Technical Services Librarian - Homepage - AALL...Hope Breeze Katherine Hedin Private Law Libraries: Betty Roeske Research and Publications: Brian Striman Serials: Margaret McDonald

Technical Services Law Librarian, June, 2002 Page 1

http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/tsll/tsll.htmISSN: 0195-4857

From the Officers:TS-SIS Chair................................3OBS-SIS Chair............................4

Articles:Nicholson Interview.................1TS-SIS Bylaws: Proposed

A m e n d m e n t s . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Basics of BASIC.............20OBS Membership Survey.....21TS Membership Survey.............23From the Editor..............27AALL Mentoring Committee........28

Columns:Acquisitions..............................7Classification...........................8Collection Development.............9Description & Entry................9Miss Manager......................10OBS OCLC Committee.............12Preservation.........................13Research & Publications.............14Serial Issues.............................17Serials..................................18Subejct Headings................19

Volume 27 No. 4June, 2002

Newsletter of the Technical Services Special Interest Section and theOn-Line Bibliographic Services Special Interest Section of the American Association of Law Libraries

INSIDE:

Technical ServicesLaw Librarian

(continued on page 26)

Who is that energetic woman with all ofthose good ideas? How can she soundso upbeat and realistic at the same time?

If you’ve ever thought these thoughts while attending a meeting or program atAALL, you may have been seeing Carol Avery Nicholson in action. Whether inher role as a member of the AALL Professional Development Committee sent to abusiness meeting to drum up interest, as a program presenter imparting a bit ofpractical knowledge, or as a fellow department head sharing the laments of staffingcutbacks, Carol has been a force in OBS and TS for years. Now she is ready tocarry the skills that have made her a great Technical Services librarian to thepresidency of AALL. As she prepares to take over as President during theupcoming annual meeting, Carol has agreed to take time to answer some questionsfor TSLL.

- Joe Thomas, Editor

1. The AALL Presidency most often goes to library directors. Within the pastseveral years two Technical Services librarians (first Margie Axtmann andnow you) have been elected. Does this constitute a trend?

I certainly hope so! I think that it certainly reflects the fact that dedication toserving the Association can open doors to new opportunities both for TechnicalServices librarians and for AALL.

2. Is a Technical Services background a good one for developing the leadershipskills needed for running an organization as large and complex as AALL?

I recently completed the process of appointing members to AALL committeesand found the organizational and hiring skills that I honed over the years to bevery helpful in undertaking this major responsibility. It helps to be detail-orientedwhen keeping track of so many appointments for such a wide variety of committeesand task forces. Also, just as Technical Services work requires skills in a varietyof specializations, it is necessary to be informed and involved in a variety ofactivities at the national level. Technical Services librarians who work directly

Hail to the Chief!Hail to the Chief!Hail to the Chief!Hail to the Chief!Hail to the Chief!An interview with theAn interview with theAn interview with theAn interview with theAn interview with the

incoming AALL Presidentincoming AALL Presidentincoming AALL Presidentincoming AALL Presidentincoming AALL President

Technical Services Law Librarian, Vol. 27, No. 4Page 2

OBS-SIS

Chair:Ismael GullonMercer University

Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect:Mary Jane KelseyYale University

Secretary/Treasurer:Richard JostUniversity of Washington

Members-at-Large:Susan ChinoranskyGeorge Washington UniversityJudith Vaughan-SterlingUniversity of Pennsylvania

Education Committee:Mary Jane KelseyYale University

Local System Committee:George PragerNew York University

Nominations Committee:Brian StrimanUniversity of Nebraska, Lincoln

OCLC Committee:Michael MabenIndiana University

RLIN Committee:Brian QuigleyUniversity of Texas, Austin

Web Advisory Committee:Maria Okonska,Brooklyn Law School

2001-2002 Officers and Committee ChairsTS-SIS

Chair:JoAnn HounshellNorthwestern University

Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect:Christina TarrUniversity of California, Berkeley

Secretary/Treasurer:Pamela DeemerEmory University

Members-at-Large:Angelina JosephMarquette UniversityKathleen PecarovichUCLA

Acquisitions Committee:Karen DouglasGeorgia State University

Awards Committee:Lorna TangUniversity of Chicago

Bylaws/Handbook Committee:David BratmanStanford University

Cataloging & Classification Committee:Nancy M. PoehlmannUniversity of Notre Dame

Joint Research Grant CommitteeBrian StrimanUniversity of Nebraska, Lincoln

Nominations Committee:Vacant

Preservation Committee:Will MeredithHarvard University

Program/Education Committee:Patricia Sayre-McCoyUniversity of Chicago

Serials Committee:Andrea R. RabbiaSyracuse University

TSLL EDITORIAL POLICYTechnical Services Law Librarian (ISSN 0195-4857) is an official publication of theTechnical Services Special Interest Section and the Online Bibliographic ServicesSpecial Interest Section of the American Association of Law Libraries. It carriesreports or summaries of the convention meetings and other programs of OBS-SISand TS-SIS, acts as the vehicle of communication for the SIS committee activities,and carries current awareness and short implementation reports. Prospective authorsshould contact the editors for style information.

Statements and opinions of the authors are theirs alone and do not necessarily reflectthose of AALL, TS-SIS, OBS-SIS, or the TSLL Editorial Board.

Subscriptions: Provided as a benefit of membership to Sections members. Non-member subscriptions: Domestic: $10.00; Foreign: $20.00. Contact the TSLLBusiness Manager or the American Association of Law Libraries.

Publication Schedule

Issues are published quarterly inMarch, June, September, andDecember.

Deadlines:V.28:no.1(Sept. 2002)......15 Aug. 2002V.28:no.2(Dec. 2002)........30 Oct. 2002V.28:no.3(Mar. 2002)........31 Jan. 2003V.28:no.4(June 2002)......30 April 2003

TSLL StaffEditor:

Joe ThomasUniversity of Notre [email protected]

Business Manager:Cindy MayUniversity of [email protected]

Layout & Design:Linda TesarVanderbilt [email protected]

Webmaster:Martin E. WisneskiWashburn [email protected]

Contributing Editors:Acquisitions:

Jim MummRichard Vaughan

Classification:Beth HolmesMarie Whited

Collection DevelopmentMargaret Maes Axtmann

Description & EntryGeorge Prager

The InternetKevin Butterfield

MARC Remarks:Susan Goldner

OCLCMichael Maben

Preservation:Hope BreezeKatherine Hedin

Private Law Libraries:Betty Roeske

Research and Publications:Brian Striman

Serials:Margaret McDonaldChristina Tarr

Serial Issues:Ellen Rappaport

Subject Headings:Aaron KupermanElisheva Schwartz

Editorial Board:OBS-SIS:

Ruth P. Funabiki (2000-2002)University of IdahoCorinne Jacox (2001-2003)Creighton University

TS-SIS:Theodora Artz (2000-2002)University of DaytonMichael Petit (2001-2003)American University


Technical ServicesSpecial Interest Section

From the Chair

Special Notice: According to thecurrent Bylaws, Section members are tobe notified thirty (30) days in advanceof the annual business meeting of anyamendments to the bylaws. In the issueof the newsletter there are three (3)proposed amendments to the TS-SISBylaws (page 6). These amendmentswill be presented and discussed at theTS-SIS Business Meeting on July 21 at5:30 to 6P30 PM. All voting members ofthe Section are encouraged to attendthe business meeting.

It is hard to believe that the 2002 AALLAnnual Conference is only a few weeksaway! The Annual Conference is a busytime for everyone, and this year thereare many exciting TS related events andprograms for the members. It is onlyappropriate that the Annual Conferencebegin with a party, so mark yourcalendar for the TS/OBS/RIPS/CS JointReception on Saturday, July 20 at 6:00pm. Thanks to Innovative Interfaces,Inc. generous support, the JointReception has become the traditionalfirst social gathering for librarians at theconference.

The Technical Services Special InterestSection is pleased to announce theawarding of the Renee D. ChapmanMemorial Award for OutstandingContributions in Technical ServicesLaw Librarianship to Janis L. Johnstonof the University of Illinois atChampaign-Urbana, Albert E. JennerMemorial Law Library. The Renee D.Chapman Memorial Award forOutstanding Contributions in TechnicalServices Law Librarianship is presentedat the annual meeting of the AmericanAssociation of Law Libraries to anindividual or group in recognition ofachievement in an area of technicalservices, for services to theAssociation, or for outstandingcontributions to the professionalliterature.

Janis Johnston has been an AALLmember since 1982 and an active memberof the TS-SIS since 1988. She hasserved in various positions in the localchapters, special interest sections, andthe national association. Mostrecently, Janis was elected as the vice-president/president-elect of the AALL.As colleague said “Janis has taken theTechnical Services perspective andshared it with other law librariansthrough her active participation inAssociation-level work.” Through herleadership positions in the national andlocal law library associations, and herpublications in the professionaljournals, she has inspired other lawtechnical services librarians, and hasraised the visibility of technical serviceslaw librarians.

The award will be made at the TechnicalServices SIS Business Meeting, SundayJuly 21, at 5:30 p.m. Please join with theSIS in honoring Janis Johnston for herleadership and commitment to technicalservices librarianship.

Be sure to check the final program forthe location to the following TS-SISrelated events:

Saturday, July 204pm to 6pm• TS-SIS Executive Board 2001-2002

Meeting

6pm to 7:30pm• TS/OBS/RIPS/CIS-SIS Joint

Reception

Sunday, July 2111:45am to 1pm• TS-SIS Management Issues

Roundtable

2:45 pm to 4 pm• C2: Publication Patterns: Creating

Connections in the Serials World

5:30pm to 6:30pm• TS-SIS Business Meeting

Monday, July 227am to 8am• TS-SIS Acquisitions Committee

Meeting• TS-SIS Heads of Cataloging in Large

Law Libraries Roundtable

6:15pm to 7:15pm• TS-SIS Serials Committee Meeting

Tuesday, July 237am to 8:45 am• TS-SIS Cataloging and Classification

Committee Meeting• TS-SIS Preservation Committee

12pm to 1:30pm• TS-SIS Cataloging and Classification

Issues Roundtable• TS-SIS Heads of Technical Services

Roundtable• TS-SIS Preservation and Binding

Roundtable

3 pm to 4 pm• H1: Connecting with Law Publisher

by a Licensing Agreement

5:30pm to 6:30pm• TS-SIS Acquisitions Roundtable

6:30pm to 7:00pm• TS-SIS TSLL Board Meeting

Wednesday, July 247am to 8:45 am• TS-SIS Executive Board 2002-2003

Meeting

8:45 am to 10:15 am• J3: How to Avoid ‘Search Reopened

(co-sponsored with OBS-SIS)

10:30 am to 11:45 am• K6: What I Learned About

Preservation from Visits to 30 LawLibraries and How It Applies to You.

12:15pm to 1:30pm• TS-SIS Education Committee

Meeting


OFrom the Chair

nline Bibliographic ServicesSpecial Interest Section

It is fascinating to hear about anAmerican family with three generationsof Olympians. Jack Shea won twoOlympic medals in speed skating in1932. When the Olympic torch camethrough Lake Placid, N.Y. on December29, 2001, he helped carry it at 91 yearsold. His son, Jim Shea, competed inNordic combined and cross-countryskiing in the 1964 Games. And hisgrandson, Jim Shea Jr. won a gold medalin skeleton in the 2002 Salt Lake Games.Three generations have been connectedthrough the Winter Olympic Games.

Jack Shea was able to pass the torch tohis son, Jim and to his grandson, Jim Jr.

OBS is very fortunate to have greatlibrarians as members of OBS-SIS whohave connected in the past, in thepresent and will continue in the futurethrough professional networking,leadership opportunities, research andpublication. OBS’s third strategicdirection in the Strategic Plan is that“OBS Connects.”

We can celebrate OBS’s great historywith those who connected in the past.

Cindy Buhi, Technical Services Librarianat Washington State Attorney General’sLaw Library became the secondrecipient of the TS-SIS EducationalGrant in March. Cindy attended theBasic Law Cataloging Workshop onMarch 1-3, 2002 at John Marshall LawSchool in Chicago, IL.

The purpose of the TS-SIS EducationGrant is to provide financial assistanceto librarians who might not otherwisebe able to attend an AALL-sponsoredworkshop due to limited financialresources. Funds are provided by TS-SIS primarily from dues, and are a benefitof membership in both AALL and theTS-SIS. Remember that additionalinformation, and an application form forthe TS-SIS Education Grant can befound at <http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/awards/edgrant/index.htm>.

Congratulations to the newly electedmembers of the TS-SIS executive board:

Gary Vander Meer (NorthernIllinois) , Vice-Chair/Chair-ElectPatricia Sayer McCoy (Universityof Chicago), Secretary/TreasurerLorraine Lorne (University ofArkansas), Member at Large

Gary, Patricia and Lorraine will beinstalled as the newest members of theexecutive board during the TS-SISBusiness Meeting on Sunday, July 21at 5:30 pm to 6:30

It is hard to believe that the year haspassed so quickly! My term as TS-SISchair was an adventure that I haveenjoyed. The numerous tasks of theSIS chair were made much easier by thehelp and advise from the members ofthe executive board. It has been a greatpleasure to work with Christina Tarr,incoming Chair, and I know that she willprovide excellent leadership for the SIS.I have been able to count on Chris forsound advice and recommendationsthroughout the year. I would like tothank Pam Deemer, Secretary/Treasurer(outgoing) for all of her hard work overthe past two years. Pam has been atremendous help to each chair duringher term, her insight and advise havebeen greatly appreciated.Angelina Joseph,outgoing Member atLarge, has workedtirelessly this year asthe chair of the JointReception com-mittee. I know from

personal experience, how much workand worry goes into planning areception that the membership willenjoy. As a result of the hard work andpersistence of Angelina and hercommittee, the membership will kick offthe annual conference with good foodand good company. I especially wantto thank Alva Stone, immediate pastChair, for volunteering for the dauntingtask of rewriting the TS-SIS Handbook.The new handbook will be a valuableresource to future executive boardmembers. I am very grateful to all ofthe Committee Chairs for their hard workand advise this year. I especially wantto thank Joe Thomas, editor of theTechnical Services Law Librariannewsletter and the editorial staff, forcontinuing to publish the mostinformational newsletter in theassociation.

Thank you for allowing me theopportunity to serve as your Chair.

JoAnn HounshellNorthwestern University

[email protected]


These pioneers prepared the way forthe Section to provide opportunities forprofessional networking. They did itby providing a forum to exchange ideasand information regarding trends,issues and challenges. Some haveserved as liaisons with OCLC and RLINusers and their parent organizationswhile others have been involved ineducational program planning. Ipersonally have developed and grownprofessionally through the networkingat OBS.

OBS has provided great opportunitiesfor leadership in the past and thepresent. Some members have servedas officers of the Section while othershave served as chairs of StandingCommittees. These positions haveprovided the nurturing atmosphere togain expertise and to function in a moredemanding and challenging role in theAALL organization. During mymembership at OBS, two of our membershave been elected President of AALL.Even those who have retired and otherssitting on the sidelines are cheering thepresent members and hoping that newleaders will carry the torch in the future.

OBS has provided a fertile ground forresearch and publications. We arecommitted to supporting research;therefore, we co-sponsored the JointResearch Grant and ResearchRoundtable with TS-SIS. Several of ourmembers have published great articlesin the Spectrum, and the Law LibraryJournal. Our lives have been enrichedby their published research.

The phrase “OBS connects” is a realitythat has been woven in the fabric of itsmembership.

OBS Elections results:

I am pleased to announce the results ofthe 2002 OBS Election. Our new Vice-Chair/Chair Elect will be KevinButterfield and our Member-at-Largewill be Ruth Patterson Funabiki.Congratulations to these new OBSofficers! Thanks to Eloise Vondruskaand Arturo Torres for their willingnessto serve as candidates.

News:

Brian Quigley, RLIN Chair, has informedme that there will not be an RLINCommittee meeting this year in Orlandodue to lack of issues. Please see belowfor a schedule of OBS Activities inOrlando.

My two objectives as OBS Chair thisyear were: implementation of theStrategic Plan and enhancing ourwebsite. Some aspects of the strategicplan are being fulfilled in a continuousway. We established a new web policythat outlines the duties and role of thewebmaster and the Web AdvisoryCommittee. The OCLC Committee haslaunched its webpage. Thanks toMichael Maben and his committee! Wehave a new redesign of the OBS websitethat will be unveiled on July 1, 2002.Thanks to Anne Myers and Anna BelleLeiserson for their outstanding work. Ireally appreciate the input of the WebAdvisory Committee.

This is my final column as OBS Chair.I am definitely indebted to those whohave helped me with the operations ofOBS. They are: OBS Executive Board:Mary Jane Kelsey, Ellen McGrath,Richard Jost, Susan Chinoransky,Judith A. Vaughan-Sterling. OBSStanding Committee Chairs: MichaelMaben, George Prager, Brian Quigley,Brian Striman, Maria Okonska, andAnne Myers. I really appreciate theirsupport and the fond memories. I wouldlike to extend my sincere thanks to JoeThomas and Linda Tesar for continuingto produce an outstanding newsletter,Technical Services Law Librarian. Ithas been great to work with JoAnnHounshell, TS-SIS Chair

And to Anne Myers, my mentor, whohas always been there to encourage,provide insight and guidance. I amgrateful to my former library Director,Patricia A. Cervenka for her initialsupport, and allowing me to be activelyinvolved in OBS, and to SuzanneCassidy, my current Director, for herunderstanding and support.

Here are the OBS meetings scheduledfor the upcoming meeting in Orlando:

Saturday, July 204:00-6:00 pm• OBS 2001/2002 Executive Board

Meeting6:00-7:30 pm• TS/OBS/RIPS/CS Joint Reception

Sunday, July 2111:45-1:00 pm• OBS/TS Research Roundtable1:15-2:30 pm• B-3: Rule Maker or Rule Breaker?

Monday, July 227:00-8:00 am• OBS OCLC/WLN Committee Open

Discussion2:45-4:00 pm• C2: Publications Patterns: Creating

Connections in the Serials World6:15-7:15 pm• OBS Business Meeting

Tuesday, July 2312:00-1:30 pm• OBS Education Committee4:15-5:15 pm• I-1: The Catalog vs. the Home Page?

Best Practices in Connecting toOnline Resources

5:30-6:30 pm• OBS Local Systems Committee Open

Discussion

Wednesday, July 247:00-8:30 am• OBS 2002/2003 Executive Board8:45-10:15 am• J-3: How to Avoid “Search

Reopened”: Hire the Right TechnicalServices Candidate the First TimeAround

And remember, OBSConnects!

Ismael GullonMercer University

[email protected]


In compliance with the TS-SIS Bylaws, Article X, “Notice ofproposed amendments shall be mailed to the Section’svoting members or be published in the Section’s newsletter30 days in advance of the meeting”, the following changesto the bylaws are proposed and will be voted upon duringthe upcoming TS-SIS business meeting at the annual AALLmeeting in Orlando, Florida on Sunday, July 21, 2002 at5:30 p.m.

This version of the Bylaws contains only those portionsthat have been recommended for changes, plus annotations.The complete text of the Technical Services Special InterestSection Bylaws can be seen on the Sections web page at<http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/tssis.htm>. A vote toamend the Bylaws will be conducted during the TS-SISBusiness Meeting on Sunday, July 21 at 5:30 to 6:30 PM.

AMENDMENT I.Proposed Amendment to ARTICLE IX, COMMITTEES,Section 1,Standing Committees, paragraph 2.To amend ARTICLE IX, Object, by striking the sentence ‘TheCommittee Chair shall then appoint a cabinet of three (3)members for the Committee with the approval of the SectionChair’ and by striking the phrase ‘The cabinet members and’.

Explanation of Amendment I: It has not been the practice ofCommittee Chairs to appoint cabinets. Striking the languagefrom the Bylaws would reflect common practice within allthe Standing Committees in the Section.

If amended the Article will read:ARTICLE IX, COMMITTEES, Section 1, StandingCommittees, paragraph 2“On application to the Chair of the Section any Sectionmember may become a member of any standing committee.The Chair of the Section shall appoint a Committee Chair foreach standing committee. The Committee Chair shall beappointed for terms of two years, and may be reappointed atthe expiration of a term. During this term, the committee Chairshall also serve as a member of the Section Executive Board.No officer of this Section may serve as a Chair of a standingcommittee.”

AMENDMENT II.Proposed Amendment to ARTICLE X. AMENDMENTSTo amend ARTICLE X, Object, by striking ‘Notice of proposedamendments shall be mailed to the Section’s voting membersor be published in the Section’s newsletter 30 days in

advance of the meeting.’, and by inserting ‘Thirty (30) daysprior to the annual meeting, members will be notified ofproposed amendments via mail, or listserv or other electronicmeans, or published in the Section’s newsletter.’

Explanation of Amendment II: The proposed amendmentreflects the variety of communication methods available. Theproposed amendment allows the Executive Board to select,and use themost effective,and costefficient methodof keeping them e m b e r s h i pinformed.

If amended theArticle will read:ARTICLE X.AMENDMENTSThese bylaws may be amendedat the annual meeting of the Section by a majority of themembers present and voting. Thirty (30) days prior to theannual meeting, members will be notified of proposedamendments via mail, or listserv, or other electronic means,or publication in the Section’s newsletter. Any amendmentshall take effect after it has been approved by the AALLExecutive Board.

AMENDMENT III.Proposed Amendment to ARTICLE XI. CONDUCT OFAFFAIRS AND PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY.To amend ARTICLE XI, Object, by striking the phrase‘Constitution and’.

Explanation of Amendment III: The AALL Constitution andBylaws have been merged into one document. The proposedamendment would reflect the Section’s understanding of theAALL current governing documents.

If amended the Article will read:ARTICLE XI. CONDUCT OF AFFAIRS ANDPARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY“The Technical Services Special Interest Section shallconduct its affairs in conformity with the Bylaws of theAmerican Association of Law Libraries. The rules ofparliamentary procedure as contained in the most recentedition of The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedureshall govern all meetings of the Section.”

American Association of Law LibrariesTechnical Services Special Interest Section

BYLAWSProposed Amendments 2002


AcquisitionsDick Vaughan

Indiana [email protected]

E-Distribution: A Scouting Report

Have you ever noticed how law librariesand legal publishers are a lot likebaseball teams and cable companies?No? Well, in truth, I never really noticedeither, but then I happened to belistening to a news story about thedispute between the New York Yankeesand the cable company that distributesthe Yankees’ television broadcasts inthe New York City area. Without goinginto any detail (you can listen to thereport at: <http://www.marketplace.org/shows/2002/04/10_mpp.html>) thebasic dispute revolves around whocontrols the content (the baseballgame) and who controls the distribution(how the broadcast gets into yourhome). Beginning to sound familiar?

A few days after hearing the broadcastI received a letter from the Bureau ofNational Affairs, Inc. (BNA)announcing that they wererestructuring how law schools accessBNA products on Westlaw and Lexis.BNA databases that had previouslybeen available via Westlaw and Lexis,are no longer going to be included aspart of a law school’s contract with thetwo vendors. Instead, schools will haveto start paying BNA directly, for accessto the data. In announcing the policychange, BNA Publisher and Editor-in-Chief, Gregory C. McCaffery pointedout that BNA received “no revenue orroyalty” under their old arrangementswith the two online services. To learnmore about the details of the newacademic program, see the BNA website: <http://www.bna.com/lawschool/ >.

Discussion on several listservssuggests that many librarians werecaught off guard by the BNA decision,or were at least surprised by thesuddenness of the announcement.

Given that the BNA decision falls onthe heels of many other informationproducers (most noticeably manymetropolitan city newspapers)removing their data from larger databasesystems, it really should not surpriseany of us. More and more, companiesthat once paid other businesses todistribute their products (whether theproduct is electronic data or a physicalobject) have learned that today’stechnologies can allow them to cut themiddleman and distribute their productsdirectly. And while this is a relativelynew phenomenon, it is a potential thatpublishers have recognized for years.In fact BNA has been talking about thissince at least 1994. It was in 1994 whenI happened to interview, then BNAPresident, William A Beltz. Theinterview (see, “The Bureau of NationalAffairs, Inc.: The CRIV SheetInterview.” 17 The CRIV Sheet no.1-2,pp.9-11; 13-15.) came on the heels ofanother controversial BNAannouncement - their decision to stoppublishing state laws and regulationsin the paper edition of theirEnvironment Reporter and insteadpublish them in a new CD-ROMproduct. As I was ending the interview,I asked Beltz to speculate on the futureof the Internet, as it pertained to legalpublishing. Quite succinctly heresponded that, “It [the Internet] is adelivery system,” and “it is in ourinterest that our products be deliveredefficiently and cost-effectively.”

Law Librarians may disagree with thesedistribution decisions, or at least wantsome input before the decision is made,but we should not criticize them simplyif our complaint is that they create aninconvenience to us - and believe me,in this particular case, the decision hasbecome an inconvenience in our library.Yet, while I truly believe that the BNAdecision will create more work for our

library, cause us to pay more money forless information, and will require ourpatrons have to learn yet anotherinformation retrieval system, Iunderstand why BNA made thedecision and I support their right todistribute their own products.

While the BNA decision didn’t surpriseme, I admit I was not as prepared as Ishould have been. I also understandthat BNA is not going to be the lastpublisher to start its own electronicdistribution system, nor will thesedecisions only affect the academicmarket. Thus, in retrospect, here are afew quick suggestions on howAcquisitions Librarians can be betterprepared for e-distribution changes:

Know what databases yourpatrons are using - talk to yourreference people if you don’t havedirect access with patrons or thedata. If you learn what yourpatrons use, you can make betterdecisions about what is the bestway to obtain it.

Learn what type of electronicaccess works best for your library.Does your library prefer/require IPrange access versus password-protected access? Similarly, learnthe basic technical configurationand statistics of your systems sothat you’ll have a betterunderstanding of how it will workwith any new system being offeredby vendors. In other words, knowwhat your library can and can’thandle in terms of accessingelectronic distribution. Again, talkwith the appropriate people inyour organization whocan educate youon these matters.

Consider how adecision, similar


C lassification

Marie E. WhitedYale Law School

[email protected]

By now, youshould all know that

LC’s Classification Web is available forsubscription. See <http://www.loc.gov/cds/classweb.html> forinformation about the product.

The best sources for subjectcataloging policy and procedure are thesubject specialists in the Library ofCongress’ Cataloging Policy andSupport Office. People were wonderingabout LC policy regarding editions sorecently I asked Paul Weiss of LC’sCataloging Policy and Support Officeto reiterate their policy for us. He didand I quote:

to the BNA decision, is going toaffect your departmental workflow.Now that you are going to pay thepublisher directly, will you have tocreate new payment accounts?What type of billing system will thenew distributor offer you and howwill it interact with your system?How will their decision affect yourbudget?

Keep abreast of what is going onthe legal publishing industry. Inaddition to publications like TheCRIV Sheet (and its correspondingwebsite: <http://www.aallnet.org/committee/criv/>), check outpublications like InformationToday, Fulltext Sources Online,and Net.Journal Directory. Thesepublications can help you stay

aware of what alternatives are beenoffered. Similarly, visit the majorpublisher websites to see whatthey are offering. Most companieswill offer you free trial subscriptionsto their online services, so if youthink there is a chance that a newservice is going to become youronly source for particularinformation, go ahead and startinvestigating the system.

Talk, Talk, Talk. Talk to thepublishers/distributors who will bethe ones who ultimately make thedecisions; let them know, inadvance, how these types ofdecisions affect their librarycustomers. Talk to your colleaguesat similar libraries; find out howothers handle these types of

changes. Talk to your colleaguesand patrons at your library; thesedecisions affect all aspects of thelibrary. Get as much input as youcan.

Perhaps the most important preparationyou can make for these types ofchanges, is to be prepared to analyzewhat is being offered. Don’t rush intoanything; take the time to study whatis being offered and learn what thealternatives are. Finally, don’t be afraidto say “no.” If, after evaluating the newdistribution, you discover that thesystem (or even the informationcontained within) simply isn’t neededby your library, use the savings toacquire other materials that are needed.

Classification number. If a previousedition of a work was correctlyclassified and the number is still valid,assign the same classification numberto the new edition. If the number is nolonger valid, assign a currently validnumber.

Form divisions. If an earlier editionuses a form division Cutter that is nolonger valid, do not use that Cutterfor a new edition.

Book number. If a work is enteredunder an author, and either the authoror the title changes from one editionto another, maintain the same Cutternumber for later editions that was usedfor previous editions.

If a work is entered under title and thetitle changes significantly from oneedition to another, do not attempt tomaintain the same Cutter for latereditions that was used for previouseditions.

Sometimes it is a nuisance to keepeditions together since it means gettingolder editions from the stacks andreclassing them or adapting copy. It ismore apt to be a problem with copycataloging since FASTCAT staff orthose staff doing LC copy may not beadept at recognizing editions or willingto do the work to keep editions together.Some of the copy catalogers may betrained just to accept call numberswithout class number verification oredition checking.

You (along with your public servicesstaff) must decide if you want tocontinue keeping editions together aslong as the substance of the book isthe same or if you no longer care aboutkeeping editions together. If you arekeeping your editions together, youmust be prepared to update old formnumbers for earlier editions.


Before Iagreed tobecome thecolumn editor forC o l l e c t i o nDevelopment, I asked about the scope and length of thecolumn. “Whatever you want,” Joe said.

Now what could be better than that? After years of havingcollection development as only one component of my job, Inow have a position devoted to developing a new collection.My work takes me back to the fundamentals of collectiondevelopment, but it also keeps me on the cutting edge. I’vealways known that the literature on collection developmentin law libraries is sparse, but it is discouraging just how littleis written about how we create policies, select material,manage our collections, create and monitor budgets, andincorporate new formats and technologies. I have burningquestions, and there are few places to turn for answers.

Margaret Maes AxtmannUniversity of St. Thomas

[email protected]

Collection Development

My colleagues have always been the best source of helpfor me, generous with their time and willing to share ideasand information. So this is a column for all of us, a chance todiscuss any and all aspects of collection development inlaw libraries.

I can and will write about the collection development topicsthat interest me. But I’d also like to write about the thingsthat interest the TSLL readers. What are your burningquestions about collection development? If you want towrite about them, I’m very open to the idea of guestcolumnists. If you want me to write about them, send meyour ideas. If you’ve tackled a problem and found a solution,contribute your expertise. Call (651-962-4868) or e-mail<[email protected]> or talk to me at the AALLmeeting in Orlando.

It’s a challenging time to be developing the print andelectronic information resources our users require. Eachtype of law library faces those challenges in different ways,but we can all learn from each other. I look forward toexploring the issues with you.

George A. PragerNew York University

[email protected]

Description & Entry

I am honored to have been selected as the new Descriptionand Entry Columnist for TSLL. I shall endeavor to be aworthy successor to the distinguished law librarians whohave preceded me in this position. Given the ever-faster rateof change in our profession, there should be plenty to writeabout! While I hope to have a few ideas myself of varyingfertility, I’d like to hear from you, the TSLL readers, anyquestions you may have in this area. I’ll do my best to giveyou a clear and accurate answer. So please write to me.

Thanks.


Dear Miss Manager:

The director of the lawlibrary just came to me and said that

his friend, the director of the main library, is being forcedto let a particular staff member go, but only for budgetaryreasons. My director has suggested (not demanded,although it’s hard to tell the difference) that we hire thisstaff member from the main library in an empty slot we have.Now comes the mess: I had intended to fill that slot withsomeone from another department on campus whom I’veknown of for some time, a person I know to be a good workerand very interested in this position. To further complicatethings, reliable grapevine communications indicate thatthe staff person from the main library is a lazy trouble-maker who has been having an affair with anotherdepartment head! Also, this staff person has very littlerelevant experience. What should I do?

Sick in the South

Dear Sick:

What should you do? First, you should be sure of yourinformation. “Reliable grapevine” sounds nearlyoxymoronic. Will you be allowed to interview this person,talk to references, and perform all of the normal checks wehave available when we are looking at a potential staffmember? If you are not allowed to go through these normalprocedures, if you really are forced (either explicitly orimplicitly) to hire this person without any reasonable chanceto make an assessment, then your situation is dire indeed. Ifthat is the case, you won’t bear any of the responsibility forthe disaster that is probably waiting to happen, but you willhave to live with its consequences. Unless your director isreally completely unreasonable, you should be able to go tohim or her and explain why your preferred choice is morequalified, at least on paper, than this recommended person.If you can conduct normal interviews and then present all ofthe facts clearly to the director, you will have made yourcase. You should make it clear what your opinion is, whyyou think the preferred choice is better, and ask the directorto justify the decision if something other than your clearchoice is required.

Having said all that, we should now acknowledge that someworkplaces are filled with politics, and that you must exercise

your political skills in a situation like this. You may say youare not a games player, that you don’t participate in thesekinds of shenanigans, that you are a department manager ina library, and you have plenty to worry about without alsoworrying over gossiping and old boys’ networks.Unfortunately, though, the price of working in many placesincludes taking those sorts of side issues into account. Thedaily happiness of your staff and the efficient operation ofyour department often depend more on those kinds ofpersonal issues than they do on direct work-related policy. Ican’t tell you from this vantage point whether or not youshould become a crusading whistle-blower or a more quietlysubversive element in your organization. If this sort ofpersonnel-shuffling is a common practice in yourorganization, if people frequently get moved rather than fired,if everyone has to take a turn dealing with the troublesomeor marginally competent worker from time to time, thenperhaps it is your turn not only to absorb this person intoyour work, but to help break the cycle. If you can bringgood work out of this apparently awful employee, you willdo the most good for everyone. On the other hand, if youare in a place that is seriously corrupt, a place wherefavoritism and personal attributes are rewarded capriciouslyand in defiance of accepted standards, then it may be time toput your foot down. Perhaps you work in a place wherethese sorts of activities are a rarity, where this may be thefirst instance of such a thing happening. If that is the case,it may be even more important to stand your ground as muchas possible so that the proper precedents may be set.

As in most management decisions, there is no easy answer.So much depends on local circumstances and practices.Management is more art than science. Finally, you shouldrely on your own good judgment. Fight for the right in thiscase, but keep in mind the big picture.

Dear Miss Manager:

What should I do about harassing sales representatives? Ihardly ever want to speak to these people, but when I doneed to, I’d like it to be on my terms, and notwhenever one of them happens to need a newpinky ring.

Fed Up in Frisco

Miss Manager

To contact Miss Manager, pleasewrite in care of the TSLL editior


Dear Miss Manager:

I am so unhappy with the sales people who come to see me.They don’t seem to know anything about their own products– I have to tell them what they are supposed to cover! – andthey treat me like an idiot child. I chewed one out the otherday. Just because I look like a stereotypical librariandoesn’t mean I can’t be tough!

Frumpy but Firm

Dear Fed and Frumpy:

Now, let’s not get testy. Sales representatives are like peoplein any other profession: some provide excellent service, someprovide mediocre service, and some are not good at all. Manypeople suggest that the merging of legal publishers has notbeen particularly beneficial to the development of strongsales representatives. One often hears the lament of theexperienced acquisitions librarian bemoaning the loss of thelong-ago days when those unmerged companies employedlong-term, loyal, knowledgeable, hands-on sales people; thekind librarians used to name their children after or go onvacation with. Maybe sales people were different back then,or maybe the whole information universe was a cozieroperation. Whatever the case may have been, we have todeal with the here and now.

One thing to remember is that being concerned with thebottom line is not a new concept for legal publishers. Thoseolder companies weren’t in the business to lose money either.They determined that the best way to go about buildingprofits involved a particular set of behaviors and theyadhered (more or less) to those behaviors. Companies nowmay have a different outlook, may see profits arising out ofa different set of behaviors, and that is their right. Ratherthan reminisce about the old days, we need to operate withinthe new universe to our advantage as much as possible.That means being firm when necessary, being clear aboutyour needs at all times, and doing your part to make thingswork. Here are some specific points.

Advice for customers:

1. Learn as much as you can about the products available foryour library. One of the best ways of negotiating withsales people is being able to tell them that you know thescore. If you know that there are two other products onthe market that do basically the same thing as the onebeing presented to you, you will be able to concentrateon the details that might make a difference. You shouldalso make sure that you are not being sold somethingyou don’t need. The sales representative may be offeringyou a great product for ERISA coverage at a great price,but if no one in your organization is working with ERISA,where is the bargain?

2. Be clear about the sales approaches you will accept. Thisusually works best when you state and maintain a clearrule: for example, we do not commit to anything based ona telemarketing call; we will not accept approval booksunless we order them. Let them know whether or not youwant them to visit. If you don’t want them to drop byunexpectedly, tell them.

3. Be patient. Not all sales people are treated well be eitheremployers or customers. Some of them may not deservegood treatment, but giving them the benefit of the doubtgives you a chance to start on the right foot. It isn’t thenew sales rep’s fault that she is the 3rd representative in 2years sent by the company. Do your part to make therepresentative effective for the company so that she canbe effective for you.

Advice for sales representatives:

1. Know your products. When you ask someone to spendseveral hundred or several thousand dollars a year onsomething, you must be ableto articulate what it is aboutthat product that is providingvalue. If you come into anoffice to pitch the newestthing, the customer is nothappy to hear phrases like“I’m pretty sure it coversthat”; the customer is veryunimpressed with “I’ll have to get backto you on that”; and the customer will escort you outwithout further ado if you say, “Just call customer servicefor that” more than once.

2. Describe your products honestly. When the customerasks, “Does this cover all 50 states?”, please say whetherit does or not. Don’t say “yes” when you really mean “itcovers a bit more than half”; don’t say “yes” when youreally mean “all the ones you are likely to need.” Don’tsay “no, but it will cover all 50 by next month” if youreally have no idea what the development plans are.

3. Know your customers. Learn from asking them how theywant to be contacted, whether they find face-to-facemeetings helpful or not, whether they want regular check-ins or prefer to contact you as needed.

4. Be supportive of customer needs. Customers want to beable to go to the company with questions that get answeredproperly. They want to rely on the company to know howto fix problems. Work within the company as much aspossible to help that happen. Let the people in customerservice know that what they do affects sales very much.Customers are much happier buying from a company theysee as backing up products with good service.


AALL AnnualMeeting – Orlando,Florida, July 20-24, 2002

The Annual Meeting is rapidlyapproaching, and I hope that many ofyou will be able to attend, especiallythe OCLC/WLN Committee meeting.The Annual Meeting is one of thehighlights of the year professionally forme—I always come away with newideas and concepts to put into practice,along with having the opportunity tosee and speak with many of mycolleagues from around the country.

The Committee will meet on Monday,July 22nd, from 7am-8am. The meetingwill be at the Orange CountyConvention Center (it has been movedfrom the Peabody Hotel). A continentalbreakfast will be served. Our speakerrepresenting OCLC will be Mr. WilliamCaine of SOLINET out of Atlanta. Mr.Caine will be speaking about OCLC’stransition to the new interface, and hewill be available to answer questionsyou might have about OCLC’s service.If you have any ideas or topics youwould like to have discussed, pleaselet me know so that I may suggest themto Mr. Caine in advance. Last year inMinneapolis we had an excellentdiscussion with much give and takeamong the OCLC and MINITEXrepresentatives and the attendees. Ihope that we will have a similardiscussion this year. This is yourchance to speak directly with an OCLCrepresentative and to ask thosequestions that concern you (andprobably many others in room). Pleasemake plans to attend. In continuingwith last year, there will be a door prize.Unfortunately, it will not be a beautifulhandmade afghan donated by SusanChinoransky (Susan has already gonethe extra mile for the committee). If you

work for or went to school at one of thefour schools that were in the NCAAFinal Four basketball tournament(Maryland, Indiana, Oklahoma, and

Kansas), you will definitely want to bepresent. There may be an additionaldoor prize of something chocolate. Iwill look forward to seeing many of youthere.

Migration to the new OCLC interface

The migration to the new interfacecontinues on schedule. According toOCLC, in February CatME was“enhanced again to include a terminalmodule to allow you to connect to yourlocal system to run macros betweenCatME and your local system.” OCLCstates that with the first release of thenew interface “CORC and CatExpressfunctionality become part of the newinterface.” In fact, in the April issue ofBits and Pieces, OCLC announced thaton June 30, 2002, the new cataloginginterface will be introduced and theCORC product name will be retired. June30th is a Sunday, so for most of us July1st will be our first look at the newinterface. This is exactly 3 weeks beforeour open discussion meeting inOrlando. I suspect that we will have alot to talk about at the meeting.

One thing to remember about the newinterface is there is a transition timebuilt in to making the switch. Users arenot required to cut over on July 1, 2002.Passport will continue to be supportedthrough December of 2002, andPassport will work with the system untilDecember 2003. So the date librarieswill be forced off of Passport is January2004. This gives libraries and users 18months to make the transition.

I would suggest that you go to OCLC’swebsite at <www.oclc.org/strategy/cataloging> and review the updated

Guide to Migration and the FrequentlyAsked Questions for the latestinformation and to refresh your memoryas to what it going to happen. This willbe the biggest change that most of ushave ever seen with OCLC, and we needto be prepared to lead our libraries andstaff in making the transition.

Steering by Standards videoconference

As I write this in late April, two of thethree scheduled Steering by Standardsvideoconferences have occurred (thefinal one is scheduled for May 29th). Ihave had the opportunity to view bothso far. The first two have dealt withopen archives and data sharing. Thefirst one was titled “A New Harvest:Revealing Hidden Resources with theOpen Archives Metadata HarvestingProtocol” and featured the individualwho virtually invented the protocol—Herbert Van de Sompel of the LosAlamos National Laboratory and theBritish Library. The second sessionwas titled “OAIS [Open ArchivalInformation System] Imperative:Enduring Record or Digital Dust?” andincluded Donald Sawyer of NASA asthe keynote speaker. The final sessionfeatures Barbara Tillett of the Libraryof Congress speaking on “Paper Past,Digital Future: Managing MetadataStandards in Transition.”

The sessions have been veryinteresting and informative. OCLC hasgone directly to the experts to talkabout these topics. The sessions haveincluded expert practitioners, and thesecond one had an archivist from theNational Archives and RecordsAdministration. Some of what he saidresonated with me due to my interest ingenealogy and family history, and howNARA makes its data available (thingslike military service records, pensionrecords, etc.). If you have an

OBS OCLC/WLN CommitteeMichael Maben

Indiana [email protected]


Splitting Paper To Conserve It

PreservationHope Breeze

Duke University Law [email protected]

opportunity to see the videotapes ofthese sessions, I would highlyrecommend it.

OCLC Committee’s website

The OCLC Committee now has a homeon the Web. Please check it out at

<www.aallnet.org/sis/obssis> and clickon OCLC Committee.

Toll-free number for reporting errors

Finally, OCLC now has a toll-free faxphone number to report errors orchanges to records that require proof.

In the world of conservation, there areseveral options for lengthening the lifeof aging paper. Deacidification, forinstance, is a well-known and widelyacceptable treatment for extending thelife of paper. Washing pages in water(called aqueous washing) is anothercommon method used by conservatorsto clean and reduce acidity in paper. Alesser-known and somewhatcontroversial technique for restoringfragile paper is paper splitting.

Although the concept of splitting paperto preserve it has been around for morethan one hundred years, it is not widelypracticed. It has received moreattention in recent years as the resultof a paper splitting technique developedin eastern Germany during the 1960sand 1970s. Conservators WolfgangWächter of the German Library(Deutsche Bücherei) and GüntherMüller of the University Library in Jenacollaborated in refining the technique.In 1998 the German Library’sConservation Department spawned aprivate book and paper conservationcompany, Zentrum für Bücherhaltung(ZfB).1 The company, directed byWächter, is renowned for offering papersplitting as a conservation option to itscustomers.

The paper splitting process employedby ZfB involves placing the page to besplit between two sheets that have beencoated with a special adhesive. Thesheets are carefully pulled apart,separating the original page into two,

with its front adhering to one sheet andits back to the other. A thin reinforcingsheet is then placed between theoriginal front and back, and they arereattached and left to dry. The twoadhesive coated sheets are thenremoved in an enzyme bath that isformulated to only soften the specialadhesive and not damage the originalpage. It sounds incredible, butapparently not only works, but worksespecially well for pages that areextremely brittle or fragile.

The attention focused on ZfB increasedwith the development of a prototypepaper-splitting machine. The machinewas built by Becker, a Germanengineering firm, to the specificationsof Dr. Wächter. Whereas splittingpages by hand can cost several hundreddollars per page, the one-of-a-kindpaper splitting machine can reputedlysplit, reinforce, and reattach 2000 pagesper hour for a cost of about $5 a page.

Although this machine is beingpromoted as a way of improving theprocess by removing human error, themost publicized paper splitting projectshave been accomplished by hand. TheCenter’s most famous paper splittingproject to date has been the restorationof Johann Sebastian Bach’s musicmanuscripts. The manuscripts are invarious stages of deterioration resultingfrom corrosion of the iron gall ink usedby Bach. As the ink ages, it is changingto sulfuric acid and literally eating holesin the pages. ZfB is using its paper

splitting technology in an attempt tosave the endangered manuscripts.

The Library of Congress has alsoutilized ZfB’s paper splitting services.An April 28, 1912 supplement to the NewYork Times, dedicated to reporting theevents surrounding the sinking of theTitanic, was restored to usabilitythrough this unusual treatment.

There is still some doubt within theconservation community that theprocess is a safe and effective meansof paper restoration. After all, it is ahighly invasive treatment.Nevertheless, ZfB continues to tout itsprocess, and apparently the papersplitting machine is available forpurchase. A description (in German)and photographs of the machine areavailable at the Becker web site.2

Although the price is not listed, a newsreport in the June, 1998 Preservation &Access International Newsletter quotedits price as 2,500,000 DM whichtranslates at today’s exchange rates to overa million dollars U.S. Given thatconservators are skeptical of the long termviability of the process, and considering thehefty cost of the equipment, it seemsunlikely that automated paper splittingwill catch on in this country soon. On theother hand, there are sources who reportthat ZfB is interested in opening a U.S.branch, possibly in the Boston area,so stay tuned.

1 Translates as Center for Book Preservation,for more information see the Center’s webpage at: <http://www.zfb.com>2 <http://www.preservotec.de>

The number is 1-866-709-6252. Send inthose corrections!

Don’t forget—Monday, July 22nd, 7am-8am, Orange County ConventionCenter. See you in warm, sunny Florida!


Research & PublicationsBrian Striman

University of [email protected]

The agenda at the Research Roundtablefor the AALL’s annual meeting inOrlando includes* Introductions* Publishing or research projects

colleagues are thinking about doing,or are doing, or have recently done

* Update on the OBS & TS SIS JointResearch Grant Committee (JRGC)

* Handouts of Brian Striman’sPublication “Kit” for anyone whowants one

* Reminders of grant availabilities inAALL for research

* Sharing the results of LarryDershem’s work that resulted fromhis grant award last year of the JRGC

* Any other advice or discussionsthat are raised during the Roundtablediscussions

* Chance to meet a potential co-authorfor that article or book you need towrite, or want to write.

Finally, we will need a reporter at theroundtable. This is a good publishingopportunity if you’ve never contributedanything to TSLL, this a good time tojump in, but not get too wet.

Ellen McGrath has volunteered tocontribute her notes on a program sherecently attended. Thank you so muchEllen! So here’s a fabulous idea, whichI’ve mentioned in previous columns: Ifyou have recently attended a programat your institution, or some regionallibrary event, or just read an excellentarticle or book about research orpublishing that you think you’d like towrite a review on, PLEASE considerusing this R&P column as a vehicle to

share your comments and what youlearned. Before we get to Ellen’s report,I have a URL to share with you—<www.lita.org/manual/publish.html> —go there and read through the screens.It has some good information aboutpublishing opportunities for you. It alsohas information that their Publishingand Publications Committee requires oftheir authors. It’s a good place to start.LITA is Library and InformationTechnology Association and is adivision of the American LibraryAssociation. If you are not familiar withit, go to their main homepage andinvestigate the work they do. It’samazing! <www.lita.org>

*********************************

A Conference ReportEllen McGrath

SUNY at Buffalo

The spring conference of the WesternNew York/Ontario chapter of the ACRL(Association of College and ResearchLibraries) was held on May 3, 2002 atthe beautiful White Oaks Resort andConference Centre in Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario. It was called “BecomingVisible, Staying Viable: Researching,Publishing, Mentoring.” This programwas interesting and inspiring and I wasvery glad I had taken the opportunityto attend it.

The first speaker was Dr. Gloria Leckie(Faculty of Information and MediaStudies, University of Western Ontario)and her presentation was entitled “TheImportance of Being Earnest: Librariansand Their Scholarly Role in Academe.”She began by describing the nature ofthe university where scholarship andlearning are important in their own right;advances in knowledge will comethrough research and study; theuniversity must have control over

academic matters; and the faculty arebest placed to exert their controlthrough collegial governancestructures. To become a member of theprofessorate requires a long process ofacculturation which places emphasis oncertain values such as research as theprimary focus of the university, an in-depth knowledge of a discipline,awareness of important scholarsworking in the discipline, andparticipation in a system of formal andinformal scholarly communication.

Dr. Leckie next turned to the questionof how academic librarianship differssignificantly from other types oflibrarianship. The reasons for this arereflected in the institutional context:being surrounded by those in pursuitof knowledge; there is a strong senseof institutional history and tradition;and faculty self-governance occursthrough the Faculty Senate. Theinstitutional values also have an effecton academic librarians: in-depthknowledge is respected; collegialityand respect for peer judgment isintegral; and autonomy, self-governance and academic freedom arehighly valued. She pointed out that theacculturation of academic librarians isat odds with that of the non-librarianuniversity faculty. Librarianship is aservice profession and as such,stresses the values of professionalethics, a priority on relationships withclients, equity and fairness in thepractice of librarianship, and acommitment to equitable access toinformation. Dr. Leckie characterizedacademic librarianship as beingmarginalized, specialization isdiscouraged. Little original research isrequired and there is littleunderstanding of the politics of theacademic or the librarian within theacademy. Ultimately, research is viewedas a burden by the librarian, not as an


essential part of one’s career. Thesewere thought-provoking observations,especially given the presenter’s statisticthat approximately 60% of college anduniversity librarians have faculty status.

Dr. Leckie tracked some historical trendsin academic libraries. In the 1980s, shenoted declining budgets, downsizingand structural reorganizations,collection constraints, and a decreasedstaffing complement. This was followedin the 1990s by a spread of personalcomputers, the arrival of electronicdatabases and the Internet, and the riseof information literacy instruction. Allof these trends resulted in what shecharacterizes as the repurposing ofacademic librarians. She posed thequestion: How do academic librariansperceive themselves? This is where hercatchy presentation title came in andshe made a comparison to Oscar Wilde’sThe Importance of Being Earnest. Inher view, academic librarians have adual identity: “Jack” is the consummateprofessional and “Ernest” is theinvisible scholar.

The next question posed was: How dothe faculty perceive academiclibrarians? Dr. Leckie proposed twoidentities: the older identity (“slavingover a hot reference desk”) or the neweridentity (“expert navigator in a sea ofelectronic resources”). Whicheveridentity the faculty perceive along thatcontinuum, her conclusion is thatacademic librarians are not perceivedas scholarly colleagues engaged inactive research. So what are the barriersto the development of a scholarlyidentity for academic librarians? A lackof knowledge and confidence, a lack ofinstitutional support, a lack of peersupport, and job descriptions andperformance reviews. Suggestedstrategies to deal with these barrierswere outlined.

Strategies to bring down the barrier ofthe lack of knowledge and confidence:♦ Have in-house workshops on

research methodologies♦ Develop research partnerships with

faculty members♦ Start small—try to get something

published

♦ Take a study/research leave♦ Undertake a Ph.D.

The lack of institutional support wasaddressed by saying that most facultycollective agreements suggestinstitutional support through theavailability of sabbatical and otherleaves. However, the reality forlibrarians contradicts this:♦ Librarians do not have flexible

working arrangements♦ Librarians are discouraged from

taking sabbatical or study leaves♦ Librarians are not eligible for internal

university research money♦ Librarians do not have access to

research assistants

So how can weovercome theserealities and encourageinstitutional support?There must be a collectiverethinking of the roles andresponsibilities ofacademic librarians; wemust be clear about termsand terminology whennegotiating contracts; we mustinsist on the same support asfor faculty, including sabbaticalsand access to research and travelmoney; we must publicize ourscholarly activities within ourinstitutions. Some specific ideasconcerning the last point were toestablish a colloquium series,participate in research seminars inacademic departments, and announceour accomplishments in campuspublications.

Strategies to address the lack of peersupport are:♦ Foster an atmosphere of

collegiality—work together toidentify areas needing further studyand to develop research projects

♦ Support colleagues who are eligiblefor sabbatical or who are attemptingto conduct original research

♦ Celebrate the research successes ofcolleagues

♦ Form a research and discussiongroup

Dr. Leckie noted the tension betweenthe regulatory vs. reflexive aspects ofjob descriptions. Regulatory refers tothe fact that there is a need to beaccountable for ongoing libraryprocesses and work. This contrastswith the reflexive aspect, which focuseson time to read, study, learn, andcontribute to the knowledge of thediscipline. The tension betweenprescribed time vs. flexible time isaccompanied by a tension between theauthoritarian vs. mentoring aspects ofthe performance review for librarians.The authoritarian calls for a policing ofperformance based on certainprescribed indicators, while thementoring strives to foster and supportan interest in research. Dr. Leckieencourages a movement toward a more

reflexive and mentoring model andshe suggests a few ways to

achieve this. Weshould movetoward moregeneric jobdescriptionsfor facultylibrarians, inwhich thes p e c i f i ccomponents ofpositions aredownplayedand emphasisis given toresearch andservice. Theactivities ofi n d i v i d u a l

librarians can be examinedto see if there are duties that could berotated and thus taken out of individualjob descriptions. More should be leftto the individual discretion of thelibrarian. We should strengthenexpectations for scholarship andservice and support that throughappropriate performance reviews.Mentoring committees should be set upfor new academic librarians. It shouldbe made a strategic priority forlibrarians to take a greater role incampus governance and politics.

There are many advantages to begained if changes can be made to the


scholarly identity and role of academiclibrarians:♦ It will add knowledge to the

discipline of library and informationstudies

♦ It will contribute to the solution ofreal pedagogical problems in highereducation

♦ It will increase the visibility ofacademic librarians as colleaguesand partners in the academy

♦ It will increase job satisfaction forlibrarians (This point was supportedby research results listed by Dr.Leckie: librarians with faculty statuswere the most satisfied; librariansat institutions where the facultystatus model was the most rigorous,were the most satisfied; librarianswho were involved in a collegialmodel of governance were the mostsatisfied.)

The second session was a paneldiscussion moderated by AmandaWakaruk (York University). Thepanelists were Inga Barnello (LeMoyne College), journal editor ofCollege & Undergraduate Libraries;Rea Devakos (Gerstein ScienceInformation Centre, University ofToronto), a librarian who conductsoriginal research; Carroll Klein,managing editor of Wilfrid LaurierUniversity Press; and Cathy Matthews(Ryerson University), a librarian whohas been awarded numerous researchgrants.

In answer to the moderator’s firstquestion How do you develop researchideas? there were many goodsuggestions. Be curious about things,read the literature, let your dailydecision-making events produce ideas,collaborate with others, force yourselfto reflect, go back for another degree,let your need to achieve tenuremotivate you, follow your passion,attend conferences and read electroniclists. The discussion flowed on tomany other topics. Collaboration orpartnering is often actually sought outby an editor. In co-authoring situationsthe shared expertise and skill sets canbe very advantageous. One panelistspecifically described the process that

she feels works well for co-authors:chunk the paper into parts and divideup the research and writing; have oneperson do the “slaughterhouse” edit(first edit, putting the chunks together,not focused on grammar, etc.); integratechanges and solicit comments; have adifferent person do the second edit;integrate changes and solicitcomments; then do the final, “finesse”edit. She described the process as“read—write—consult.” Ms.Matthews focused on grants. She saidit is necessary to do your homework in

advance. Find out what grants are outthere and what other grants the fundingbody has awarded. Be thorough in yourproposal, detail all costs, and completeall paperwork carefully. Ms. Barnello,speaking in her role as a library journaleditor, said she does sometimes getunsolicited submissions that are verywell done. But she prefers to have theauthor contact her in advance so thatthe author doesn’t waste time or tailorthe submission to her journal’s styleunnecessarily. Ms. Barnello said sherejects a submission most oftenbecause the topic has already beenhandled recently. Other reasons are thatthe article is not substantive enough(“too fluffy”) or that the writing is poorlydone. She will work with the author ifshe feels the piece is salvageable.

There was a discussion about justgetting started and writer’s block. Itwas acknowledged that everyone hasproblems getting going and has a levelof anxiety about writing. Suggestionswere to block out a time period everyday, even if only for 30 minutes or so.More than one panelist emphasized justgetting something, anything down onpaper. Let if flow and capture it all, evenif you think you might end up cutting itlater. Don’t try to make it perfect whenyou are starting. In terms of writer’sblock, some ideas were to set it asidefor a day or two (but not for too long),

focus on the issues you are blockedon and build a “to do” list aroundthem, schedule small periods of timeand force yourself to work on it, andconsult a colleague if you are reallystuck. Of course you cannot expectsomeone else to do your work for you,but if it is a really tough part you arestuck on, a fresh perspective may help.One of the panelists pointed out thatresearch is basically about projectmanagement and active learning, skillsthat come naturally to librarians.

The final session speakers wereMichael Cook and Angela Horne andtheir presentation was called“Mentoring Matters: The Re-Inventionof the Cornell University LibraryMentorship Program.” They describedtheir program at Cornell in detail,focusing on the pros and cons and howthe program is being tweaked so that itwill be more successful. Theirpresentation and mentoringbibliography is available on the web at:<http://www.library.cornell.edu/pdc/Mentor.html> so I will not go into detailhere. I will focus instead on some ofthe points they made that particularlystruck me. It is essential to profile boththe mentor and mentee thoroughly andto make sure that they are matchedcarefully based on both theirexpectations. It is important to follow-up with mentors and mentees, in orderto determine why the match wassuccessful or not. It is not a one-waymatch, mentors can get a great deal outof the relationship too. Cornell’s currentprogram is for librarians new to Cornell.However they are considering


Serial IssuesEllen C. RappaportAlbany Law School

[email protected]

AACR2 to Expand Seriality at Last!

After five years of meetings, papers,discussion and votes, we expect to seea new revision of AACR2 this summerwhich will make major changes in howwe catalog serials. This TSLL columnhas presented some of the changes asthey’ve developed.

Descriptive cataloging rules willchange. We’ll see new rules on whento make a new bibliographic record —some kinds of title changes will nolonger require a new bibliographicrecord, resulting in fewer new bibrecords. This will result in fewerholdings statements, and less clutter inour catalogs. And some relief to ourcataloging workload. Hallam’s specialrules for cataloging loose-leaf serviceswill be part of mainstream AACR2. Theprinciples of cataloging an integratingloose-leaf service will also be appliedto integrating web sites.

We will have some new MARC values,and some new uses of existing MARCtags. These MARC changes will haveto be added to our online catalogprograms, either by the system vendoror by someone in your library,depending on what changes yoursoftware allows you to make.

We hope to provide some preparationfor all of these changes by offering aninformal session during AALL 2002 inOrlando, during the Cataloging andClassification Roundtable time slot,on Tuesday, July 23, 2002, from noonto 1:30 p.m. Since this isn’t a formalAALL program, it will be listed in thepublished program only as theRoundtable.

We are very grateful to NancyPoehlmann, Chair of the Cataloging andClassification Committee for making thistime available. I’m also very pleased tothank Richard Amelung, who has taughtcataloging, for agreeing to speak aboutthe cataloging aspects, and SusanGoldner, AALL’s representative toMARBI (which determines changes toMARC tags), for agreeing to speakabout the changes to MARC tags toaccommodate these revisions.

NISO Survey on Information aboutElectronic Resources

In April and May, NISO conducted asurvey seeking information about howlibraries were communicatinginformation about their electronicresources to other organizations suchas subscription agents, documentdelivery services, link resolutionservices, and aggregators. The surveyincluded single electronic titles andgroups of titles received fromaggregator services. The survey askedin what format holdings were beingtransmitted. The survey was alsoattempting to ascertain what kinds ofstandard identifiers are being used. Forexample, ISSN or ISBN for titles,Standard Address Number, OCLCsymbol or National Union Catalogsymbol for library. NISO expects tomake the results available on its website<www.niso.org>in June.

extending the program to librarians thathave been there a while, but needslightly different mentoring through themid to late stages of the tenure process.

Much of what I have reported shouldsound somewhat familiar to regularreaders of this column and to those whohave attended the OBS/TS ResearchRoundtable. But I feel it is alwayshelpful to be re-energized by hearing itagain and in fresh ways. The mentoringpiece may not be as familiar, but it too

is an integral part of the big “Research& Publications” picture. I am thinkingabout mentoring a lot these days as Ibegin to train our new cataloger, whohas faculty status, and as I embark on adialogue with my newly-matchedmentee, courtesy of the AALLMentoring Committee. One other pointthat lingered with me after thisconference was the mention of theimportance of reflection by a number ofthe speakers. I think that is one of my

biggest challenges: How do I make thetime for reflection? It is so essential toproblem-solving in our daily tasks, aswell as in the process of choosing atopic, doing research into it, and thenwriting about it. Yet I don’t think I amalone when I say that I feel rushed muchof the time and it is the reflection partof my day that usually gets short shrift.Do you have any ideas about this? Ifso, I would love to hear them<[email protected]>—thanks!


The following serial title changes wererecently identified by the University ofSan Diego Legal Research Centerserials staff and the University ofCalifornia, Berkeley Law Librarycataloging staff:

Albany Law environmental outlook-v. 2, issue 2 (Fall 2000)Changed to:Albany Law environmental outlookjournalVol. 6, issue 1 (fall 2001)-

Countdown 2000Vol. 1, issue 1 (Feb. 1998)-v. 2, issue 8(Sept./Oct. 1999)Changed to:Update 2000 (Charlottesville, Va.)Vol. 1, no. 1 (Jan. 2000)Ceased with:Vol. 1, no. 1 (Jan. 2000)

Dickinson journal of international lawVol. 2, no. 2 (spring 1984)-v. 19, no. 3(spring 2001)(OCoLC 11761337)Changed to:Penn State international law reviewVol. 20, no. 1 (fall 2001)-(OCoLC 49210199)

FICC quarterlyVol. 50, no. 1 (fall 1999)-v. 51, no. 4(summer 2001)(OCoLC 44558588)Changed to:FDCC quarterlyVol. 52, no. 1 (fall 2001)-(OCoLC 49410122)

Jury verdicts weekly-v. 45, no. 50 (Dec. 14, 2001)Changed to:California jury verdicts weeklyVol. 1, no. 1 (January 7, 2002)-

Tulsa law journalVol. 1, no. 1 (Jan. 1964)-v. 36, no. 4(summer 2001)(OCoLC 1767838)Changed to:Tulsa law reviewVol. 37, no. 1 (fall 2001)-(OCoLC 48844050)

The following serial cessations wereidentified by the University of SanDiego Legal Research Center serialsstaff and the University of California,Berkeley Law Library acquisitionsstaff:

The California lobbyists/PACsdirectoryCeased in paper: 2000.

Case commentaries and briefsCeased with: 21, no. 4 (Apr. 2001)

Construction law and businessCeased with: v. 1, no. 4 (fall 2000)

Droit de l’informatique et destelecoms = Computer & telecoms lawreviewCeased with: 1999/4

European Court monitorCeased with: no. 22 (1999)

Foreign policy bulletin (Washington,D.C.). Foreign policy bulletinCeased with: v. 11, no. 5/6 (Sept./Dec.2000)

Islamic and comparative law reviewCeased with: v. 15/16 (1995 & 1996)(OCoLC 27301956)

Japan quarterly (Asahi Sinbunsha).Japan quarterlyCeased with: v. 48, no. 4 (Oct.-Dec.2001)

Journal of international legalstudiesCeased with: v. 5, no. 2 (summer 1999)

Journal of reprints for antitrust lawand economicsCeased with: v. 29, no. 2 (2000)

Library of Congress. CatalogingPolicy and Support Office.LC classification, additions andchanges(OcoLC 28590161)Ceased in paper format with: list 284(Oct.-Dec. 2001)Subsequent issues available online:Library of Congress classificationweekly listsList 1 (Jan. 2, 2002)-(OCoLC 49398438)

Litigation docket(OCoLC 34727368)Ceased in paper format with: v. 6, no.4 (summer 2001)Subsequent issues available onlyonline: Litigation docket (Online)(OCoLC 49040110)

Post-Soviet media law and policynewsletterCeased with: no. 56 (1999)“Materials that can be previouslyfound in the Newsletter are availableon the newCommunications Law in Transition:A Newsletter available at: <http://pcmlp.socleg.ox.ac.uk/transition/>

Rechtshistorisches JournalCeased with: v. 20 (2001)

Translex : transnational lawexchangeCeased with: v. 2, no, 6 (March 2000)

WTO focusCeased in paper with: No. 52 (Mar.-April 2001)Available on-line at: <http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/focus_e/focus_e.htm>

Year 2000 law bulletinCeased with: v. 3, issue 6 (Aug. 2000)

SerialsChristina Tarr

University of California, [email protected]

Margaret McDonaldUniversity of San Diego

[email protected]


Most law catalogers areold enough to remembera time when documentswere routinely produced by amechanical keyboard causing a pieceof metal in the shape of a letter to makean impression through an inked ribbon.Some of us remember when mail washand delivered twice daily, seven daysa week, or when telephones had rotarydials and were attached to walls. Evenfor those of us who don’t remember,the world is full of change.

At present anything to do withcomputers is still “new” — at least inthe legal realm. Authors write books on“Internet and law” or “Computers andlaw” as if they were discrete subjects.If it were not for the newness of thesubject, this would make no more sensethan “books and the law” or “humanexistence and the law.” At some pointlegal research via computerized toolswill become the norm, and we will nolonger need to bring out in subjectheadings that computerized tools areused, just as we no long need to bringout that printed books are being usedfor our research (though a library in the15th century might have consideredthat to be significant). At some pointcontracts that exist as data filesencrypted by secure electronicsignatures will be considered normal,and written contracts will beconsidered quaint, along with oralcontracts attested to by witnesses orcontracts bearing a wax seal impressedby signet rings.

Compared to other librarians, lawsubject catalogers have to deal withthose changes in unique ways since thelegal community is unusuallyconservative by nature. We are in aprofession based on deliberate use ofanachronisms. Anglo-American

lawyers claim to bemedieval squires while“Civil” lawyers pretend to

think like they are wearing togas. Law,almost by definition, extrapolates froma known paradigm to cover a newsituation. Environmental law has itsroots in the regulation of tanneries.Labor law was once the law of “Masterand servant” (emphasis was on theformer). All of the laws on using theinternet for commercial transaction(“Electronic commerce—Law andlegislation”) had their origin in the lawsgoverning non-electronic means ofengaging in commerce (“Commerciallaw”). Litigation on the status of webdomains deal with legal principlesderived from the law of heraldry andpaternalistic medieval trade policy.

Following the usual way we catalogersdeal with controversy, we will followwhatever the authors do (what in politecompany is called “literary warrant”).If they say they are writing a book on“Electronic commerce” or on“computerized” legal research, we willprobably respect their judgment andawait the day when the editor at thesole surviving law publisher tells theauthor that he she is revealing their age,since all commerce (or research, orcontracts, or signatures) is electronic.

Of course we can look to whatauthors use in their title andbase subject headings on thelatest “buzz words”.Unfortunately, legalterminology is no lesssusceptible to the whims offashion than that of any otherfield, though the fashions vary.Isn’t “Informationsuperhighway—Law andlegislation” a really meaningfulheading? Does anyone talk like that

anymore? It is interesting to note thatduring the last two years, most of thebooks cataloged by the Library ofCongress with “Informationsuperhighway” in the title have beenlaw books, suggesting that the phraseis still used by lawyers but not byanyone else anymore.

Computer subject headings meanderquickly, much faster than (to chooseanother LCSH fiasco)a Colored can turninto a Negro can turn into an Afro-American and into an African American,while never being Black. When firstestablished as a subject heading by lawcatalogers “Data protection” was aninherently legal heading based on theEuropean “Datenschutz” dealing withprivacy and access, and having a strongcivil rights flavor to it—and dating back30 years (before the “net” and the PC,i.e. before modern civilization). By the1990s, in English, data protectionbegan to include things like makingbackups and not playing with magnetswhile computing, and the heading waskidnapped by the computer sciencecatalogers, necessitating establishing“Data protection—Law and legislation”with a reference structure indicating itisn’t the legal aspects of what hadbecome a computer science heading.

Some specific headings have evolvedin an interesting way. Atone time “Informationstorage and retrievalsystems” were a genericterm for any sort ofcomputerized gizmo (and“artificial intelligence”was one of the lessbelievable ideas amongscience fiction writers).The subject heading“Information storage and

retrieval systems—Law” now refers to

Legalizing computers orcomputerizing law

Subject HeadingsElisheva Schwartz

New York [email protected]

Aaron KupermanLibrary of Congress

[email protected]


large data base systems, but is no longerbeing used for any computerizedsystem. Two subject subdivisions haveevolved “Automation” and “Dataprocessing”, with the later suggestinga process than can be automated (e.g.judicial decision making, law officemanagement), whereas virtually anylegal heading can take “Dataprocessing”. Of course the automationof any system depends on dataprocessing, and the computerizedprocessing of data by definition isbased on automation. If normalhierarchal rules applied, they might be“related terms” but probably one wouldbe “used for” for the other.

Some terms become broader over time.“Telematics” is defined as “computerassisted communications” which at thispoint includes virtually allcommunications other thanpenmanship or human speech. It mightbe a great “broadest” term for many

books on the “techie” side of computerlaw (since it doesn’t involve content).The term is used in European lawbooks, and by non-lawyers, but hasn’tmade it into the titles of American lawbooks in a big way. At this point“internet” seems to be merging with“telematics,” though “internet”includes discussion of the contentwhereas “telematics” implies just thetechnical vehicle. “Computernetworks” once meant bunches ofcomputers working together, but todaymost computers are networked, and atthe same time all communicationsnetworks are computerized.

“Smart cards” shows the problem inreverse. Originally they were add-onsto computers that had built-inprogrammable elements (able to processdata independent of the hostcomputer), but increasingly one seesthe term used as an overall “catch all”for hand-held “money” cards such as

stored-value, debit or credit cards.From a legal perspective these are alldifferent beasts: credit cards are loans,debit cards are an alternative to paperchecks, stored-value cards are bearerinstruments but to a real person thesecards are often indistinguishable(except for a techie who thinks thatsmart cards are toys to insert into theback of a computer). At LC, thebusiness catalogers use the term oneway and the computer catalogers use itanother way, and for the most part, lawcatalogers try to avoid using it.

This is probably a “lose-lose”situations for law catalogers. The legalprofession is based on creativeanachronism and applies ancient rulesto ultra-modern problems, so we’restuck translating for Tudor andClaudian wannabees trying to explainthings to a world run by geeks andnerds.

BASIC stands for Book and SerialIndustry Communications, a standardsforum of the Book Industry Study Group(BISG), which is supported bypublishers, librarians, booksellers,wholesalers, book manufacturers andbook suppliers. For over 25 years, theseindustry parties have worked todevelop standards which wouldfacilitate computer-to-computerordering and fulfillment. Four yearsago, BISAC and SISAC (the Book andthe Serial Industry Systems AdvisoryCommittees) merged to form BASIC.AALL had sent a liaison to SISAC andcontinues to send one to BASIC. Asthe current BASIC liaison, I plan toshare developments with you and torepresent the needs of the lawcommunity to BASIC.

BASIC is involved with formats forelectronic data interchange (EDI), usedin electronic ordering and claiming. Isyour library using electronic orderingor claiming? Do you need to sendadditional data that you can’t sendnow?

SISAC helped develop the NISOstandard Z39.56-1996, the Serial Itemand Contribution Identifier (SICI). It isa character string — based on the ISSN— which can identify a particular issueand article of a serial. It can also beexpressed as a barcode, to facilitateautomated checkin. The SISAC barcode standard is due for its five-yearreview; SISAC will review it and provideinput to NISO. Unfortunately, SISACbar codes have not generally appeared

on law serials. The obvious barrier isthe lack of ISSNs. How can we improvethis, to facilitate automated serialscheckin?

In association with other internationalgroups, BISG maintains the OnlineInformation Exchange standard (ONIX)in the United States. In other words,BISG is involved with developingchanges to the standard with input fromappropriate parties. ONIX refers to anXML format in which publishersdistribute electronic information abouttheir publications to wholesale, retailand e-tail booksellers. ONIX containsnot only bibliographic information longfamiliar to libraries (metadata), but alsotables of contents, pictures of bookjackets, reviews, information about

Basics of BASIC

Ellen C. RappaportAALL Representative to BASIC

[email protected]


Summary:

I received 51 responses which isn’t agreat sample, but I think it gives ussome indication of what interests OBSmembers and what they expect OBS tocontribute to their professional lives. Considering the small size of thesample, it’s not very meaningful toreport percentages. However,generalizing from the responses it isclear that respondents find that OBSprograms, TSLL and MARBIrepresentation are highly relevant totheir jobs. The Joint Reception atAALL is also very popular withmembers.

Website:

Respondents responded to what theyliked about the Website (a tribute toWeb Advisory Committee, MariaOkonsa former Chair and Anne Myers,Interim Chair.) Respondents also shareda number of thoughtful suggestions forimprovements.

LIKEwell organized

uncluttered and direct access toinformation resourcesclearly laid out, easy to negotiate,minimum load timeit brings together many usefulresources under one umbrellaeverythinglots of linksneat, easy-to-navigate designclear, precise, to the pointTSLL available in HTML format forquick retrievalI really like everything about thesite. It’s greatly improved, easy toread and navigate. I wouldn’tchange anything. OBS has done agreat job!concise and easy to use formateasy to find information about thesection; well organizedI like the fact that information iseasily accessibleclean design—very straightforwardgood organization, clarity, MARBIinfoclear layoutit is updated frequently now andpeople work to make it even more

useful. This survey is the bestdesign to date

clean design, easy navigationwell organized and contains relevantinformationeverything

it all looks worthwhileuser friendly approach

CHANGEwant more timely newsspecify background color so that itdoes not default to my Windowssystem colorschange colors— blue and white aredepressingadd a site map, so that I can see whatis under each categorymake TSLL searchable (full text)don’t change anythingright now change nothing, I can findwhat I needwould be useful to have links to andfrom the Research Grants andWorkshopsI wouldn’t exactly change anything,but I would continue to havecommittees discussing the design

authors, and purchasing information.The format was originally developed toprovide data to electronic retailers suchas Amazon.com. Library patronsseemed to respond to Amazon’scatalog, so some library system vendorsare now offering similar enrichment foropacs. If your law library is using anopac that provides this kind ofinformation, does it work for the lawtitles? Is there any ONIX data out there,for us? Can the ONIX data be matched

effectively to our bibliographicrecords?

Currently, ONIX formats are beingdeveloped for serials, which couldperform alerting functions, such aswhen an issue has been mailed or whenan e-journal issue has been posted.This should allow us to claim missedissues promptly, and lessen prematureclaims. Like ONIX for books, ONIX forserials could carry tables of contents.

One of the most visible changes thatBASIC is involved with is theproposed expansion of the ISBN. The

need to accommodate vast numbers andkinds of electronic publications isdriving this expansion. All our librarysystems will eventually have toaccommodate this longer number.

Since many of us live with automatedlibrary systems, we know that we areaffected by bibliographic standards.Here is another group of standards that,less visibly, affect the way we operate.Let’s get involved with theirdevelopment, so they can accommodatethe needs of law libraries.

2002 OBS Membership2002 OBS Membership2002 OBS MembershipSurvey ResultsSurvey ResultsSurvey ResultsSurvey ResultsSurvey Results

Mary Jane Kelsey,OBS Vice Chair/Chair Elect


of the site and the needs of themembership. Out of that workwould come changeperhaps more educational contentfor the membership on automationor internet issues. This would be away of supplementing TSLL. Wecould introduce issues in thequarterly columns and then have aforum on the website to further morein depth informationmaybe the design could be updateda bit. More importantly, could therebe some sort of hot topics sectionthat might spark discussion betweenannual meetings? A link could besent from and email message thatwould go to the membership. Thatwould also remind us about thepage. It’s easy for some of us toforget it’s therechange nothingThere needs to be a link to it fromthe AALL sections page. Last timeI looked there was not one (nor forTS/SIS) some tutorial programs inthe OBS web page

Programming

Minneapolis OBS programs More respondents DIDN’T attend thandid notwithstanding the fact thatprograms ranked as very relevant totheir jobs. The reason is unclear—possibly the respondents didn’t cometo Minneapolis at all (I didn’t ask thatquestion) or other programming ormeetings competed for their time andinterest.

For the Orlando meeting, roughly 2/3of the respondents plan to attend theOBS sponsored programs. All of theprograms were ranked very relevant. So, we’re on the right track.

Potential Seattle programs in order ofpopularityUpdate on implementation ofintegrating resource application forbibliographic utilities and localsystemsLeadership in technical services:librarians who have experimentedwith new systems and productsIs the end of MARC near? Is XMLthe successor?

Managing knowledge assets withtools like JAKE, SFX, SerialsSolutions, Innovative’s MAP, etc.How to stay current on thetechnological front. Survey of theissues and resources for studyTechnology training— how to getyour staff up to speed. Methods andtechniques. This was tied with

Issues in redesigning technicalservices space. A survey of severallaw library renovations.

Program Suggestions/comments fromsurvey respondents:

Handling retention policies in yourOPAC— options for handlingchallenging legal publications suchas legal newspapers, Restatements,ABA newsletters, AALLS pubs,gov docs, microfiche.Topics geared to technology andtraining (separately or combined)are most useful. [And might I add,closely match the purpose of OBS]

How to reach the modern lawstudent and make the library theplace they think of to get a questionanswered

[A note: The Education Committee hasbegun to meet via email to start theprocess of developing these ideas intoprogram proposals, TSLL articles, orinformal round tables or poster sessionsduring the slots given to us for some ofour committee meetings. Please contactany of the members with yourthoughts.]

Education Committee:Cindi Buhi <[email protected]>;Kevin Butterfield <[email protected]>; Pat Callahan<[email protected]>; SusanChinoransky <[email protected]>; Cindy Cicco<[email protected]>; Ruth PattersonFunabiki <[email protected]>;Ismael Gullon <[email protected]>Janet Ann Hedin <[email protected]>; Richard Jost<[email protected]>; MaryJane Kelsey <[email protected]> , Chair; Ellen McGrath<[email protected]>; CatlinRobinson <[email protected]>; Mary M. Strouse<[email protected]>

TSLL ColumnsThe columns rated most relevant (3) arelisted here in order by the number of“3”responses.CLASSIFICATIONDESC & ENTRYMARCSUBJECT HEADINGSSERIALSOCLCMISS MANAGERINTERNETACQCOLL DEVRLINRESEARCH & PUBPRESERVATION

VolunteerismIt is gratifying that OBS members arewilling to contribute their time torunning our SIS — 6 volunteered to runfor office and 24 offered to work on oneor more committees.


I received 102 responses. With 614members of TS, that’s a 16.6% responserate, which is a fairly good rate as thesethings go. 100 people responded on-line, and 2 by fax. For the first time,surveys were distributed only via theTS website, and that seemed to workwell. Thanks very much to MartinWisneski, who put the survey up onthe web.

The first questions dealt with programsat the annual meetings. As programsranked second highest of all thesection’s activities, we know programsare important to our membership. BelowI have listed the Minneapolis programsby the most relevance points theyreceived. Respondents ranked them ona scale of 1 (not relevant) to 3 (veryrelevant). The ranking is partially, butnot completely, a function of how manypeople attended the program — if everyrespondent had attended a program andgiven it a 3, it would have scored 306. Aless-well-attended but highly relevantprogram could outscore a well-attended,but less relevant program.

Revising Rules to Reflect the NewReality: Changing the Definition ofSerials in AACR2: 154

Implementing the MARC 21 Formatfor Holdings Data: The New Frontierin Technical Services: 141

New Roles for Catalogers: SubjectAccess to the Web: 114

Cataloger’s Dilemma: When andHow to Use Law Uniform Titles: 108

Everything Old is New Again:Second (or Third) Generation SystemMigration (OBS-SIS co-sponsor): 72

Workshop: Managing TechnicalServices: 70

What You Don’t Know Can HurtYou: Essential Technical Services

Knowledge for Public ServicesLibrarians: 61

These are the ranking for the upcomingOrlando programs (again, the highestpossible ranking would be 306):

Publication Patterns: CreatingConnections in the Serials World: 180

How to Avoid ‘Search Reopened’and Hire the Right TechnicalServices Candidate the First TimeAround?: 158

Connecting with a Law Publisher bya Licensing Agreement? What am ISupposed to Do?: 133

What I Learned about Preservationfrom Visits to 30 Law Libraries andHow it Applies to You: 115

These are the rankings from theprograms proposed for Seattle (2003):Highest possible ranking would be 306.

A program on management issues:233

A one or two day workshop onserials cataloging, offered inconjunction with the Program forCooperative Cataloging’s SerialsCataloging Cooperative TrainingProgram (See <http://lcweb.loc.gov/acq/conser/scctp/schedule.html> fordetails): 219 Basic: 13 Advanced: 59

A program on applying subjectheadings: 208

A program on the application of thenew religious law schedules: 199

A one or two day workshop on serialMARC holdings: 196

People are interested in programs onmanagement issues, on newdevelopments that will affect how wedo our jobs, and in practical programs

on parts of our job that are a little tricky.Clearly, a lot of us are catalogers, so weshould remember, in looking at thesenumbers, that numbers aren’teverything. If a preservation programis ranked lower, it isn’t necessarily lessimportant, just important to fewerpeople.

The next section of the survey queriedrespondents on how relevant they ratedcertain TS-SIS activities. The highestpossible score in this section would bea 3.

Technical Service Law Librarian(quarterly newsletter): 2.82

TS-SIS sponsored educationalprograms at AALL annualmeeting: 2.61

TS-SIS Electroniclist: 2.42

TS-SIS sponsoredand cosponsoredO f f i c i a lRepresentatives toCC:DA, SAC,MARBI, BASICCommittees: 2.41

TS-SIS sponsorede d u c a t i o n a lworkshops precedingannual meeting: 2.35

TS-SIS Website: 2.30

Joint Reception atAALL Annual Meeting:2.20

Rene Chapman Award forOutstanding Contributions inTechnical Services LawLibrarianship: 2.17

TS-SIS/HQ sponsored continuingeducation workshops given aroundthe country, not in conjunction withannual meeting: 2.16

TS-SIS MembershipTS-SIS MembershipTS-SIS MembershipTS-SIS MembershipTS-SIS MembershipSurSurSurSurSurvey Rvey Rvey Rvey Rvey Reporteporteporteporteport


TS Education Grant: 2.01

TS Mentoring Program: 1.99

TS/OBS Joint Research Grant: 1.93

TS-SIS Brochure: 1.66

Promotional Giveaways: 1.47

TSLL is TS’s most highly rankedactivity. We can also rank the columnswithin TS by their relevance:

Serials Issues: 2.64Serials: 2.62Classification: 2.55Description and Entry: 2.50Subject Headings: 2.49MARC Remarks: 2.43Miss Manager: 2.42Internet: 2.38OCLC: 2.31Acquisitions: 2.28Collection Development: 2.15Research & Publications: 1.96Preservation: 1.90RLIN: 1.45

We asked people to give advice andcomment on the strategic plan. The planis available on the TS website at: <http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/strategic/draft/index.htm>. The goals were listedas:

1. Broad-based training,2. Professional networking, and3.Securing the acquisition and

preservation of informationresources.

Comments included:

* I think that the training programsaround the country coupled with theEd grant is an excellent way toaccomplish #1 (as well as #2 to someextent). Another idea is to sponsor morelimited duration electronic discussionlists (e.g. like the TS in the 21st centurydiscussion)

* I think the web-based clearinghouse(networking, strategy 3) is a fantasticidea. I would be willing to do a fairamount of grunt work for this andsimilar projects.

* Distance learning is a great idea, butwhat kind of support can we expect fromAALL to fund the technology anddevelopment? It’s a lot to expect as avolunteer effort initiated by SISmembers and exceeds the skill level ofmost of us to design.

* With the emphasis on training, I thinkwe may need to reorganize ourcommittees to some extent. At themoment, the Education Committeeworks primarily on programs. Perhapssomeone should be trying to develop along-term education strategy? On theorder of the beginning, intermediateand advanced cataloging programsoffered in sequence. Perhaps othereducational workshops have the sameset of requirements. (Serials, forexample.)

* In our library, technical servicespeople don’t go to the AALLconferences. If there were local trainingsessions, those would be possible toattend. Even easier to attend, but withless opportunity to meet people, is web-based training.

* The draft needs more polishing! Itshould include some timetables whenyou expect to meet some of thestrategies.

* As I am not able to attend AALLconferences on a regular basis, Strategy#2 under the Broadbased Training goal,and Strategy #3 under the ProfessionalNetworking goal would be of especialinterest.

* Concerning #3 about preservation, Iknow from experience that there are fewlaw libraries with staff trained inpreservation or using consultants. A lothas to do with the existence and extentof a preservation program in anacademic library’s main campus library.The main library serves as a resource.Law librarians will have to look outsideour own ranks for models for programsand individual librarians or consultants.

* The strategies as described in theplan now are a bit vague and do nothave associated deadlines. I think theplan should be more specific so TS

members will know if progress has beenmade. I like the 3 goals and strategies;they just need more work.

* Re: training, I like the idea of exploitingdistance learning and web-basedtraining. We can’t afford to send staffto out-of-town regional trainingsessions, and I wonder how manyothers can.

*Re: the interface between networkingand acquisitions, we should emphasizeand further explore cooperativecollection development. As expensecauses acquisitions to drop, and space-mandated weeding increases, weshould emphasize coordinationbetween libraries to ensure maximumavailability of resources (e.g. on an “I’llkeep this, you keep that” level, unionOPACs for patron convenience, etc.)

We also asked what TS-SIS could bedoing better, and received thesecomments:

* I need TSLL to remain a strongnewsletter with good content. The TScommittee meetings and roundtablesshould be good places to foster face-to-face discussion. The grants are anexcellent addition to TS’ products.Strong program planning shouldcontinue. TS needs to communicatewith its members better via its e-maillist.

* Getting the rest of AALL tounderstand what and when what issuesand programs are important to us.

* What TS is doing now is definitelyneeded and worthwhile. What I needas a head of technical services in alarger law library in which I don’t docataloging any longer and am involvedin acquisitions only to some extent isnot often addressed, though. I need tobe able to talk with people about overallworkflow issues. I’ll think more aboutthis and try to expand on it at somepoint. While specifics about catalogingrules, MARC formats, etc. are veryimportant, they aren’t what I need. Doesthe TS Education Committee ever lookat the programs offered by ALA?


* Continue to consider the variouslevels of experience within the SIS whenplanning education programs. As thereis increased use of online catalogs,think about annual meeting programsand TSLL articles covering this area.

* Again, I benefit from the informationyou share, but cannot attend meetingsor contribute myself. Thank you.

* I am a senior librarian. Most of theprograms, etc., are too basic and justdon’t interest me. I would be interestedin more opportunities for meeting withmy colleagues who are at a moreadvanced level.

* TS-SIS is a great group. The electroniclist is a tool that relieves the sense ofisolation that many law catalogersexperience. Law cataloging is different,and the list shows us that two (or many)heads are better than one.

* Offer more training workshops atannual AALL meetings

* I think TS-SIS does a great jobkeeping us informed and providingrepresentatives on the various nationaland international committees

* What ever happened to themanagement committee idea? I attendeda preliminary meeting in Minneapolisand haven’t seen anythingon the listserv nor beencontacted. I thought it was agreat idea; heads of techservices aren’t really beingserved in the SIS [Editor’snote: There will be aManagement Roundtable inOrlando.]

* Continue to work hard toget cataloging programsaccepted at the annualmeeting.

* Continue practicalprograms and workshops atAALL. Revisit important andchallenging topicsperiodically. Use TSLL andour list to explain/discussissues and developments.And, again, thank you.

* I want TS SIS to lobby the AALLBoard for a change in how our programselection and scheduling, and ourcommittee meeting scheduling, is done.I want us to be able to choose our ownprograms without needing approval orcoordination with a general programcommittee. I want us to be able toschedule committee meetings in regular8-5 program times lots, not just beforeor after program time slots. I want AALLto abandon its no conflict rule thatprohibits us from being able to holdimportant discussion groups orcommittee meetings opposite programsthat have nothing to do with us. I wantthe 7:00 am committee time slot banned.We need to look at the ALA ALCTSmodel to create a more flexible situationfor our training needs in Tech Services.

I’m thoroughly frustrated right nowat the fact that no program onAACR2 revision was planned forOrlando.

I wonder how many Tech Servicesand technical people attend AALL?Is there information about that? Dothese AALL members attendOTHER conferences instead? Whatis the ratio of tech services andtechnical programs to publicservice-related topics, and howdoes this compare to the ratio oftechnical and tech servicesattendees?

The speed of changes in today’stechnology doesn’t allow leisurelyprogram planning. ALA’s LITArecognizes this, and is very flexibleabout program planning schedules.It is possible to plan a LITA programin a six-month time frame. AALLshould find a way to allow for this,beyond the single “hot-topics”program.

Volunteerism:

Forty-four respondents offered to serveas a TS officer or committee member.

All in all, it seems that TS-SIS is doinga good job of meeting the needs of itsmembers. TSLL is our most importantservice, and many members who areunable to come to meeting expressedtheir appreciation for it. Programs at theannual meeting are also very important.Members would like more managementprograms, more programs on hot topics,and more flexibility in schedulingprograms and meetings. We also gotvaluable feedback on the strategic plan.

Thanks to everyone who participated!

Christina TarrVice Chair, TS-SIS

[email protected]

SaturdaySaturdaySaturdaySaturdaySaturday, July 20, 2002, July 20, 2002, July 20, 2002, July 20, 2002, July 20, 20026:00-7:30 p.m.6:00-7:30 p.m.6:00-7:30 p.m.6:00-7:30 p.m.6:00-7:30 p.m.

Orange County Convention CenterOrange County Convention CenterOrange County Convention CenterOrange County Convention CenterOrange County Convention CenterRm. TBARm. TBARm. TBARm. TBARm. TBA

Hors d’oeuvres and cash barHors d’oeuvres and cash barHors d’oeuvres and cash barHors d’oeuvres and cash barHors d’oeuvres and cash bar

Sponsored bySponsored bySponsored bySponsored bySponsored byInnovative Interfaces, Inc.Innovative Interfaces, Inc.Innovative Interfaces, Inc.Innovative Interfaces, Inc.Innovative Interfaces, Inc.

TS/OBS/CS/RIPS Joint RTS/OBS/CS/RIPS Joint RTS/OBS/CS/RIPS Joint RTS/OBS/CS/RIPS Joint RTS/OBS/CS/RIPS Joint Receptioneceptioneceptioneceptioneception


5. Why should OBS or TS membersattend the annual meetings ofAALL?

The Annual Meeting provides a greatopportunity to attend (and develop)educational programs; to have face-to-face committee meetings; visit withvendors and see new products; andto interact informally with colleaguesfrom near and far. And at the SeattleAnnual Meeting there will be anopportunity to develop and/or attendnew 30-minute educational programs.All of these activities constitutelearning opportunities that are moreclosely related to our work as lawlibrarians than any other experienceand are essential for broadening ourhorizons beyond the daily work thatwe do and the professional readingwe try to squeeze into our busy lives.Besides, it’s a great opportunity to

learn new ways to maximize ourpotential and contemplate/anticipatethe future. (Need I mention how muchfun it is?)

6. How can we encourage youngpeople to consider TechnicalServices librarianship as a worthycareer goal?

We can encourage young people bybeing alert, talking to potential futurelibrarians, lecturing on TechnicalServices librarianship and by setting agood example! I would also like toencourage you to support futurelibrarians by giving as generously asyou can to AALL’s scholarships andgrants funds, particularly the George A.Strait Minority Scholarship.

7. What do you think Technical Serviceslibrarians will be doing 20 yearsfrom now?

Twenty years from now I envision afuture where Technical Serviceslibrarians still will be ensuring thatpatrons have easy access to neededmaterials in a variety of formatsincluding print and electronic. It is myhope that we will have taken our rightfulplace as the organizers of the Internetor whatever its successor might be. As

information and research resourcesbecome more complex I think that ourrole in acquiring and organizing accessto resources will become even moreessential.

8. What kind of help would you like toget from your OBS and TScolleagues during yourpresidency?

Everyone benefits from fresh ideas andthe willingness to pursue them. Ofcourse I really appreciate positive andenthusiastic responses and supportand look forward to a great turnout forthe Annual Meeting and other AALLeducational programs (as well asproposing and fulfilling thoseprograms.) Also, support for CRIV, thePrice Index, and Government Relationscommittees at the chapter level are justa few of the areas where TechnicalServices librarians can make a specialcontribution.

9. What have been some of your favoriteor most memorable experiences inAALL?

I developed lasting friendships at theBasic Cataloging Institute in 1985,which preceded my first AnnualMeeting. Since then I have alwaysenjoyed thechallenge ofattending programsand committeemeetings by day,and Dance SISmeetings by night.

10. T S L L ’ sinterview withM a r g i eA x t m a n nrevealed apred i l ec t ionfor chocolateon her part. Doyou have anyp a r t i c u l a rcraving we canexploit toinfluence you?

I prefer nuts in my chocolate.

with vendors will find this aspect of theirwork quite useful as well. A good middlemanager is able to translate ideas intoresults, utilizing one’s own skills andcoordinating and directing the skills ofothers. Serving AALL at the nationallevel is the ultimate experience in teamleadership, a skill that every goodTechnical Services librarian must have.

3. Will your presidency have aparticular theme or focus?

Maximize Today—Envision Tomorrow!I want law librarians to excel in theireveryday work and to be leaders inshaping the legal information arena forthe future.

4. How can interested TS and OBSmembers get into leadership posi-tions in the parent organization?

First start at the Chapter and SIS level.Get involved, volunteer for committeesand be sure to be an active, resourcefuland cooperative member. Say yes whenasked to take a leadership position, andrely on friends and colleagues forsupport. Volunteer for nationalcommittees, and be sure to update yourmembership profile on the MembersOnly section of AALLNET.

(continued from page 1)


I would like to take this opportunity at the end of the volume to inform our readers of several important developmentsand to relate a few interesting facts.

On the development side, I am pleased to announce that we have two new columnists: George Prager will be writingour “Description and Entry” column, and Margaret Maes Axtmann will be handling “Collection Development”.[See their introductory comments on page 9.] These slots have been empty for some time, and we are lookingforward to having those areas covered once again. Also, Regina Wallen has stepped down as one of the“Classification” co-columnists and will be replaced by Beth Holmes; and Aaron Kupperman’s efforts as “SubjectHeadings” columnist will be shared with a new co-columnist, Elisheva Schwartz. We welcome the new membersand say good-bye to our departing friends with gratitude for work well done.

Another development is a potential change in the “Structures and Policies” document of TSLL. If you are surprisedto learn that TSLL has formal structures and policies, I expect that you are not alone. But, indeed, they exist andthey have been in effect (if not always adhered to) since 1989. During the past several months, I have beenreviewing them and coming up with some recommendations for changes. These recommendations will be discussedby the TSLL board and then submitted to the OBS and TS Chairs and Vice Chairs for their action.

Also of interest to TSLL readers is one of the grants from the OBS/TS Joint Research Grant Committee. BrianStriman, chair of that committee, offers an interim progress report for the TSLL Indexing Project:

“Susan Goldner and Lorraine Lorne were awarded a grant from the OBS/TSJoint Research Grant last year so they could purchase software to enablethem to index the TSLL. After looking at some software programs, theychose SYNDEX, and then have done research on indexing and guidelinesfrom NISO, as well as examining various thesauri for the project. Theyexpect to request an extension on the grant deadline and will write a fullinterim report for appropriate Orlando business meeting reports.”

Now for the interesting facts:

Fact One: I have the easy job around here. Think about it. There are columnists who write all kinds of interestingand useful content, and there are other people who contribute timely and pertinent articles. They send them to me.I send them to Linda Tesar, who makes them look beautiful; she sends them to Cindy May, who prints them andmails them, and who takes care of subscriptions and costs; and then Martin Wisneski transforms them intoperfectly integrated Web versions.

Fact Two: I know I have the easy part, and I am extremely grateful to all thepeople who do the hard parts: the columnists, the contributors, the rest ofthe TSLL staff. I would also like to thank OBS Chair Ismael Gullon and TSChair JoAnn Hounshell. They have been a pleasure to work with and havebeen very helpful in keeping the information from the two SISes flowing in.I look forward to working with Mary Jane Kelsey and Christina Tarr in theupcoming volume of TSLL.

We have collected a gaggle of reporters to cover the OBS and TS sessionsat the annual meeting. All of you who have agreed to cover a meeting,please remember that I would like to receive your reports and/or minutes bythe next TSLL deadline (August 15.) I hope to see many of you in Orlando.

Thanks for the feedback I’ve received during my first year as editor. I enjoy hearing from you. Please contact mewith any questions, comments, or ideas for pieces.

- Joe Thomas

FrFrFrFrFrom tom tom tom tom the Editor:he Editor:he Editor:he Editor:he Editor:

Nonprofit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDPermit No. 658Madison, WI

TECHNICAL SERVICES LAW LIBRARIANc/o Cynthia MayUniversity of Wisconsin Law Library975 Bascom MallMadison, WI 53706-1399

Are you contemplating a career change and need advice? Do you have a wealth of experience thatyou would like to share with others? Would you like to increase your networking opportunities? Doyou feel uncertain about attending your first AALL conference? Would you like an opportunity togive back to the law librarian community? If these thoughts sound familiar then the MentoringCommittee encourages you to participate in the 2002 Mentoring Project as either a mentor or mentee.

The purpose of the Mentor Project is three-fold: to provide an informal, personal source of informationfor newer members; to provide an avenue by which experienced law librarians may meet promisingnew members of the profession; and to provide a network for members who are contemplating amove to another type of library.

The Mentor Project is open to librarians from all types of libraries. Each participant will be assignedto a member whose profile matches, as closely as possible, his or her request. Applications will bereviewed by the Committee on Mentoring, Retention, and CONELL, which includes representativesfrom a wide range of employer categories.

If you are interested in participating, please visit our website at <http://www.aallnet.org/committee/mentoring/mentor_project.html> and submit your mentor or mentee application by June 1, 2002, butinterested mentors and mentees can submit applications after that up until July 1 and we will try tomatch applicants if we are able. Please also take a moment to review our selection of articles and tipson mentoring. We look forward to hearing from you.

A message from the AALL Mentoring Committee

Documents

Technical Services Librarian - Homepage - AALL...Hope Breeze Katherine Hedin Private Law Libraries: Betty Roeske Research and Publications: Brian Striman Serials: Margaret McDonald