism of the venue and of the hotel facilities and in particular the quality

of the presentation facilities and projector screens in the main room (13%).

Some sponsor feedback suggested that the conference offered poor value for money as too little

time was allowed for viewing the exhibition area. (4%)

30%

18%14%

13%

4%

Any Other Comments or SuggestionsTop 5 Mentions as % of Overall Response

Great Event

Well Organised

Programme & Schedule

Venue & Facilities

Value for Exhibitors