By Dan Crump, CCL Liaison to the ASCCC

ASCCC held their Fall Plenary Session in a hybrid format, both online and in-person in Long Beach in early November. The theme was "Leading Change: Teaching, Learning, and Governance in a Hybrid World" and provided impactful breakout sessions, discussion of statewide issues and the opportunity for networking with faculty colleagues throughout the state. A listing of the Session program, breakout materials, and resources is available on the ASCCC website.

In addition, the delegates adopt resolutions that guide the work of the ASCCC. The resolutions cover a wide range of topics relating to "academic and professional matters" (the ASCCC 10+1). While all the resolutions are worthy of mention and of interest to librarians, I wish to note two areas that are of specific note for the library community–open educational resources (OER) and tutoring and learning centers. The ASCCC adopted the paper “The Role of Faculty in Tutoring and Learning Centers.” Many thanks to the writing team for this paper: Ted Blake (Mt San Jacinto College), Vandana Gavaskar (Santa Barbara City College), Ray M. Sanchez (Madera Community College) and Tascha Whetzel (Mendocino College), in collaboration with the ASCCC Transfer, Articulation, and Student Success Committee. There were also a series of resolutions about OER and ZTC (zero textbook cost) courses and degrees spearheaded by Michelle Pilati, Coordinator of the ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI) and the rest of the OERI team. Granted, OER is not an exclusive librarian issue, but is of great interest to us as we are involved in OER/ZTC initiatives and activities at our colleges. The text of the all the resolutions can be found on the ASCCC website.

I have the honor and privilege of being the CCL Liaison to the ASCCC and therefore attend their meetings to present the library faculty perspective. I can attest that they are a hard-working and fantastic group of faculty leaders. The ASCCC is very supportive of the role that librarians perform in the instructional processes at all of our colleges (see the 2019 ASCCC paper,"The Role of Library Faculty in the California Community College"), and I also wish to acknowledge the strong and continued support of the ASCCC for the Library Services Platform (LSP). They have been great in every step of the way!

By Tamara Weintraub, CCL-EAR Chair

With Fall 2021 coming to a close, many of us are busy finalizing plans for expanded re-openings of our campus library buildings "in the time of COVID."¹ For the first time since the global pandemic shut our doors in March 2019 we’ll be restoring full or partial self-serve access to physical collections of materials for California’s 2.1 million+ community college students.² But it won’t be pre-pandemic business as usual, because remote learning isn’t going away. The value of complete or parallel offerings of online library resources has become abundantly clear over the past 20 months (if it wasn’t before) and now we begin the process of figuring out optimal ways to meet our colleges’ needs equitably in both environments.

And, of course, the Council of Chief Librarian Electronic Access & Resources Committee, or CCL-EAR, is poised to help. As I wrote in earlier reports, having an advocacy group (CCL-EAR), processes (product reviews, ordering system), and resources (Consortium products) already in place to serve our community in both face-to-face and remote learning modalities ensures this aspect of “return to campus” planning is taken care of. No doubt there are other challenges to work through, but I am confident our students will have seamless access to credible and reliable information e-resources.

We’ve been busy over the course of the Fall 2021 term. CCL-EAR offered two new product reviews (DSM-5 online and New Play Exchange), with more on the way this Spring. We presented a short program at the Consortium’s November 10 Wednesday Webinar, where we discussed the Committee’s role within the CCL structure, and our product review process. And, the NetLibrary/EBSCO eBooks CCLC shared collections deselection list was finalized, and the CCLC Library Consortium is undertaking the complex task of removing titles from both the LSP and members’ EBSCO eBooks portal (we’ll keep you posted when those steps are completed). CCL-EAR is also continuing efforts to proactively address Consortium members’ values and concerns with vendors and e-content, including privacy and equity, and are undertaking an examination of the products review framework to ensure these areas are covered.

CCL-EAR is composed of volunteers from CCL member libraries. We share the same interests and concerns as you and will address these together. Feel free to reach out to me or your Regional Representative, or attend CCL-EAR meetings (all CCL members welcome). Learn more about who we are, what is involved, and meeting dates and times.

References

1. Apologies and thanks to Gabriel GarcÍa Márquez.↩

2. "Management Information Systems Data Mart: Annual/Term Student Count Report – Annual 2020-2021,” California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, 2021↩

By Gregg Atkins, CCL Executive Director

Colleagues –

As I write this, there are still many unsolved issues concerning how our LSP program functions and operates going forward:

• it’s really good news to report that the CCCCO has agreed that the League will keep the Ex Libris contract through December 2023 (although the payment arrangement is not what CCL and the League proposed);
• there is continuing difficulty in reaching an agreement on the Scope of Work contract between the League and the CCCCO – we are now working on V.4, mostly due to shifting demands from the CCCCO;
• a workable framework for how the League, CCL, the TechCenter and the CCCCO interact and deal with program expansion (new software purchases, instructional design and development work, resource sharing, etc.) has not yet been fashioned.

And yet, things are happening as we planned:

• the work groups are engaged and tackling policies, procedures, issues and getting work done;
• the new DEI Task Force is off to a very good start, grabbing its charge with both hands and working well as a group;
• the LSP Governance Committee is poised to consider a framework which identifies and prioritizes a broad range of programs which can be addressed using the new financial resources at hand;
• the NZ Administrator (Pawel Szponar) continues to successfully build the LSP program’s capacity to fully manage the many aspects of system administration, special project work and troubleshooting oversight;
• the LSP Program Director (Caroline Sinay) keeps the LSP Task Force, Governance Committee and the working groups on track and working constructively and effectively (no easy task!) and continues to build and enhance the excellent LSP Libguide.

CCL also continues to work with partners like the ASCCC (e.g., a resolution on the electronic textbook issue to be voted upon soon) and is actively working to support the work of the Library and Learning Resources Programs Advisory Committee (LLRPAC) at the CCCCO.

Thanks to the huge number of institutions (74 – a record!) which have already paid their CCL membership fee! I’ve never seen Business Offices work so quickly – it’s amazing!

The new year brings new opportunities (and challenges, to be sure!!). I hope that we’ll find ourselves back in that place where we can meet up at conferences, workshops, and other events. But until then, see you on the Zoom.

ALA LibLearnX: The Library Learning Experience (LLX)
Online
January 21-24, 2022

More info: https://alaliblearnx.org/

SCIL Works
Instructional Mix-Tape: Mixing tracts from In-person and Online Instruction
Online
Friday, January 28, 2022

More info: https://carl-acrl.org/ig/scil/scilworks/2022/

Council of Chief Librarians
Deans & Director's Meeting
Sacramento, CA
Thursday and Friday, March 17-18, 2022

More info: https://cclibrarians.org/event/deans-and-directors-meeting

California Conference on Library Instruction: Engaging in Speculative Pedagogy: Reimagining Library Futures with Creative Foresight
Online
May 13, 2022

More info: https://www.cclibinstruction.org/

By Stephanie M. Roach, San Mateo County Community College District

Correction 12/8/2021: A prior version of the article stated that the Library of Congress' Tentative Monthly List 11b was published on November 12, 2021, and included a call to action in which stakeholders send feedback to LC about the list. However, the Tentative Monthly List 11b and the Approved Monthly List 11b were both published on November 12, 2021. The article has been updated to include this detail, additional information clarifying Library of Congress' process for feedback on subject heading updates that is detailed on their website, and a modification to the call to action initially proposed in the article. LC’s usual review process allows feedback on tentative lists to be sent to listcomments@loc.gov. Thank you to Violet Fox for pointing out the error.

Introduction

The words we use to label and describe people matter. Labels can empower, labels can support, and labels can cause harm. Libraries share systems, standards, and vocabularies. Our shared vocabularies, and the systems in which they are used, can support or harm as our community of users searches for and discovers library resources. When the vocabulary includes harmful terminology, particularly terminology that describes groups of people, users of library search systems are impacted, and whether intentional or unintentional, a message about the library's values is communicated to our users. When users are members of the group being labeled by the terminology, the impact of encountering the terminology in the library search system is personal. We must scrutinize terminology found in our common vocabularies, such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings, identify harmful labels, and take action to reduce or eliminate harm by making changes in our library systems.

Most academic libraries in the United States, including those at California community colleges, use Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) as the primary controlled vocabulary for describing the topics or subjects each library resource is about. It is incredibly beneficial to have a shared vocabulary in common across academic and research libraries. However, LCSH does not always reflect the values of diversity, equity, and inclusion held by individual libraries or consortia, and too often includes terminology that is dehumanizing, xenophobic, racist, heteronormative, or otherwise harmful or problematic for our students and other library users.

Since 2014, there have been efforts to get LC to update LCSH terminology related to noncitizens and undocumented immigrants. These efforts have been politicized, and up until last month, LC has elected not to update the vocabulary, despite announcing updates in 2016. Between then and now, individual libraries and consortia, including the consortium of 110 California community colleges that share a library services platform (LSP), have responded by making changes to that terminology in their systems locally.

On November 12, 2021, the Library of Congress (LC) simultaneously released Tentative Monthly List 11b and Approved Monthly List 11b, a list of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) related to noncitizens and undocumented immigrants that has been updated. This article examines that list, provides context for and critical response to the approved changes, as well as a description of what the consortium of California community colleges sharing an LSP has already done with this terminology and what it and others could do moving forward. Finally, although LC has already approved the subject heading changes, the article closes with a call to action, including a request that library workers and other higher education partners and stakeholders work locally to address issues with LC’s approved changes.

LC's Process, the Tentative List, and the Critical Response

The Library of Congress ultimately decides which terminology is included in its official vocabulary through a proposal and review process that includes a comment and feedback period open to library workers, lawmakers, and the general public. Once terminology is approved and implemented by LC, and then in other shared systems such as OCLC WorldCat, the terminology will be updated in individual library catalog records using LCSH.

Current LCSH terminology describing undocumented immigrants (“Illegal aliens”) and noncitizens (“Aliens”) is deeply problematic. “Illegal aliens” is routinely described as dehumanizing, insensitive, polarizing, outdated, and as a racial slur by immigrants, immigrant advocates, legal scholars, linguists, journalists, library professional associations, library workers, and others. The word “Illegal” is particularly problematic in this context and is noted generally to be dehumanizing, racially charged, coded, and inaccurate (Race Forward, Drop the I-Word campaign). In March 2016, LC noted in initial plans to update the terminology that “Aliens” is confusing and “Illegal aliens” is pejorative.

Library of Congress Tentative Monthly List 11b and Approved Monthly List 11b put forward the following basic changes to terminology: 

• Change "Aliens" to "Noncitizens"
• Create a new subject heading: "Illegal immigration"
• Change "Illegal aliens" to "Noncitizens" AND "Illegal immigration"

The response to the tentative and approved lists has been mixed, as pointed out by Kelly Jensen and Burkely Hermann. Some library workers, library professional associations, publishers, and vendors¹ have welcomed the change, while at the same time, many in the critical cataloging community and some Republican lawmakers have objected to parts of it. Critical cataloging advocates on Twitter responded quickly to the news about terminology presented by LC in Tentative Monthly List 11b. See tweets on November 12, 2021 (the day the list was published) by Violet Fox, Tina Gross, Stephanie Roach, and others. Additionally, many did not initially realize the approved list was published simultaneously, which caused confusion among library workers when changes began to appear in library records.²

Other critics, particularly those on the political right, refer to a need for alignment with legal terminology, which is often outdated itself. However, there is no requirement that LCSH terms be the same as legal terms. In the recent past, some have centered policy over people and argue that framing of policy issues is more important to public perception of immigration policy than the framing of immigration status is, which might lead one to conclude when using this policy lens that individual labels do not matter much. However, the people being labeled according to their immigration status tell us that how they are labeled matters, and considering agreement by many that the terminology is dehumanizing, we need to ask ourselves why would we want to keep using it? What purpose and ends does it serve? Some justify continued use of the terminology because there is a long historical and legal tradition for using “Aliens.” However, formal and informal research demonstrates that “Illegal aliens” appears to be falling out of common usage, despite increases in use of dehumanizing language in news outlets since 2014. Language changes over time and subject headings change over time as part of LC’s regular business process. This argument based on longstanding tradition is problematic because the tradition itself is problematic.

In an April 2021 CCL Outlook article, Roach, Angela Boyd, Megan Kinney, Mario Macías, and Glenn Tozier argued that “we must thread a network of accountability to inspect and inclusively collaborate against racist, inequitable, dehumanizing, and oppressive dispositions in our systems. Ultimately, our goal is to create learning environments for our students driven by anti-racist values and cultural competencies." We do not create safe learning environments for our students when dehumanizing language is present in our library vocabularies. To passively accept inherently problematic vocabularies is to perpetuate harm by upholding xenophobic and white supremacist culture and structural oppression. Educators--all workers in higher education--have an obligation to avoid “organizational inertia” and hold ourselves accountable as change makers--we must practice empathy and genuine care in order to best support students.³ To make sure we are creating safe learning environments in this particular case, we must scrutinize LC’s list, identify the ways in which it perpetuates harm, and be prepared to act locally and transparently to effect change by transforming the terminology approved by LC.

In this particular moment, with LC’s approved list now live in library systems across the nation and world, libraries and consortia must be prepared to act locally to assure that subject headings in their library systems meet the needs of their users. While a comment period is not available for this particular list, lessons can be learned as LCSH is changed in future updates, and an argument can be made for sending comments anyhow. There has been renewed interest in and confusion regarding LC’s process for updating subject headings. Questions of LC’s commitment to transparency and meaningful engagement with the public, lawmakers, and library professionals in the broader community remain open.

Terminology Transformation Options

Approved LCSH or other terminology may not meet the needs of individual libraries or consortia. Fortunately, terminology transformations can be implemented locally that better fit the needs of their users. Terminology transformations in library systems are similar in concept to “find and replace” functions found in the common word processing software. This type of transformation work can typically be handled through automated processes and/or by specialty library service vendors. Once initial technical work is completed, and automation is put in place, the labor to maintain changes to vocabulary is minimal. It is best practice to have a monitor and review process in place for quality assurance--particularly as system requirements shift or additional vocabulary updates are made over time.

With this particular set of LCSH terminology related to undocumented immigrants and noncitizens, many in the library community have already put processes in place to update current terminology locally. Adjustments to existing processes will be required once LC makes any update of their own. For example, the consortium of 110 California community colleges sharing an LSP completed a “Change the Subject” project in September 2021. “Aliens” has been transformed to “Noncitizens”, and “Illegal aliens” has been transformed to “Undocumented immigrants” in our shared system. With the approval of LC's list, the transformations we have made locally in our system for noncitizens will hold--only a little maintenance will be needed, and the impact on our library users will be minimal.

The same is not true for the transformations we have made locally in our system where “Illegal aliens” is changed to “Undocumented immigrants.” With the approval of LC's list, these transformations will no longer hold. Instead of “Undocumented immigrants”, we see “Illegal immigration” AND “Noncitizens.” In comparing the two, the new terms of “Illegal immigration” AND “Noncitizens” are not in the same spirit as “Undocumented immigrants.” They do not have the same meaning, which is particularly pronounced when derivative terms such as “Children of undocumented immigrants” are considered, and which would change to “Children of noncitizens” AND “Illegal immigration” (a book about children of undocumented immigrants may have nothing to do with “Illegal immigration”, yet both terms would be used).

More alarming, is creating the new term “Illegal immigration” for use when describing undocumented people. First, the word “Illegal” is still in use--and use of this word has clearly been rejected by the undocumented community. Second, the recommendation of the Subject Analysis Committee and preference of those who are undocumented to use the term “Undocumented immigrants” has not been taken on board by LC. Third, eliminating and rejecting specific terminology such as, “undocumented immigrants” and replacing it with a broader term “Noncitizens” and a possibly related term “Illegal immigration” is deeply problematic. It begs the question of whether and why LC is avoiding this terminology and what the effects of using a broader term are. Roach stated that the use of a broader term to describe this group of people can be perceived as “a kind of forced assimilation within the context of the subject schema that devalues the identity and importance of undocumented peoples. [T]his is a clear example of systemic [and] structural racism, particularly when we consider the fraught politics related to this subject heading change and coded rhetorical use of the term "illegal aliens" over the last several years.”⁴

The intent behind changes made by our LSP in September, reflected in the term “Undocumented immigrants,” is not captured by the terminology in LC’s list. We have an obligation to monitor LCSH changes and re-examine the impact on our students and other library users, particularly those described by the language. Discussions about LCSH terminology found on the tentative and approved lists are planned within the LSP Cataloging Work Group. The LSP Governance Committee and its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Task Force also included the topic in recent meeting discussions.

Call to Action

Most importantly, we must act. Examining this set of subject headings on the tentative and approved lists is only a starting place. More work is to be done, and many places where LCSH and other vocabularies, or the systems and algorithms that display subjects and topics in our library catalogs and discovery systems, let us down. Learning what our options are for locally making change and then following through on making change is critical so that we begin to realize learning environments that reduce and eliminate harm as we better support our students. As Roach et al. wrote, “we are responsible for establishing mechanisms to address such negligence; we must continually monitor, identify problems, and proactively make change within our library systems. Every time we delay this work, we uphold structural oppression and allow systemic harm to continue."

Actions you can take:

• Examine LC's Approved Monthly List 11b (11/12/2021) with a critical eye. The usual LC process allows for feedback on tentative lists to be sent until the date shown on the published list by emailing listcomments@loc.gov. You may elect to send comments on list Tentative Monthly List 11b even though the usual comment period appears to have been unavailable for this list.
• Monitor publication of future tentative lists on the Tentative Lists webpage on Classification Web. 
• Monitor publication of the summary of decisions to see explanations.

• Examine your library catalog to see how it conforms or differs from LCSH terminology related to the approved list, and consider how your library users who are described by the terminology are impacted.
• Discuss your findings with your library team, and ask what actions are needed.
• Listen to those who are most impacted by systemic harm, and create space for their voices to be heard.
• If your library is a member of a larger institution or consortium, learn about how organizational change is effected so that you are better able to advocate for change within that organizational structure.
• Examine local policy and procedure at your library, and put a process in place for identifying and making changes to harmful terminology identified by your library team and stakeholders. Monitor the effectiveness of processes, and make changes as needed.
• Look to the work of others who are doing this work for examples, templates, professional development, and support.
• Look inwards and interrogate your practice, identify blind spots, gaps, and areas for growth based on your identity, situational context, and/or privilege.
• Practice self-care so that this work can be sustained.

References

1. Weitz, Jay. Jay Weitz to American Library Association (ALA) Connect - Social Responsibilities Round Table mailing list, "LCSH 'Aliens' Change to 'Noncitizens' in WorldCat," November 23, 2021. Accessed November 30, 2021. (Login to ALA Connect required)

2. Rubel, Dejah T., Mark K. Ehlert, Shawn King, Kathleen A. McElhinney, and Stephanie Morna Roach. Dejah T. Rubel, Mark K. Ehlert, Shawn King, Kathleen A. McElhinney, and Stephanie Morna Roach to ALMA mailing list, "Alma updates Illegal aliens headings before LC?," December 3-8, 2021. Accessed December 8, 2021. (Login to ALMA-L required)

3. Taylor-Mendoza, Jennifer. "Embracing the Obligation: Social Consciousness and Epistemological Disruption." In Minding the Obligation Gap in Community Colleges and Beyond: Theory and Practice in Achieving Educational Equity, edited by Jeremiah J. Sims, Lasana O. Hotep, Jennifer Taylor-Mendoza, Jeramy Wallace, and Tabitha Conaway, 35-59. Educational Equity in Community Colleges 1. New York: Peter Lang, 2020.
↩

4. Roach, Stephanie Morna. "Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: Change the Subject IZ Implementation." E-mail message to Caroline Sinay Gudiel, Michelle Ohnstad, Pawel Szponar, and Evelyn Lord. November 16, 2021.
↩

By Mary McMillan, El Camino College and Sean A. Flores, San Diego Mesa College

Introduction

This past year, discussions on the integration of library database content with the new California Community College (CCC) statewide library services platform (LSP), Ex Libris Alma, began to take shape. Libraries gained experience making content discoverable in their live instances of Ex Libris Primo VE post-migration, while raising more questions about the many “open access” (OA) collections available for activation in Alma. Examples include collections of freely accessible journals (e.g. DOAJ), popular open educational resources (OER) such as the textbooks offered by OpenStax, and a wide variety of in-between content. Librarians are looking for for guidance on the potential benefits and drawbacks with bringing open access content into Primo VE results, as well as how to locate and activate these collections in Alma, how to determine a collection’s scope, and how to select open access collections that have the most potential for supporting the information needs of our community college libraries.

Members of the Electronic Access & Resources Committee of the Council of Chief Librarians, California Community Colleges (CCL-EAR) discussed whether or not it would be within the Committee’s purview to review open-access collections available for activation in Alma and, if so, from what lens. We know that similar discussions on open access integrations are taking place within the LSP workgroups so we did not want to risk duplicating their work on this subject, and we also deliberated over whether or not these fell outside those library e-resources that are traditionally reviewed by the Committee and offered through the California Community College Library Consortium (CCLC). However, as CCL-EAR “is charged to explore ways in which the resources of the community college libraries could be maximized through cooperative ventures for electronic resources, databases, and information,” the Committee determined there is a place for contributions to the discussion, and we undertook this examination.

In the February 2021 CCL Outlook, Ryan Edwards of West Los Angeles College shared his insightful article “Making OER Discoverable in OneSearch,” where he described his strategy of using Primo’s Resource Recommender service to increase visibility of available Open Educational Resources to his campus. This article is an effort to build upon Ryan’s suggestions with further insights into available open access collections, recommendations for librarians to consider prior to such activations with instruction on locating them, and offer a spreadsheet of data on open access resource collections available for activitation from the Central Discovery Index (CDI) that could be useful in collection evaluation.

Librarian Interest

Librarians play a role in supporting scholarly open access and linking students to freely available online collections and, in more recent years, have taken leadership roles to push forward campus OER and affordable learning initiatives. However, the discovery of these resources can be challenging for students and faculty alike. The inclusion of packaged open access collections in Ex Libris’ Central Discovery Index (CDI) allows the opportunity to make these materials discoverable in Primo VE alongside database subscription content, thus expanding library collections. While some subscription packages do contain open access within them (e.g. EBSCO Academic Search Complete), as defined by Ex Libris, these are not the focus of this article.

Open Access Content in the CDI

According to the Ex Libris Knowledge Center, content in the Central Discovery Index is considered open access if it meets the following general criteria:

• An item is freely available and openly accessible without requiring authentication by the user.
• An item is identified by the provider/publisher as open access.
• An item resides in a known open access repository, database, or journal collection that Ex Libris determines to be open access.

In the Central Discovery Index, content can be identified as open access at the collection level for open access repositories and open websites. There is not a consistent way to identify open access content across different providers and content types. As such, metadata for all collections from participating providers must be carefully analyzed to determine the best methods for identifying whether the content is open access or not. In many cases, Ex Libris must apply conditional rules and logic to the metadata at indexing time to correctly identify and differentiate open access content from subscribed content.

In the case of collections with hybrid content (collections of primary publishers where some articles from a journal are open access and others are not), for example, Ex Libris has started to separate the collection into two collections: one collection for subscribed content and the other for open access content, regardless of whether the open access content is coming from full open access journals or hybrid journals. Over time, you can see an increasing number of these collections appearing in the Central Discovery Index.

Considerations Prior to Activation

With the administration of shared CCLC database collection in the Network Zone (NZ) now underway, there have been suggestions to add a select number of open access collections with potential interest to CCC libraries to the Network Zone. If added to the NZ, individual libraries would still have the option not to activate them locally. This process would also help the LSP stay under the contractual bibliographic record limit. As with any kind of collection development, librarians should be selective regarding open access activations to ensure the best possible discovery experience in Primo VE for their user communities. It is recommended that the following be considered before activating an open access collection in Alma:

• Content Scope: It is important to review the collection to determine the scope of the included content. Open access collections may include open scholarly journals and eBooks (e.g., JSTOR Open Access eBooks), digital content shared from an institutional repository or archive (e.g., Vanderbilt University), or even articles from public websites (e.g., Wikipedia). They can be multidisciplinary in scope or have a narrowed subject focus supporting only specific academic programs, and they can also contain publications in many different languages.
• Full or Partial Access: While many of the open access collections available for activation in Alma freely link to the full-text of the offered collection in its entirety, there are collections where only some of the content is open access. Whether or not to activate collections where full-text access is unavailable should be made at the individual library level.
• Content Overload: Collection size should be a consideration as some open access collections are so large (e.g. HathiTrust and Project Gutenburg) that they have the potential to bury local and subscribed content in Primo VE results. In addition, the threshold for bibliographic records, based on the system contract with ExLibris, is an important factor for both local activations and those which may be done system-wide via the Network Zone.
• Collections vs. Portfolios: Libraries may decide whether to activate an entire open access collection or, depending on their overall collection development parameters and user needs, a select number of available portfolios. For example, rather than activate an entire collection of open access eBooks a library may prefer to make available only those titles within a set date range, or covering a particular subject area of interest to local researchers.
• Open Educational Resources: As campus OER and Zero Textbook Cost (ZTC) degree initiatives develop, some libraries may consider the potential benefits of including OER textbooks in their discovery catalog, either as entire collections or by activating individual portfolios that are used on their campuses. As noted, The Ex Libris CDI currently includes collections from some of the larger OER publishers/repositories (e.g., OpenStax) and there has been a push for the expansion of available collections to include PressBooks and LibreText content. Doing so could aid student access to OER being used in their courses via Primo VE, providing another place for faculty to search for OER available in their discipline. However, it is important to note that OER textbooks activated in Alma include the portfolio of the original editions made available within that particular collection and do not reflect any remixing, or customizations, that may have been done by individual faculty or other “downstream” users.

Finding OA collections in The CDI

Ex Libris provides two methods of identifying and activating open access collections.

Method 1: CDI Collection List

1. Locate and open the CDI Collection List.
   • The Ex Libris Knowledge Center provides a CDI Collection List that is updated every month.
   • Navigation to the CDI Collection List can also be found through the following path upon visiting the ExLibris Knowledge Center website: Knowledge Center Home Page >> Alma >> Product Documentation >> Alma Online Help (English) >> Electronic Resource Management >> CDI Collection Lists for Alma Customers
2. To only view collections with OA content in the CDI Collection List, filter the Full Text Rights field to Open Access or Partially Open Access.

   

   

   1. Select the Full Text Rights header field
   2. Select the Data menu tab
   3. Select the Filter Icon 
   4. Select the Small Filter Icon that now appears on the Full Text Rights header field.
   5. Select OpenAccess
   6. Select Partially Open Access
   7. Confirm selections using the OK button.

Method 2: Export an Advanced Search in Alma

A report can also be run manually in Alma and exported into Excel:

1. Log into Alma and select the Advanced Search icon 
2. Set Search in field to Electronic collection
3. Select the Zone field’s radio button to Community
4. In the first advanced search field select CDI Fulltext rights
5. In the second advanced search field select Equals
6. In the third advanced search field select OpenAccess
7. Select Search button
8. On the results screen, select the Export List icon
9. Select Excel.

You will now have the latest OA Collections information in an Excel spreadsheet to help with your evaluations for activations/deactivations.

Evaluating Open Access Collections in CDI

The MnPALS Consortium, a group of 54 academic and state government libraries in Minnesota, migrated to Alma and Primo VE several years ago, going live in January 2019. As part of their work to craft consortium-wide recommendations for Primo Central Index (PCI) collection activations, including open access resources, the MnPALS ERM workgroup put together a spreadsheet that helped clarify the scope of available open access collections at that time. They also provided recommendations for which collections to activate in a webinar at UNYLA.

The MnPALS ERM group decided to be conservative with their list of recommendations and suggested that all collections classified by Ex Libris as partial open access be de-selected or non-activated. However, they suggested that local institutions may still wish to activate some of these collections, particularly if the local institution has a subscription to the content with a corresponding selective-title package in Alma. They classified resources into three categories based on recommended activation action: Yes, No, and Optional. “Optional” collections were generally ones that were subject-specific (e.g., physics) or content-specific (e.g., Government documents). The group reasoned that certain institutions with programs or special collections in these areas might be interested in “opting-in”/activating these collections. The relatively few “Yes” collections in their list are open access collections from larger, well-known publishers, are highly multidisciplinary in subject in content, or are open access textbook collections.

The MnPALs metadata from their recommended open access collections spreadsheet was based on the PCI, but the collection names have since changed when Ex Libris moved to the CDI in 2020. Therefore, the information needed to be mapped to the eCollection names that are used in CDI in order to better utilize the open access work done by MnPALs. Further, the MnPALS spreadsheet contained useful metadata that we wanted to map over to the appropriate CDI collections.

The Ex Libris Knowledge Center provides two documents that allow us to map the PCI-based collections in the MnPALS spreadsheet to their CDI collections: the CDI Collection List, and the PCI to Alma Mapping Table. The CDI Collection List and the PCI to Alma Mapping Table were both used to identify PCI collection names from the MnPALS spreadsheet with their corresponding collection in CDI. The MnPALS spreadsheet fields for ACTIVATE, DESCRIPTION/SUBJECT, and REASON FOR DESELECTION/NON-ACTIVATION were also mapped to a May 2021 version of the CDI Collection List.

The information is now mapped, but it should be noted that the CDI open access collections are continuously evolving. Collections that were “Partially Open Access” (collections that had a combination of subscription and open access content) are having their open access content pulled into their own CDI open access collections for easier overall activation of open access content. It should also be noted again that Ex Libris updates the CDI Collection List monthly. The information shared in the newly created spreadsheet is based on the May 2021 CDI list.

Information that could be useful for the evaluation of open access collections from the original MnPALS spreadsheet are now reflected on a new mapped collection list, CDI OpenAccess Recommendations (May 2021).¹

When reviewing the CDI OpenAccess spreadsheet, there are two main areas. One area marked with blue column headers indicates the data columns from Ex Libris’ CDI Collections List as of May 2021. The yellow column headers are the mapped data from the MnPALS spreadsheet. The combined view will allow you to utilize the analysis done by the MnPALS group and associate them with the applicable CDI collection in Alma to assist with your own evaluations of open access collections for potential activation for your institutions.

Conclusion

Open access materials are varied and come in different combinations of material type and subjects. They are also placed into completely open or hybrid collections. Ex Libris is making an effort to separate the hybrid collections so that open access materials can be activated with less confusion, but this will be an ongoing effort on their end with more collections becoming available over time. While there are certainly many open access collections available in the CDI, individual libraries will need to determine which they may want to activate (if any) locally. The newly mapped open access spreadsheet can serve as a starting place for our collective consideration.

References

1. McMillan, Mary, and Flores, Sean A. on behalf of CCL-EAR Committee. “CDI OpenAccess Recommendations (May 2021).”↩

By Kaela Casey, Ventura College, Elizabeth Horan, Coastline College, and Cynthia Mari Orozco & Rita Suarez, East Los Angeles College

Another Tool in the Tool Belt: Finding Articles with Primo VE

Presented by Elizabeth Horan, Coastline College

Coastline College Library is unique in that it is 100 percent online. To reach students, online library workshops were developed; these are completely online in Canvas, take students one to two hours to complete, and students can self-enroll in them. Faculty assign these workshops to students, and students receive a certificate of achievement upon completion that they turn in to complete their assignment. Current workshop offerings include:

• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Library Orientation Workshop
• Advanced APA Citation Skills
• Advanced MLA Citation Skills
• Internet Searching and Online Privacy

Elizabeth focused on developing these workshops and strategies for increasing student engagement. She begins by identifying the overall student learning outcomes for each workshop. Then, she breaks each student learning outcome into smaller chunks to identify specific tasks or concepts students should learn. This process also helps develop assessments for each student learning outcome. From there, she develops the script for the workshop and begins creating content. Elizabeth aims to create a high-touch environment within the workshops by communicating with students through the Canvas inbox and providing detailed feedback and comments on their final assessments. She has found that her feedback prompts students to communicate with her through the Canvas Gradebook and even leads to reference interactions.

With the implementation of the LSP, new workshops are in development that focus on utilizing Primo VE and library databases to locate sources. With Primo VE’s ability to search across all library databases, these workshops will be important for improving student’s research skills and information literacy and give them another research tool to add to their tool belt.

Canvas Commons Information Literacy Modules & Workshops

Presented by Cynthia Mari Orozco and Rita Suarez, East Los Angeles College

At East Los Angeles College, librarians Cynthia Mari Orozco and Rita Suarez created eight information literacy modules in Canvas Commons in Fall 2019, including “Getting Started with Library Research,” a module dedicated to finding books and articles using Primo VE. Each module includes an introduction with learning objectives, explanatory Canvas pages, and a short quiz, with some modules also including videos that are appropriately captioned and hosted on the library’s YouTube channel. The modules are all in the public domain and can be easily imported or downloaded into an instructor’s Canvas courses. The modules are discoverable in Canvas Commons by searching for “ELAC Library” and can also be found on the library’s Instruction Services Research Guide. The guide lists each module, provides step-by-step directions in how to import modules into Canvas (as well as an instructional video, “Faculty: How to Import Library Modules into Canvas”), FAQs, and librarian contact information for follow up.

The “Getting Started with Library Research” module aims to provide students with basic point-of-need instruction in understanding when to use Primo VE for their information needs and perform basic searches in Primo VE to retrieve books, ebooks, and articles. The first explanatory page, “What is OneSearch?” contextualizes what a discovery service is and does. While library professionals are keenly aware of the power in aggregating library resources, students often do not understand why one would need to search across databases in the first place. This first page equates databases to shopping at stores, where you can find the same and similar items across stores but availability of brands, categories, quality, volume, and so on may vary. Like stores, databases also provide general and specialized information. The store analogy often helps students better understand the function of various databases, and understand the function and utility of Primo VE.

The next two pages provide step-by-step instructions in limiting to books (including eBooks) and articles, respectively. The last page features a 10-minute video that provides an audiovisual explanation of the previous content pages.

After the switch to Primo, the instruction team also combined two in-person workshops–Find Books (an exploration of the print catalog, keywords and subject searching, and call numbers) and Find Articles (reviewing academic databases with emphasis on keyword searching in EBSCO) and created a Primo-specific in-person workshop, Find Books and Articles in OneSearch and accompanying handout. The new workshop consisted of three parts: 1) a quick introduction to OneSearch as a new tool that combines the library’s print and digital resources into a single-search interface; 2) an activity on how to find and narrow search results to books and eBooks; and 3) a final activity on finding articles. While the instruction team all teach Primo differently, the overall pedagogical approach is to teach both higher-level information literacy concepts–such as keyword development and Boolean searching–alongside the more practical aspect of teaching the features and mechanics of utilizing OneSearch.

Synchronous Zoom workshops seemed like a good alternative when the campus was forced to move entirely online during the pandemic. However, the instruction librarians realized that many students could not attend live sessions, and faculty were desperate for asynchronous, embeddable content. The instruction team opted to design video workshops by breaking down the content of the in-person, activity-based workshops, including the OneSearch workshop, into the most essential concepts students needed to get started on their research. The instruction team recorded these workshops, uploaded them to YouTube, and created online worksheets in Google Forms so that students had an opportunity to practice what they had just learned. The workshop content is purposefully general in scope to allow faculty across disciplines to assign these to their students. Having had the opportunity to teach the OneSearch workshop in-person prior to the pandemic, the instruction librarians had enough informal assessment from students to predict areas in which students might get stuck and address those points in the video. For example, during the hands-on workshop sessions, the instruction librarians observed that students often did not know where to click to access the full-text of an article or were not sure how to limit their results to view only books or peer-reviewed articles. Thus, the videos make explicit how to perform these technical functions of Primo, and instruct students in keyword searching. These workshops have been successful; students are able to complete them with relative ease and faculty have been able to assign them to students just as easily. Faculty can either direct students to the library’s Instruction Services Research Guide that provides five online video workshops. Each has an embedded video workshop and an online worksheet. Completion of the worksheet generates an email and PDF certificate of completion for the student. Alternatively, faculty can embed edited versions of the workshops in Canvas through Canvas Commons. Since the online worksheets have the disadvantage of email mix-ups and Google Form issues, the library advises faculty to use the embeddable Canvas Commons workshops over the video workshops.

Library Research Workshops at Ventura College

Presented by Kaela Casey, Ventura College

Like many other community college libraries, the COVID-19 pandemic has had lasting effects on Ventura College (VC) Library’s instruction. Great strides have been made since the start of the pandemic in increasing the library’s online instruction presence through videos, modules in Canvas Commons, Zoom library instruction, and embedded librarians. However, although librarians are back on the ground, requests for library instruction, both in-person and online, have remained lower than usual. Due to this, Kaela decided to develop a fully online self-enrolled, self-paced library research workshop series in Canvas with digital badging. This framework would provide benefits for both students and faculty. For faculty, they would have the ability to assign one or more workshops and easily determine student completion by viewing their digital badge. The workshops could be assigned in lieu of traditional library instruction or be a supplement to a library instruction session in which the focus could be aimed at the course’s specific assignment or learning objectives. For students they would have the convenience of enrolling in and completing the class at times that work for them. They would also have the digital badge as proof of their achievement that can be used throughout their time at the college.

Currently, three workshops have been created and are being tested by librarians and student workers:

• Workshop 1: Getting to Know the Library
• Workshop 2: Finding Books
• Workshop 3: Finding Articles

Content for each workshop includes videos, infographics, and LibWizard Tutorials created by VC librarians, and content adapted from Introduction to College Research by Walter D. Butler, Aloha Sargent, and Kelsey Smith. In her presentation, Kaela focused on Workshop 3: Finding Articles. The workshop begins by orienting students to the information lifecycle, types of sources, the differences between articles, and search strategies. With this foundation in place, the workshop moves on to an activity in an embedded LibWizard Tutorial. LibWizard Tutorials allow librarians to embed images, documents, or live websites into slides accompanied by librarian-generated content or questions. The tutorial begins with a walkthrough of searching Primo VE. A live record from Primo VE is included with information on how to read and understand the record, as well as questions that prompt the student to think about how the content in the record could affect their search term choices. The tutorial ends with a live Primo VE search page with instructions for students to search independently  and answer questions about their search. The hope is that these hands-on experiences within the workshop will help students develop confidence and reinforce the information literacy content presented earlier in the workshop.

Kaela plans to launch the first three workshops in the Library Research Workshop Series in spring 2022 and hopes to launch additional workshops on online searching and information evaluation by fall 2022.

Further Readings and Resources:

• LSP Instruction Work Group Presents ‘Teaching with Primo VE’ - Presentation Recording and Slides.
• East Los Angeles College, “Instruction Services: Research Modules in Canvas (Faculty)”
• Introduction to College Research by Walter D. Butler, Aloha Sargent, and Kelsey Smith

Hello, everyone! My name is Cynthia Mari Orozco, and I will be the new CCL Communications Manager from this point forward. I’m very much looking forward to this new role and working with CCL and all of you. 

I am currently the Equity and OER Librarian and Associate Professor at East Los Angeles College in the Los Angeles Community College District, where I've been since August 2016. My work primarily consists of instruction, reference, outreach, and OER at both our Monterey Park and South Gate campuses. I also am an adjunct librarian at Santa Monica College and teach information literacy classes at Santa Rosa Junior College and Los Angeles Valley College. Prior to ELAC, I was the Student Services Librarian at California State University Long Beach, Sunday Librarian at the Palos Verdes Library District, and Librarian-in-Residence at Loyola Marymount University. Early in my career as a librarian, I realized that I wanted to work directly with students in public community colleges, and I couldn’t be happier to be in this field. I hold an MLIS from San José State University, and I should be finishing up my PhD in Information Studies from UCLA next year (fingers crossed!). As a researcher, I’m really interested in the role of archives in community college libraries, oral history and community college history in California. 

At the risk of sounding fanatical, I have a lot of ties to and happy memories within the California Community Colleges. As a competitive swimmer from an early age, I attended swim practices at Cosumnes River College and swim meets at CRC, Sacramento City College, Santa Rosa Junior College, and Solano Community College. As an undergraduate, I attended Sacramento City College, American River College, and Irvine Valley College, and post-baccalaureate, I’ve committed to lifelong learning by attending various upskilling courses at ELAC, Los Angeles City College, Los Angeles Valley College, Santa Barbara City College, Orange Coast College, Coastline College, Saddleback College, Pasadena City College, and Long Beach Community College. My family are alumni and current students at Monterey Peninsula College, Reedley College, and Fresno City College. I've been lucky enough to have also adjuncted at Chaffey's Chino campus library and Los Angeles Southwest College. I have a deep-seated respect for the work that the community colleges do in our state, and I'm thrilled to be able to nerd out in this communications role. 

Again, I'm very much looking forward to working with all of you. Please reach out to me if you ever need anything or just to say hi!

By Rebecca A. Eckland, TMCC Celebrates Family History Research Room

On Friday, Oct. 8, 2021, guests from across the community came together to celebrate a major milestone for Truckee Meadows Community College's Genealogy Lab: the opening of its Family History Research Room. These guests were joined by others on Zoom who could also witness the grand opening event from as far away as Florida and New York. As Genealogy Researcher and Learning Commons Librarian Suzanne Malek would say, genealogy's appeal is universal—who doesn’t want to know more about their own history?—and one of the fastest-growing areas of research and interest in the United States today.

TMCC's Genealogy Lab began four years ago, and later became a contracted affiliate with the Family History Library in Salt Lake City, which is the world's largest genealogical library. Malek, a passionate researcher for the discipline, created and fostered the TMCC Genealogy Lab as a resource for students, faculty, staff and the community. To date, the books in the genealogy collection are the most circulated books at the TMCC Learning Commons, and the lab has hosted over 200 guest speakers at no additional cost to the college, which have been attended on average by 40-50 participants each week.

The Family History Room will house the growing acquisitions and resources that are available to help TMCC students, faculty, staff and community members to learn more about their family histories. “What I love about this new space is that everyone is welcome in the Open Genealogy Lab. It's a true community resource, here at your community college. And that’s exactly what we are here for—to serve our community,” said Malek in her speech at the opening ceremony.

“We want to be the one-stop place to do your family research. This has been one of my goals, and certainly something that will benefit the community in the years to come,” she said.

Resources

LibGuide
Open Genealogy Lab YouTube Channel

By Terezita Reyes Overduin, Chaffey College

Following the FDA approval of the COVID-19 vaccines, many institutions, organizations, government entities, and workplaces of various kinds have instituted vaccine mandates. The country is still grappling with various legal challenges and other uncertainty impacting the endurance of these mandates, but in the current moment, many of our institutions are moving forward with implementation of mandates on our campuses.

But where does the library stand? Research has shown that the work of librarians is often not fully understood or appreciated by our fellow faculty, administration, or the broader institution.¹ Library faculty and staff have to grapple with decisions that administrators have made without fully understanding the repercussions for their libraries. Vaccine mandates provide an example of how this dynamic can play out.

On August 16, 2021 the Chaffey College Governing Board passed a vaccine mandate resolution requiring all students and employees be fully vaccinated by October 15, 2021. This semester, the library and many other campus buildings remained closed. To enforce this mandate in the classroom in the upcoming semester, the college will require students registered for in-person classes to upload proof of vaccination in order to enroll. However, as the library prepares to re-open in Spring 2021, administrators are only now considering what a vaccine mandate would look like in the library. After many meetings and conversations with administrators, faculty, and union negotiators, librarians at Chaffey persist in asking the college to enforce this mandate in the library.

In these discussions, we were asked to provide examples of how California community college libraries are dealing with vaccine mandates at their institutions. To that end, a survey was distributed to our librarian listserv asking:

• Is your library currently open for in-person services? (Study space, computer use, reference questions)
• Does your campus have a vaccine mandate?
• Is the mandate enforced for library visitors?
• Is your library open to non-student visitors (i.e., the public)?
• How does your campus check the vaccine status or screen for COVID symptoms of on-campus students, if at all? Does this also apply to visitors?

Responding librarians were very helpful, and we are extremely grateful to all who provided information on the topic.

The survey received 44 responses. After controlling for duplicate entries, we received responses from 39 institutions. Two of those responses did not specify their college.

Responses to "Is your library currently open for in-person services?" (Figure 1) show that 38 responding campus libraries are currently open, and one is not.

Responses to "Does your campus have a vaccine mandate?" (Figure 2) show that 33 responding campuses have a vaccine mandate, and six do not. 

Responses to "Is the mandate enforced for library visitors?" (Figure 3) show that 19 responding campus libraries require library visitors to be vaccinated, nine do not require visitors to be vaccinated, five campus libraries are still figuring out how or if the mandate will be enforced, and six are not under a mandate. 

Responses to "Is your library open to non-student visitors (i.e., the public)?" (Figure 4) show that 25 responding campus libraries are open to non-student visitors, and 15 are not. 

Analysis of the open-ended responses reveals various approaches to the issue. Responses range from no check-in or restrictions on library visitors at all to admitting only students or vaccinated members of the public with strict enforcement. Some require that patrons be vaccinated, while others may permit entry to patrons who pass a health screening. Many libraries use an app or campus check-in kiosk to verify status before a visitor can enter campus buildings. Some libraries staff their entrances with student workers or other personnel to check visitor status before entering the library building, while others use an "honors system" approach with no tangible enforcement.

This variety in approaches seems to mirror the variety in views on the pandemic and vaccines themselves. Some regions, communities, governing boards, or administrators feel protected by vaccine mandates and embrace them, while others may feel ambivalent or restricted by vaccine mandates.

Whatever the case, administrators and institutions at large must realize that the library is an important part of any college campus and deserving of the same treatment and protections that the rest of the campus community receives. It is important to note that nine of the 33 responding campuses (27%) with a vaccine mandate, do not enforce the mandate in the library. If an institution chooses to implement a vaccine mandate, then enforcement must happen equally for all college services. A vaccine mandate that was created for the entire college community but is only enforced for some is, by definition, a discriminatory practice.

In fairness, it is possible that the institution did not realize the complexities of implementing a vaccine mandate for the entire campus. In Chaffey College’s September 2021 presidential newsletter, it states, “All students taking in-person classes and using in-person services are required to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by October 15 under a mandate passed by the Governing Board.” This statement implies that the intent was to ensure that all in-person students on campus are vaccinated. However, now that we are investigating what that would mean as we re-open the library, the college is equivocating on that commitment.

We have heard several reasons why the institution is hesitant to restrict access to the library. We have heard the argument that the library is a public space and a community service, and therefore should be open to all community members. While this is a commonly held belief about libraries, only public libraries are expressly and primarily created to serve the public at large. Academic libraries are created primarily for the use of the students, faculty, and staff of an academic institution.² While many academic libraries offer access to community members in the form of circulation privileges, access to physical resources, and computer usage, there are examples of institutions that are limiting or suspending this access in the current pandemic climate. New York University and UC San Francisco are two examples of large public universities that are currently open only for students, staff, and faculty.

Vaccine mandates have become one of the "hot topics" we librarians so often use to teach our students research skills. There are many perspectives on their effectiveness and implementation in various circumstances. The purpose of this investigation is not to determine whether or not vaccine mandates should be used in the academic library or on campuses in general. The issue at hand is how an institution views its library and the students, staff, and faculty who spend so much of their time there. Libraries and our students are deserving of the same treatment and protection as the rest of the institution's faculty, staff, and administrators.

References

1. Fagan, Jody Condit, Hillary Ostermiller, Elizabeth Price, and Lara Sapp. "Librarian, Faculty, and Student Perceptions of Academic Librarians: Study Introduction and Literature Review." New Review of Academic Librarianship 27, no. 1 (January 2, 2021): 38-75.↩

2. Bates, Marcia J., and Mary Niles Maack. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, Third Edition. Boca Raton: CRC, 2015

By Micaela Agyare, Foothill College

Foothill College Library is pleased to welcome Mark Barnes as their first Dean of the newly formed Learning Resource Center. He will oversee the Library, Pass The Torch, The Teaching & Learning Center, and the STEM Center. A native of the Detroit area, Mark Barnes has worked in libraries for over a decade. Before joining us at Foothill, Mark supervised the library, testing, and tutoring departments at Lone Star College - Houston North, in Texas. He graduated from the University of Michigan with a B.A. in History, and from Wayne State University with his Master's degree in Library and Information Science.