Tag Archives: 2007 ARLIS/NA Conference Atlanta

Using a subject degree in a nontraditional position

Kristen Mastel just published an article, “Using a subject degree in a nontraditional position,”  in the online library career newsletter, Info Career Trends.  To read her article, visit: http://lisjobs.com/career_trends/?p=475   The article is a write-up of her presentation at the Art Libraries Society of North America 2007 conference. 

Notes on Atlanta 2007, Session 2, Communicating and Collaborating: Working with Faculty for Information Fluency

Moderator: Jennifer Parker, Asst. Professor/Art and Architecture Librarian, University of Colorado at Boulder

Speakers

  • Jennifer Parker: Working with Faculty to Create Credit Courses and other Instruction for Art and Art History Students

  • Jeanne Brown, Head, Architecture Studies Library, Univ. of Nevada, Las Vegas: Comm. & Collab.: Faculty and Core Information Competencies

  • Claudia Covert, Readers’ Services Librarian, Rhode Island School of Design, Work in Progress: Foundation Building with Art and Design Students

  • Lucie Stylianopoulos, Art and Architecture Librarian, Univ. of Virginia: Developing Organic Instruction for Incoming Architecture Students

Jennifer Parker:

They have a required course for incoming art history students, a credit course.

The Colo. Univ. Lib. has a long time collab. with the CU Program for Writing and Rhetoric. The lib. does a tutorial and instruction session with the students in those classes, but it is not subject- or discipline-specific. The result is that 75% of freshmen come into the libraries in the 1st year, but the library rarely sees them after that. She’s a believer in subject/assignment specific library instruction.

She tried several things to get this instruction going and it’s taken four years to get it adopted. She had to be persistent and try different things for different groups. She knocked on doors. She set up web pages for each course [using Dreamweaver]. She created an exhibit space for artists’ work to be displayed, but that didn’t work to bring in students. She says it was harder to reach the studio classes’ students. They have a ‘Foundations’ class for studio art, so she started with that.

For Foundations, they have to write a 3-4 pg. paper on a contemporary artist that the student has learned about in class. The paper must include a bibliography and the assignment requires that the student visit the library. The bib. must include one book, one database, one website about the artist. Plagiarism is also discussed. http://ucblibraries.colorado.edu/art/ARTS1010.htm

She includes steps for searching the catalog and searching databases such as ArtBibliographies Modern and Lexis/Nexis Academic for articles.

For art history graduate students, she proposed library instruction at an art history faculty meeting. They now have a one-credit library course taught in conjunction with the art theory course. The library course is required for all incoming graduate students. It’s also recommended for advanced undergrads. The library course is now listed in the course offerings for this Fall 2007.

They reached 700 students through the Foundations classes. The library’s art/architecture section has high visibility now.

Jeanne Brown, 2nd speaker:

Persistence and repetition has been the key for her. She’s had problems with faculty turnover, even though people are receptive and positive when approached about library instruction.

She uses plagiarism as a topic to convince instructors that lib. instr. is worthwhile.

She offers to grade the lib. assignment for the instructor and return it to them.

There’s an assessment 2-3 mos. after the class to see if the students remember anything or if they thought it was helpful. She also collab. with a faculty member to create an image copyright tutorial on the architecture website. She’s done something with using wikipedia to teach. She was a member on a mini-grant, which she said was useful for forcing them to get something done.

She recommended that people capitalize on opportunities to talk with faculty because this can lead to collaboration.

Evaluation: for each competency, she asked

how important do you think it is, on a scale of 1-5?

how competent do you feel, how confident, on a scale of 1-5?

Claudia Covert, 3rd speaker:

Restructuring of art history 101-102. A mandatory library session, incorporates ACRL information literacy standards. It’s 15 sessions of 90 minutes each. The faculty asked to meet with the librarians: they brought over a really bad bibliography with inappropriate citations that a student had done and asked for help in improving things. So the librarian changed it around a little and removed identifying information and now they use that in the class as an example of what not to do. They break into groups in class and discuss why each source is unacceptable and say what they’d use instead.

They also use a picture of an artwork and have them use library resources to get information on it.

In the class, they give a handout of the slides they’ve discussed. All documents are kept on a shared drive that faculty and librarians can see. Components include a walking tour, a presentation with a handout, an exercise/scavenger hunt, and an evaluation with a candy treat. She said it’s funny but people really like the candy part.

Evaluation: They found that evaluation for students are best done on paper right after the session. For faculty, they do surveys/assessments by email, later in the semester, because faculty members prefer it this way.

She’s happy to send sample power points. Her email is ccovert at risd.edu (using the @ symbol).

Lucie Wall Stylianopolous, 4th speaker:

The embedded librarian. She said universities are very interested in outcomes. You have to evaluate/survey students and faculty at the end of instruction and post the results for all to see.

A required graduate course for incoming students. All lib. instruction is mandatory at their school. Key for her in designing instruction were scalability and location.

She says architecture students are studio people, like artists. They went to the classroom where the architecture students met, instead of having lib. instr. in the library. They looked at the syllabus to see where library instruction could fit in.

They have a required Refworks class and a class in using Artstor. They also teach about searching and using images on the web, copyright, and plagiarism. She said their BI involves a progression of using Google, then the online catalog, then the databases, then … Google was her main research tool, especially the international pages and learning how it is structured. She said it can be more useful than Google scholar.

Their mantra was ‘keep it to the curriculum; keep it to the syllabus.’

Students have to be able to do credible research on images and on topics for research. They have the hardest time making their research relevant to their topic.

Now student requests for acquisitions have increased greatly, so their collection is picking up.

They plan to continue teaching in the classrooms where the classes already are and they’re going to require that students bring their laptops to class.

notes on some conferences/meetings attended: Atlanta

 

notes made on workshops, sessions, and meetings: Art Librarians of North America annual conference, Atlanta GA
Apr. 26-30, 2007

 

notes by: Tom Hartmann, Librarian, Harrington College of Design, Chicago, IL.

These are notes garnered from notes taken at the above-noted conference. They are sometimes detailed, somtimes very light in detail. I’ve noted conference and meeting names in bold, in a sort of short-hand such as “Getty vocabulary contributions,” rather than full name.

The notes are not meant to be comprehensive. Perhaps for those who attended other conferences and meetings, the notes may afford an insight. I have not consulted any powerpoint versions of lectures, so facts, spelling of personal names, and other details may not be accurate.

 

 

1) Getty Vocabulary contributions

–Librarians may add subject heads, personal names (authors, creators…)

geographic subjects to Getty Museum cataloging.

Getty is basically taking voluntary informational contributions

via an Internet form it makes available.

 

Information at the Getty site is updated once per month.

 

One name (of author, creator, etc.) is preferred, usually a vernacular

name.

Go to www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/vocabularies/editorial_guidelines.html

 

If nothing else this is a reminder that information is shared. Libraries can contribute information, but also may obtain information at the Getty website.

 

2) Working with faculty for information fluency

 

–varying projects were done by one college:

 

a.) before-and-after test of library literacy: what learned? was it helpful?
b.) displays of student work
c.) coffee initiatives

 

–another college:

 

a.) survey sent to faculty asking about if tour wanted: they did, and tours were arranged

and interest in library increased

 

b.) quick/short survey eliciting knowledge of plagiarism (most students don’t know what it is).

 

c.) Univ. of VA Fisk Library (architectural studies):

information literacy was studied

Decided to become “imbedded librarians” : teach in classrooms; use library less

Closed down its special classroom, which was part of the library

Did instruction sessions on reference books they have

 

page 2 conference notes Atlanta

3) Cataloging Section meeting

This is a meeting for issues important to catalogers.

 

Some points to note:

 

Some family names are becoming corporate entities.

[Rest of meeting was administrative, mostly re type of

“clout” Cataloging Section will have….Survey done by ARLIS

suggests too much “administrative discussion” is being done

in meetings—to exclusion of addressing issues.

Cataloging Section decided to study further what should be

done—to change way meetings are done, to continue on, or???]

 

4) Copyright ten years later: a decade of copyright developments

Lawyer (special counsel to the librarian at Univ. of Virginia)

says she believe an orphan works bill “has legs.”

–There are prohibited works, especially some media ones

–Kids believe in right to harvest

–Litigious society

–Fair Use has 4 factors: but doesn’t tell which most important;

is deliberately vague, but is useable

 

Case of universal garage door opener mfr being sued.

Court found against idea of universal idea.

Likely a Fair Use Act—if not, then likely courts will review

Likely effect on digital.

Bridgeman vs Corral: had to do with thumbnail issue

Finding was that just because losts of effort ==> not copyrightable

 

9th circuit court (west coast court; influential; Hollywood rulings):

Commercial co. okay to have fair use, but just students/faculty have

allowance to use.

Sonny Bono law disallowed use of old stuff

–Lots of orphaned works are new.

–There is a chance to go back to the former copyright rules dating back to 1963.

–Problem is new publishings go to 2047

****Be careful what’s in licenses: CHECK FINE PRINT. **

 

 

conference notes Atlanta page 3

 

Joseph Beck an attorney who does some copyright work:

most is case-by-case basis.

study shows 1923-1999: less than 15% of works renewed

why? Cost of negotiating w/ copyright owners

still likely orphaned works will come

–have to make reasonably diligent effort to find owner: use technology/pay fee

**each college should be asking re classroom use as new books/materials are received**

–section 108: wants balance of use vs. something in return

Maybe 3 copy limit to digital works?

“Fair Use Act” = unfortunate name as it’s hard to oppose:

 

BUT would eliminate statutory damages; however $175 per damage primary

damages would be allowed (an add up!)

 

libraries have difficulty making high quality reproductions

protection of images, but want fair us: is this a contradiction?

 

2nd district court (Wash, DC) becoming liberal

ruled on Graham Archives (thumbnails) case

talked about purpose and character of use;

commercialism doesn’t carry the day

real issue is transportative use (changing work into new)

 

Bill Graham case (Grateful Dead art-quality posters):

wanted to put posters on timeline

2nd district ct said didn’t care re commercialism;

rather transformative use worried about:

posters are promotional; and secondarily art

tried to accentuate an event

 

search engine case:

Ct. allows thumbnail on cell phone there’s license

 

5) Social tagging and controlled vocabularies

Director of Rhizome.org (Rhizome at the New Museum)

Is non-profit project of art engaging digital technology

have 2 archives: a textbase and art base (archival)

after thinking about, then surveying members,

allowed social tags; worried re having too many tags

ended up allowing

 

 

conference notes Atlanta page 4

 

Jean Riley of Indiana University:

 

asks about identity of those who tag

categories need refining

she detailed their system by which tagging has been allowed: getting cooperation,

keeping control

 

6) Art and Design School Division meeting

 

Much akin to point 3 above (Cataloging Section meeting)

VP Elect of ARLIS NA Ken spoke of thought of cross-pollinating groups:

it’s a trend amongst many organizations…Can have interest group or clique

rather than so formal a group.

 

There was request to send art and design school news on to the secretary of this group.

There was proposal to formulate ideas for next conference (Denver) 3 months ahead of

time to help minimize the “administrative discussion” that bogs down meetings.

Meetings become meeting to discuss more meetings.

 

7) Walking tour of Ansley Park (just past Sheraton Colony Sq. = conference site)

Single family homes. Low rise, but can see tall buildings on Peachtree—

SBC Bldg., etc.

Not quite a historic district; but new buildings seem to try to blend in.

Novelist Pat Conroy lived/worked in one home; later burned to group: no fire

hydrants nearby worked.

In the 1940’s oil magnate lived there; traveled much; had second wife and a mistress…

 

8) Challenges, Choices for art librarian

To summarize, there were talks by three librarians who each discussed their

past and present positons as librarians.

 

Eugene Downing of the Getty had a handout showing websites of standards present and future for art librarians and giving informational listings of job skills important to art librarians.

 

Sarah McClesky of Hofstra University had moved from classical languages to archeology to librarianship. She spoke of preparing for future change:

getting decision-making experience; establishing user-services group;

getting budget experience; learning to supervise (more than just student workers), etc.

Alessia Zanin-Yost, Ref. Librarian Western Carolina Univ.

Spoke of handling all the humanities (6 depts.): 17 faculty and 1000 students

conference notes Atlanta page 5

Alessia Zanin-Yost (continued):

 

Her specialty is art (has masters).

She does 10 hours per week ref. desk duty.

Is on tenure track (to be achieved 3 years hence)

Has to publish.

Does outreach.

Attends committee meetings.

Work aplenty, but enjoys greatly her position.

 

Other librarians iin her library cover just two subject areas each.

 

9) Atlanta: architecture of the 20th century

 

Eliz. Dowling of GA Institute of Technology spoke on Philip Shutze, an architect in the classical traditionwho resisted modernism, and retired early rather than give in to it.

 

In contrast Alfred Willis, Harvey Library Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia

Gave a slide tour of modernism in small town Georgia.

Prof. Robert M. Craig of GA Inst. Of Tech. had an ample slide show, from classical to modern buildings, in Atlanta.

 

END OF NOTES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Summary of Backpack to Briefcase: Life after Library School

Backpack to Briefcase: Life after Library School.

Sarah Carter Moderator Introduced the session saying this session was born from the conference last year at Banff, and envisioned something that would help students, and new professionals jumpstart their role in ARLIS. Continue reading

Atlanta Conference – Thank You and Evaluations

A heartfelt thank you to the entire conference planning team for the wonderful Atlanta experience in 2007! From the hotel to the cultural attractions to the sessions – what an impressive conference!

As we plan for Denver in ’08, all attendees should take a few minutes to evaluate the conference here (deadline is Monday, May 21st). In this way, we can ensure that next year’s conference will be even more spectacular!

Session Update from Atlanta: Going Outside, Coming in from the Cold

Going Outside, Coming in from the Cold: Outsourcing, Moonlighting, and Consulting

Carol Rusk, Whitney Museum of American Art

Eric Wolf, New York School of Interior Design

Margot Keuper, Duncan Systems Specialists, Inc.

Continue reading

ArLiSNAP meeting in Atlanta

The Student Affairs Discussion Group met in Atlanta on Friday, April 27. The following is a summary of the topics addressed at the meeting.

Sarah Carter began the meeting by introducing herself as the outgoing Co-Moderator, and introducing Rebecca Cooper as the incoming Co-Moderator. Co-Moderators serve a term of two years, and overlap by one year. The continuing Co-Moderator, Megan Macken, was unable to attend. Other present members also introduced themselves.

(1) Announcements:

The cafepress site is up, with many new ArLiSNAP items for sale at cost. Check it out! (just go to www.cafepress.com and search for “arlisnap”)

A reminder that there are three sessions at the conference sponsored by the Student Affairs Discussion Group.

(2) Session Proposals

Members were asked for suggestions for sessions or conference activities that they would like to be involved in for next year. Several ideas were discussed. A separate blog post will appear to continue discussion on these ideas, which included a Next-Gen OPACS session, a “wisdom of crowds” session, continuing the New Voices session, supporting the Resume Review workshop, encouraging more job postings/interviews, and getting involved in poster sessions.

(3) The proposal for a Social Networking Interest Group in ARLIS/NA

Members discussed Sherman Clarke’s recent suggestion on ARLIS-L to form a Social Networking Interest Group. Although it was agreed that the Student Affairs Discussion Group is active in this area, it was decided that it would be best to wait to see what came of the idea before deciding exactly how we would get involved. The suggestion was made that if the group is formed, it may be appropriate for us to appoint a liaison or representative.

(4) ArLiSNAP

Members were asked for critiques/ideas about ArLiSNAP. It was discussed that some of our new members had not explored it fully, and that some of the general ARLIS/NA membership may not have the skills to feel comfortable with the blogging format. It was suggested to create a very basic “blogging 101” introduction so that new visitors could learn a bit about the format and how to use it, as well as blogging etiquette. It was also suggested that we update the YouTube video with fresh content from the current year, and that we perhaps author a podcast as well. If you have other ideas, please post them in the soon-to-appear suggestions post.

(5) Name Change

There was discussion as to whether ArLiSNAP was synonymous with the Student Affairs Discussion Group. Some members mentioned that they did not realize that the core group of participants were the same. Others commented that the name “Student Affairs Discussion Group” is misleading, and seems to imply only student involvement, or perhaps some sort of academic administration role. It was determined that “ArLiSNAP” better represents the group, and could refer equally well to our face-to-face and online community components. A vote was taken, and a unanimous decision was made to change our name to ArLiSNAP.

(5) New Projects

Three new projects were discussed for the group for the coming year.

– Revising the existing publication on Art Librarianship educational opportunities, which will give ARLIS/NA and our group a better understanding of the degrees/tracks/coursework that exists in ALA accredited institutions to prepare the next generation of Art Librarians. Those interested in this project can leave a comment and let us know!

– Doing a study of student support and aid available in local chapters. This will help to give us an idea of whether we may need to start an initiative to be sure that students can get the support (financial, mentoring, etc.) they need from local resources. It will also allow us to determine whether there are recommendations we can make to ARLIS/NA in general, including the possibility of starting student chapters.

– Analyzing our goals and taking a hard look at where we want to go and the effect that structural/administrative changes might have on this group. It was acknowleged that our current status as an “unofficial” group seems conducive to our identity as a social, collaborative, and innovative community. It was also noted that the structure of ARLIS/NA is changing, and may re-arrange itself in coming months.

As there was no further business, the meeting was concluded.

If you were unable to attend the meeting, or if you have further thoughts, please feel free to comment or start a new thread to discuss your suggestions!

Following the meeting, participants met up with a broader group of students, new professionals, and seasoned ARLIS/NA members to attend the fantastic pub crawl!