Reporter Volume 25, No.11 November 11, 1993

By MARK WALLACE
Reporter Staff

Sharing and coordinating UB's library resources with those of the
three other SUNY Centers (at Albany, Binghamton, and Stony Brook) will
help UB meet much of its demand for those resources at a time when
library budgets are not rising sufficiently for the costs of stocking
new journals and books, Barbara von Wahlde, associate vice president
for University Libraries, told the Faculty Senate Executive Committee
last week.
	The results of an interlibrary loan borrowing survey showed
that UB could satisfy about half its requests for interlibrary loan
materials by going to the other University Centers, von Wahlde told
the FSEC. The four University Centers have developed a priority access
service that allows library users at any center to access the
collections of the other centers, she said.
	Inflation, especially in the costs of journals and monographs,
has exceeded budgetary increases for inflation, and UB has been forced
to do some cutting back in the materials it orders, von Wahlde said.
But library computing is now on the IBM Mainframe, she said, and the
new NOTIS software that is being used at many other major
universities, PACLINK, is available. So library computing at UB can
now support access to many other systems, and can become more
distributive and decentralized in terms of access to a wide variety of
resources, she said.
	"Information on this shift hasn't filtered down to the
academic community," von Wahlde said. "We want this shift endorsed and
discussed by the academic community, and we want to improve
communication."
	A faculty use needs assessment survey had showed that there
were a "bewildering" number of computer information sources, von
Wahlde said, and revealed also that faculty were concerned about
computer training and access to the information network. However, the
survey showed that a majority of faculty felt that 75 percent of their
current library needs were already being met by UB, she said.
	William George of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering asked
whether the collections at the other three University Centers were
equivalent to UB's collections, and whether UB sent out more materials
than it received. 
	Stephen Roberts, associate director of libraries, said that
there was a "surprising diversity" in the various collections, and
that roughly 40 percent of each collection was unique. "We're finding
numerous materials at the other centers that we don't have, and we
have things that they don't have," he said. "The relationship
continues to surprise us in terms of the wealth of the materials, and
we can also cut down on duplication of low use items."
	Vic Doyno of English asked about plans to reeducate faculty to
the new system, and how to teach them to search economically for the
materials they wanted.
	New systems and ideas about information access were among "the
most important things for this decade for the whole academic
community," von Wahlde responded. "The library is a switching point to
a vast array of resources," she said. "We need to teach others how to
make those switches."
	Maureen Jameson of Modern Languages and Literatures asked
about the cost of installing PACLINK at UB, and whether the
compatibility it allows with other information networks had been worth
that cost.
	Stephen Roberts responded by saying that with PACLINK, local
transactions and transactions with the other University Centers
accounted for 80-90 percent of library transactions. Remaining
requests could be sent out to the commercial databases which the new
system also accesses, he said, and only then did library loan have to
be used. Judith Adams of Lockwood Library pointed out that a national
cost study on research libraries had showed that while the cost to UB
of national interlibrary loan was about $25 a request--about $5 less
than the national average--using PACLINK should cost only about $5 or
$6 a transaction.
	"This is a dynamic environment, at a time when print material
is still with us," von Wahlde said. "There are transitions going on in
how we get material and provide access. We need flexible people on the
library staff, and among faculty and students."
	In other FSEC business, Peter Nickerson, chair of the Faculty
Senate, said that the implementation of the Schedule 25 computer
program was going ahead, and that it was "folly" that faculty had been
given no input in the decision. He said that he had written to chair
of the Schedule 25 Implementation Committee to say that the faculty
was "displeased."
	"Schedule 25 is moving ahead rapidly," Nickerson said. "Our
concern is real and well-founded."
	NIckerson said that he had volunteered the FSEC to appoint
faculty to the implementation committee. He added that implementing
Schedule 25 involved a number of issues important to faculty,
including how classroom space would be assigned, and how quickly bills
for classes would be sent to students.