ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 2 4 2 / C&RL News ULS discusses new learning com m unitiesCon feren ce Ci r c u i t By Anne Garrison, Paula Walker, Linda TerHaar, and Mary Munroe Midwinter highlights from the University Libraries Section U W ire d a t U n iversity o f W ash in g to n The University Libraries Section (ULS) Current Topics Discussion Group presented a panel on new learning communities at the University of Washington during the ALA Midwinter Meet­ ing in February. Betsy Wilson, Jill McKinstry, Paula Walker, and Helene Williams outlined the inception, growth, challenges, and successes of UWired, a program at the University of Wash­ ington (UW) which integrates electronic com­ munication and information navigation skills into instruction and learning. UWired began as a pilot project in 1994 when former UW provost Wayne Clough, now president of Georgia Institute of Technology, initiated a collaboration between the UW Li­ braries, Computing & Communications, and the Office of Undergraduate Education. This part­ nership sought ways in which the undergradu­ ate learning experience could be enriched, a sense of community established, and technol­ ogy brought into the service of learning and teaching. The resulting program has grown from a small pilot project reaching 65 students and 12 faculty and teaching assistants to a multifac­ eted program enjoyed by more than 2,000 stu­ dents and 1,000 faculty. The primary function of UWired, Betsy Wil­ son explained, is to create an electronic com­ munity in which communication, collaboration, and information technologies become integral parts of the pedagogical process. To accom­ plish this, UWired took a fresh look at the Fresh­ man Interest Group (FIG). This program has been assisting students in adjusting to life and work on campus since 1987. Incoming students enroll in a suite of thematically linked courses taught during their first quarter. In addition, they take a one-credit seminar concentrating on such topics as choosing a major and registering for classes. UWired expanded this seminar into a two-credit course team-taught by a librarian, peer advisor, and a UWired lead (i.e., com­ puter student assistant). The class now focuses on the core competencies of electronic com­ munication, the Internet and the World Wide Web, and library resources, in addition to the traditional campus survival skills. Innovative classes require innovative class­ rooms. Paula Walker detailed the planning and building considerations for three new computer facilities, called collaboratories, which have opened in the Undergraduate Library. They contain Pentium and Macintosh computers and provide a technologically advanced forum for c o lla b o ra tio n and com m unity. A fourth collaboratory is opening in a space formerly housing the Geography Library. Jill McKinstry highlighted UWired’s success­ ful partnership with intercollegiate athletics. Coaches, librarians, and faculty are working together to enhance student athlete academic success through the use of information tech­ nology. Through UWired, athletes have access to laptop computers and can remain connected to academic resources while on the road. H elene Williams discussed innovative courses, yet another aspect to the UWired pro­ gram. These upper-division courses offer fac- In lieu o f a section newsletter a tea m o f ULS m em bers provid es C&RL News w ith s e m i-a n n u a l reports o f its activities. A n n e Garrison is reference librarian a t Georgia Institute o f Technology; e-mail: anne.G arrison@ ibid.library.gatech.edu; P aula W alker is assistant director o f libraries a t the University o f W ashington; e-mail: pwalk.er@u.w ashington .ed u; L in d a TerHaar is h e a d o f the Shapiro U ndergraduate Library a t the University o f M ichigan; e-mail: terhaar@ um ich.edu; M ary M u n ro e is h e a d o f collection developm en t a t Georgia State University; e-mail: m m unroe@ gsu.edu mailto:anne.Garrison@ibid.library.gatech.edu mailto:pwalk.er@u.washington.edu mailto:terhaar@umich.edu mailto:mmunroe@gsu.edu April 1997 / 243 ulty the opportunity to explore new ways of integrating information and technology re­ sources into the course content. Faculty must submit proposals which demonstrate how they wish to integrate technology into their curricula. If accepted, innovative courses benefit by the use of the UWired collaboratories, support staff, and software. Also, a librarian is assigned to each faculty member to help implement the new course and offer technical assistance if needed. It quickly became apparent that not all fac­ ulty are comfortable with new technologies. In response to this need, UWired established the Center for Teaching, Learning, & Technology. The Center, located in the Undergraduate Li­ brary, provides support for faculty attempting to integrate technology into their curricula as well as consultation services, access to hard­ ware and software, resources, and a forum for sharing ideas. In addition to the assistance pro­ vided by the Center, UWired offers lectures and ongoing workshops for faculty. The workshops cover such topics as e-mail, pedagogy, Web page development, and copyright in cyber­ space. Finally, UWired is forming partnerships with the UW Extension Program, K– 12 schools, and regional community colleges. Through the UWired program, librarians have become active partners in an educational process that is making information and tech­ nology literacy distinguishing characteristics of a University of Washington graduate. For more information on UWired, see its homepage at http://www.washington.edu/ uwired/ or send e-m ail to u w ired@ u. washington.edu.— A n n e Garrison O th e r highlights The ULS Executive Committee, chaired by Don Frank, met twice during Midwinter. The 1997 Annual Conference Program Committee for ULS reported on plans for San Francisco. Following along on the theme of future librarians’ careers, set at the 1996 New York ULS program, the 1997 topic will be “The New Generation of Scholars: Do They Really Need Us? (Maybe, Maybe Not).” The ULS Policy and Planning Committee was asked to write a vision statement and list of strategic directions for ULS. By the San Fran­ cisco conference, the committee will have a draft to share with the Executive Committee. The ULS Communications Committee pre­ sented a draft Communication Tip Sheet, which contains information on how to publicize ULS programs and events, and asked the Executive Committee for comments and suggestions. A final version will be ready for distribution to all ULS com­ mittee chairs at the San Francisco conference. (ULS cont. on p a g e 2 5 3 ) The future from the faculty point of v iew —are librarians in the picture? ULS’s 1997 ALA Annual Conference Pro­ gram, “The New Generation of Scholars: Do They Really Need Us? (Maybe/Maybe Not!”), will be held on Saturday, June 28, 1997, from 2:00–4:00 p.m. in San Francisco. In a departure from tradition but in line with the ACRL Strategic Plan, ULS has gone outside the profession to talk to one of the major user groups in academic libraries, the teaching faculty. Universities are facing a new world of scholarly communication in the 21st century. When we get there, will there be a place for libraries and librarians? Three active and future-oriented scholars— a social scientist, Michael F. Goodchild (Uni­ versity of California at Santa Barbara), a sci­ entist, Roger Caldwell (University of Arizona), and a humanities scholar, Paul Jones (Insti­ tute for Advanced Technology in the Humani­ ties)— will address these issues. They will re­ flect on the future of scholarly research with emphasis on their particular disciplines. Then they will ponder whether libraries and librar­ ians will be needed in this future, and if so, how? Finally, they will consider what librar­ ians do now that adds value to their research and what will be useful in the future. After that, moderator Shelley Phipps (Uni­ versity of Arizona) will lead the audience in a conversation with the speakers to reflect on our joint future and to consider what we as individuals need to do to prepare. The ULS homepage (http://www.sc.edu/ library/ala/index.html) will have updates and more information as the date for this program approaches.— M ary M unroe http://www.washington.edu/ http://www.sc.edu/ April 1 9 9 7 / 253 the pool was exceptionally large or exception­ ally strong, share this with the candidate. Avoid comparisons of candidates (e.g., we hired some­ one with stronger leadership skills). Provide qualifications of the candidate hired if they are exceptional and can be stated objectively (e.g., we hired someone with more than 20 years of experience).11 Do not give the name of the per­ son hired or share information that could be used to identify him or her. End with a gesture of goodwill. Conclusion The on-site interview should seek to recruit as well as select the best candidate. Candidates will appreciate small courtesies, attention to personal comfort, and activities that address their interests and concerns. Organizations that create exceptional interview experiences will increase the likelihood of hiring the best can­ didate for the job. N o tes 1. Alison Jago, “Join the Team! Recruiting for Information Professionals,” Library M an ag e­ m en t 14 (1993): 31– 34. 2. Sara L. Rynes, “Individual Reactions to Organizational Recruiting: Review,” P erson n el Psychology 33 (Autumn 1980): 529–42. 3. Ibid. 4. Laurence S. Fink, Talya N. Bauer, and Michael Campion, “Job Candidates’ Views of Site Visits,” J o u r n a l o f C a reer P la n n in g a n d E m ploym ent 54 (March 1994): 32– 34. 5. Mick Donahue, What Makes a Jo b a Good Job?” F ocu s 70 (July 1993): 32– 34. 6. Susan Carol Curzon, M an ag in g the In ter­ view: A How-to-Do-It M a n u a l f o r H iring S ta ff (New York: Neal-Schuman, 1995). 7. ACRL, Academic Status Committee, “Model Statement for the Screening and Appointment of Academic Librarians Using a Search Com­ m ittee,” C&RL N ews 10 (N ovem ber 1992): 643–45. 8. Gary N. Powell, “Effects of Jo b Attributes and Recruiting Practices on Applicant Decision,” P erson n el P sychology 37 (winter 1984): 721– 31. 9. Fink, Bauer, and Campion, “Jo b candi­ dates’ Views.” 10. Jan Yager, B usiness P rotocol (New York: Wiley, 1991). 11. Michael G. Aamodt, “Rejecting Applicants with Tact,” Personnel Administrator 33 (April 1988): 58–60. ■ (ULS cont. fr o m p a g e 243) ULS is a “type-of-library” section of ACRL, along with the College Libraries Section and the Community and Junior College Libraries Section. All other ACRL sections are “type-of- activity” sections, such as Instruction or Rare Book and Manuscripts. The Activities Sections Council is a vehicle for communication to share information about programming and projects. At Midwinter, the ULS Executive Committee approved a motion to be presented to the ACRL Board that the three “type-of-library” sections be permitted to join the Activities Sections Council in order to benefit from this information sharing. The ACRL/ULS Public Services Heads of Large Research Libraries Discussion Group welcomes all librarians who are interested in academic library public services issues to at­ tend their meetings at ALA Annual. The Dis­ cussion Group usually meets on Sunday at 2:00 p.m. At the Washington conference topics in­ cluded: 1) ways to share Web page addresses developed for library instruction and distance learning; 2) how academic libraries are han­ dling complaints about explicit materials on the Web being viewed on library computers; 3) re­ ports on how various libraries are charging for printing from full-text databases.— P a u la W alker L ib ra ria n ’ s discussion g ro u p “Should Undergraduate Librarians Publish?” was the question examined by the Undergraduate Librarians Discussion Group at Midwinter. The discussion included brief presentations from Alice Bahr, (editor of C ollege a n d U ndergradu­ a t e Libraries), Mark Watson, (Southern Illinois University), and Jim Self (University of Virginia). Presenters and group members affirmed the value of publication as a contribution to the profession and to the librarian’s own profes­ sional developm ent, and em phasized the unique perspective undergraduate librarians have to offer. The discussion also delved into practical issues such as identifying appropriate journals, the logistics of writing, the varying demands of faculty status and academic status appointments, and the review process.— L in d a T erH aar ■