ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries


3 9 4  /  C&RL News

A C R L: 
Partners in 

Hig h er 
Education

Communicating with higher 
education in the digital age

B y  W illia m  M iller, T h o m a s  E . A b b o tt, A lth e a  J e n k i n s , 
J o n a t h a n  L a u e r, a n d  J i l l  B . F a tz e r

ACRL shares its experiences with 
higher ed

One o f ACRL’s key strategic goals is to reach out to the broader higher educa­
tion community, sharing its programs, exchang­
ing literature, and collaborating on issues of 
mutual interest. This year, ACRL has been ex­
tremely successful in increasing its visibility

Im proving distance learning through t

As part of our response to Goal 2 of ACRL’s 
Strategic Plan (increasing contact with other 
higher education associations and profession
als), members have been active this year in 
making presentations at the meetings o f higher 
education organizations outside the field o f li
brarianship. One such presentation was a re­
cent half-day preconference workshop on the 
role o f librarians in distance education, held 
during the American Association for Higher 
Education annual meeting in Washington, D.C., 
on March 15, 1997.

This workshop, entitled “Improving Distance 
Learning through New Applications of Tech­
nology,” provided the audience o f 53 deans, 
provosts, and teaching faculty from various 
fields with an idea of how libraries fit into the 
picture as academic institutions move toward 
d istan ce, asy n ch ron ou s learning. W illiam 
Miller’s introductory remarks stated that the new 
modes of distance education reinforce and en­
hance traditional roles which librarians have 
always played as facilitators, coaches, and teach­

among higher education organizations, includ­
ing the American Association of Higher Educa­
tion (AAHE), the New England Association of 
Schools and Colleges (NEASC), the National 
Association of State and University Land-Grant 
Colleges (NASULGC), the North Central As­
sociation of Colleges and Schools (NCA), and 
the Middle States Com m ission on Higher 
Education. In this issue, we share with you 
some of the highlights of our activities.— A lthea 
Je n k in s

chnology

ers. Indeed, in the distance education world, 
librarians are som etim es the only h ig h er-
education professionals with whom students 
interact. Miller cautioned the audience that most 
research-quality information is not yet available 
electronically, so distance library services are 
often a matter of providing access to traditional 
printed resources.

Ann Coder, librarian at the Virginia Campus 
of George Washington University (GWU), de­
scribed in detail her experiences providing li­
brary services to business executives and other 
adult and distance learners, chiefly in GWU’s 
graduate and professional programs at the Vir­
ginia campus. Coder’s work is focused on the 
evolving “virtual” library and the new role li­
brarians must play in helping students develop 
into skilled information managers,

Carol Moulden, coordinator for off-campus 
library services at National-Louis University 
(NLU) in Evanston, Illinois, discussed her work 
providing library services to NLU’s distance 
learners in Illinois and six other states. The

e

William Miller is president o f ACRL a n d  director o f libraries at Florida Atlantic University, e-mail: 
Miller@ACC.FAU.EDU; Thomas E. Abbott is dean o f learning resources an d  university development at the 
University o f Maine at Augusta, e-mail: tabbott@maine.maine.edu; Althea Jenkins is ACRL executive director, 
e-mail: ajenkins@ala.org; Jonathan Lauer is director o f the Learning Resources Center at Messiah College, 
e-mail: jlauer@messiah.edu; Jill B. Fatzer is dean o f library services at the University o f New Orleans, e-mail: 
jbfls@uno.edu

mailto:Miller@ACC.FAU.EDU
mailto:tabbott@maine.maine.edu
mailto:ajenkins@ala.org
mailto:jbfls@uno.edu


Ju n e  1 9 9 7  /  39 5

emphasis is on electronic access to informa­
tion resources and the delivery of materials di­
rectly to stud ents’ hom es. She exp ressed  
strongly that her institution takes full responsi­
bility for the library needs of its students, re­
gardless of physical location.

Thomas Abbott was the organizer of the pro­
gram and, after his presentation on distance 
education and off-campus library services in 
Maine, his home state, concluded the program 
by leading an hour-long, spirited group dis­
cussion on a variety of distance education is­
sues, including the definition of an educated 
student, whether we can truly educate students 
through electronic and distance education, and

whether a lab science can satisfactorily be taught 
this way.

A shortened version of this preconference 
session was presented during the regular con­
ference, with ACRL executive director Althea Jen­
kins moderating. At both sessions, we shared 
with the audience the draft of the newly revised 
“Guidelines for Extended Academic Library Ser­
vices” as printed in the February 1997 issue of 
C&RL News, and discussed the evolving role of 
librarians in off-campus library services, particu­
larly as information transmitted via technolo­
gies takes hold and becomes a primary and 
unm ediated source o f information for the 
user.—  W illiam M iller a n d  T hom as E. A bbott

ACRL helps regional accrediting associations exp lo re lib rary issues

Regional accrediting associations have a re­
newed interest in assessing libraries contribu­
tion toward achieving campus missions. New 
teaching and learning strategies such as infor­
mation literacy and distance education are ar­
eas where libraries have major implementation 
roles and have exhibited leadership. ACRL re­
cently presented five programs on library top­
ics and issues at the annual meetings of two 
accrediting associations.

On December 5, 1996, at the annual meet­
ing of the New England Association of Schools 
and Colleges (NEASC) in Boston, Thomas 
Abbott, dean of learning resources and univer­
sity development, University of Maine at Au­
gusta, presented a preconference titled “A Vi­
sio n  fo r In fo rm a tio n  L iteracy in H igher 
Education.” The preconference used the results 
from a survey on information literacy that was 
conducted by ACRL in fall 1995 to expand un­
derstanding of information literacy and provide 
a forum for dialogue with individuals who were 
already working with the concept and promot­
ing learning and experience goals for students. 
In addition to Abbott, other panelists included: 
M. Beverly Swan, provost and vice-president 
for academic affairs, University of Rhode Is­
land; Richard Pattenaude, president of the Uni­
versity of Southern Maine; and Ann Schaffner, 
associate director of the Science Library and 
reference services, Brandeis University. The pre­
conference was designed for an audience of 
20-25, but attracted 80 people.

The North Central Association of Colleges 
and Schools (NCA) invited ACRL to develop a 
program track for its annual meeting in Chi­

cago, April 19– 22, 1997. ACRL presented four 
programs that challenged higher education de­
cision-makers to take a fresh look at how their 
campus library resources can help them achieve 
campus priorities in instruction, research, and 
service. Each program dealt with the changing 
roles of libraries and attracted an audience of 
more than 150 attendees.

The programs and their presenters were:
• “Assessing Libraries in Support of Cam­

pus missions,” Elaine Didier, director of aca­
demic outreach, University of Michigan, Ann 
Arbor; Bernie Fradkin, dean of learning re­
sources, and Walter Packard, vice-president, 
College of Dupage.

• “Information Literacy: General Education 
for the 21st Century,” Patricia Breivik, dean of 
libraries, and Lynn Sutton, director of the Un­
dergraduate Library and off-campus library ser­
vices, Wayne State University.

• “Off-Campus Courses and Library Sup­
port,” Thomas Abbott, dean o f learning re­
sources and university development, Univer­
sity o f Maine at Augusta; Carol Moulden, 
coordinator of off-campus library services, Na
tional-Louis University; and Jerilyn Marshall, 
acting library director, Northwestern Univer­
sity Chicago Campus.

• “Assessing the Library: What Data Insti­
tutions Need,” Althea Jenkins, ACRL executive 
director, and Stephen Spangehl, NCA associate 
executive director, led an audience of more than 
100 participants in a discussion about the kinds 
of data institutions collect as evidence of the 
library’s contribution to campus missions.—
A lthea Je n k in s



3 9 6  /  C&RL News

Facing the ch allen g es of the d a y

Some 200 participants attended this year’s 
8th Annual Information Technologies Work­
shop in Pittsburgh, cosponsored with the Coun­
cil o f Independent Colleges (CIC), CAUSE, 
EDUCOM, and the Consortium for Computing 
in Undergraduate Education (C-CUE). Most at­
tendees were computing professionals; upper-
level academic administrators were also well-
represented, including deans, provosts, and 
even a few college presidents. Librarians rep­
resented about five percent of the group.

The sessions, both plenary and breakout 
workshops, focused on three questions:

1) How can we understand the role of inde­
pendent colleges and universities in the Infor­
mation Age?

2) How can we identify and share effective 
practices to improve learning and administra­
tion?

3) How can we build and maintain a tech­
nological infrastructure?

It became evident that these questions cen­
ter around three emerging realizations or foci. 
In one way or another, all the sessions I at­
tended interfaced with the following themes.

1) Mission-driven technology, not a tech­
nology-driven mission. It is imperative that each 
institution first know and articulate its unique 
niche and mission in higher education to de­
termine what technologies are appropriate for 
and best serve that institution.

2) “Field o f Technological Dreams” voices 
must be disregarded. The “if you put it on their

desks, they will use it’’ paradigm was probably 
never clearheaded. Now more than ever we 
must listen to our users, hear what they need 
to do, and then give them technology to do it.

3) The pedagogical revolution marches on. 
Educational theory and practice continue to 
move from a professor/teaching-centered ap­
proach to a student/learning-centered para­
digm. The “sage on the stage” has increasingly 
become the “guide by the side.” The ongoing 
implications of this for the application o f ap­
propriate technology must be thought through.

The usual array of vendors bedazzled at­
tendees with new software in hands-on ses­
sions such as “Interactive Computer-Based 
Training for Staff, Faculty, and Students.” Work­
shops addressed a broad range of relevant, day-
to-day challenges, including network develop­
ment, distance learning, electronic portfolios 
for ability-based curricula, and faculty devel­
opment. One such offering related a program 
in Ohio based on the late Ernest L. Boyer’s 
S cholarship R econsidered, specifically the schol­
arship o f integration.

Participants were reminded that similar in­
stitutions face startlingly similar challenges. The 
reassurance that others are also daunted yet 
invigorated by the rapid change of our time 
has both theoretical and practical benefits. As 
CIC senior associate Edward J. Barboni reminded 
attendees, the human factor is, in the end, the 
one unchanging constant that spells success or 
failure, joy or sorrow.—J o n a t h a n  L au er

N ASULGC offers forum on inform ation technology policy issues

The National Association of State Universi­
ties and Land-Grant Colleges’ (NASULGC) mem­
bership includes 192 public research universi­
ties, including all land-grant institutions. Its 
purposes include representation of the inter­
ests of these institutions to state and federal 
lawmakers and agencies. There are, of course, 
many other organizations seeking to make the 
interests of higher education effective in Wash­
ington. Graham Spanier, president of Pennsyl­
vania State University and recently named chair 
o f NASULGC’s Commission on Information 
Technologies, feels that higher education would 
be better served in the contentious area of in­
formation technology policy if there were one

lead agency, and if all the interested constitu­
encies could reach consensus to “speak with 
one voice.”

To that end, NASULGC’s president, C. Peter 
Magrath, hosted a meeting on January 29 to 
w hich representatives o f the presidentially 
based associations, such as the American Asso­
ciation of Universities and the National Asso­
ciation of Independent Colleges and Universi­
ties, plus a variety of national associations with 
significant interests in information technology, 
such as the Coalition for Networked Informa­
tion, the Association of American University 
Presses, and the Association of Research Librar­
ies were invited. Some 30 persons represent­



J u n e  1997 /  3 9 7

ing 17 organizations attended and agreed that 
there was enough common ground to proceed. 
It was agreed that NASULGC would facilitate 
the development of a common agenda. Each 
of the six presidentially based associations will 
designate one college or university president 
to serve on a Presidents’ Policy Board on Infor­
mation Technology to define and promulgate 
policies on information technology issues and 
serve in an advisory role to the organizations 
they represent. A forum will be convened and 
repeated annually so that practitioners in in­
formation technology arenas and their associa­
tions may shape and inform the policies to be 
adopted.

The first Forum on Information Technology 
Policy Issues was held in Washington on March 
6 and was attended by 38 delegates comprised 
of university presidents, chief information of­
ficers, librarians, computing center directors, 
distance education administrators, university 
press directors, and several association staff 
members. Librarians attending included ACRL’s 
representative, Jill Fatzer, and ACRL members 
Elaine Albright and Sharon Hogan, who sit on 
NASULGC’s Commission on Information Tech­
nology; also attending were Lynne Bradley from 
the ALA Washington Office and Pru Adler from 
ARL. After remarks from Magrath and Spanier 
on the forum’s purposes, facilitator Grant Th­
ompson led the group through an exercise to 
identify the most essential topics on which con­
sensus policies will be identified. After much 
discussion, the areas agreed upon were copy­
right, distance education, Internet enhance­
ments, and telecommunications. Each area was 
assigned to a small group representative of all 
constituencies for the purpose o f identifying 
principles on which there is substantial con­
sensus, areas in which some negotiating might 
produce consensus, and principles on which 
consensus was not possible. Each group spent 
several hours working up a group of principles 
in its area, and most found a remarkable con­
sensus, considering the diverse interests repre­
sented.

There followed a reconvening of the entire 
group, which went through every draft prin­
ciple to indicate whether the organization each 
represented could buy into it. Some redrafting 
occurred at this point. At the end of the day 
the only areas of disagreement were on subsi­
dized telecommunications, and some aspects 
of fair use caused concern to the university press 
representatives. The next step will be a polish­

ing of the statements and their presentation in 
a coherent document. This draft will go to the 
Presidents’ Policy Board on Information Tech­
nology for acceptance and presentation to the 
associations and institutions it represents. Ulti­
mately, the result of the effort should be more 
understanding o f information policy issues 
among university presidents generally, and a 
clearer presentation o f agreed-upon positions 
by many diverse associations as issues arise in 
Washington. Personally, it was very gratifying 
to see ACRL have a voice in such a potentially 
far-reaching endeavor.—J ill B. F a tz e r

(E n dow m ents cont. fr o m  p a g e  3 9 3 )
Since the primary purpose of the ALA gen­

eral endowments is to enable ALA to respond 
to emergency situations, and since the present 
purpose o f ACRL’s large mandated operating 
reserve is essentially the same, the Budget and 
Finance Committee and the Board believe it 
makes sense to transfer to the ACRL endow­
ments the funds in the operating reserve that 
have been held for more serious emergencies.

We expect that the investment income that 
will be produced from the larger endowments 
that result from the transfer will substantially 
strengthen the financial resources o f ACRL over 
the long term. Modest income from the ACRL 
endowment will also be available to support 
ACRL’s strategic initiatives, fulfilling to a sig­
nificant extent our long-term goal for the ACRL 
endowment.

In view of these considerations, in San Fran­
cisco the ACRL Board will act on the following 
specific recommendation from the Budget and 
Finance Committee:

1) that ACRL move $400,000 from its oper­
ating fund balance and $200,000 from C h o ic e ’s 
operating fund balance to the ACRL and C h oice 
endowments in four phased transfers over a 
two-year period;

2) that ACRL endowment policy be revised 
to conform to ALA endowment policy by in­
cluding the purpose of providing financial re­
sources that will enable ACRL to respond to 
emergency situations and urgent needs; and

3) that the mandated operating reserve for 
both ACRL and C h o ice be lowered to 20% of 
recent operating expenses.

We anticipate that this new way of main­
taining our endowments and our reserves will 
enhance ACRL’s finances and programs signifi­
cantly in future years. ■