UW Library Electronic Data Service | Library

SPECIAL MEETING TO REVIEW THE EDS ORGANIZATION (NOTES)

JUNE 25, 2003

Present: Sandra Keys; Richard Pinnell; Judy McTaggart (Recorder); Shabiran Rahman; Susan Moskal

The group met to review and discuss the EDS organization and how to fill some of the gaps that will be left following Susan Moskal’s retirement in the Fall. The group decided the best way to approach the discussion would be to “brainstorm” for ideas. Some of the questions raised were:

what is the role of EDS?
how are we doing?
should EDS exist as a service?
should the EDS group continue as is or in some other format?

The group agreed that, first, there needed to be clarification on “what service is it that is being discussed?”

the service as it currently exists (i.e. locating and delivery of data), or
a combination which would also include extraction of the data

Currently EDS provides the service of locating and delivery of data and there is no expectation that the members providing the service be experts in extraction (e.g. regression analysis, SPSS, etc.) Clients are referred to faculty, Jack Cooper or Bo Wandschneider for further assistance. Jack is currently a member of the EDS group and he assists with post delivery service by facilitating and trouble shooting with the data.

The group thought it would be useful to identify and categorize the components of the EDS service. They were categorized as follows:

Resources Services

cataloguing
retrieving data
extraction (downloading, subsetting data, etc.)

Services

reference service
promotion
instruction
data literacy
finding data

The group agreed the terms of reference for EDS need to be redefined to place a greater emphasis on service – specifically, reference or information service. It was suggested the items classified under “resources” are technical and should be the responsibility of TDR. Also, the analysis of data should not be the responsibility of EDS. The expertise among the people currently providing the service needs to be considered.

General discussion raised the following questions:

If a data librarian or electronic services librarian was part of the EDS group, could the service be taken to the next level (i.e. data analysis)? It was suggested a proposal could be made to replace Susan’s position with a data librarian or co-ordinator of data services. This is currently in Susan’s job description.
Could TDR staff in Guelph become involved with “data analysis”? They have the expertise. Richard noted, however, that staff members in TDR are currently over extended and not likely in a position to provide the additional help.
Should the EDS committee continue or can the service be provided without being a committee and meeting on a regular basis?

Further discussion on the last issue generated the following ideas:

have more people who would be responsible for the data
the possibility of each person specializing in a different area (e.g. census, non-census, surveys)
could UMD staff be involved (surveys)?
the possibility of getting liaison librarians more involved with data that relates to their subject
more advanced training for library assistants serving on the Government Publications desk.

There was discussion on how to fill the gap in Census, Legal and case law when Susan retires. Susan noted that more advanced training is required for the Government Publications desk staff and the training should focus on Census, E-stat and CANSIM. She stated the desk staff should be more comfortable with electronic resources and how they parallel the paper trail – especially Census & CANSIM. This would cut down on referrals. She also stated there is a need to have one individual to whom Census questions could be referred.

It was suggested that perhaps someone from within TDR could be brought in to provide more intensive training for the desk staff. Susan pointed out that any training should be conducted by a librarian because the focus relates to reference service not solely data. There is a need to focus on what the outcomes would be for the training sessions.

The suggestion to put maps, Government Publications and data together (MADGIC) was also discussed. Richard provided a description of the model used at Carleton University which has one desk where service for all three are provided. He stated that desk staffing varies from one institution to another; however, this is usually one administrative unit. Susan expressed concern with the collection being moved out of the building and Richard noted the space to have Government Publications and maps together is problematic. Richard will send a description of Carleton’s unit to the group.

The group members considered whether they needed to continue meeting over the summer. It was decided not to meet until September and the group could then meet every Wednesday during the month before Susan leaves. Action: Judy will arrange for the room bookings.

Judy McTaggart

August 3, 2005