30 · SPEC Kit 295
Remote Shelving Facility Services
8. Was the user community involved in planning services at the remote shelving facility? N=62
Yes 28 45%
No 34 55%
If yes, please describe their involvement.
Selected Comments from Respondents
Consulted Advisory Group
“1) Advisory group for the project (faculty and students) helped shape plans 2) Standing University Library
Committee approved plans 3) Solicited feedback through presentations to Student Senate, Faculty Senate, and
Graduate Student Association.”
“A library faculty advisory body was kept generally aware.”
“An advisory committee representing libraries throughout the state provides input on service and policy
“Discussions with existing library advisory committees and with individual faculty open information sessions.”
“Planned services were outlined for Faculty Senate Library Committee and other bodies representing key user
“Provost-appointed faculty and librarians committee planned and recommended the facility multiple hearings
and discussions of faculty through academic departments.”
“The Academic Senate Library Committee was involved in planning services.”
“The Faculty Council of Libraries was consulted during the development of the facility.”
Consulted Faculty
“A senior member of the faculty was a member of the collections planning team. In addition, focus groups
were held with all academic deans and their department chairs, and with selected faculty.”
“Extensive consultation with faculty members to explain this concept and allay their concerns about lack of
direct/immediate access to some materials. In some instances, decisions were made to transfer only items
where content is available electronically.”
“Faculty members were consulted regarding what journals should be sent to storage. Our aim was to send
primarily journals that were available online through JSTOR or PCI.”
“Faculty were consulted on the selection of materials for storage and faculty representatives serve on the
Previous Page Next Page