Hi all,

Thanks to the team that made the Deans and Directors meeting in Sacramento in March go so well. We had a great time coming together after missing several years and it was great to see so many friends and colleagues in one place. I look forward already to next year’s event. I hope everyone thought it worth their time to come and had safe travel to and from.

The CCL continues to work toward the full implementation of sufficient software to automate all the libraries’ primary functions from the $4 million annual allocation. We made serious steps toward that this year with the now complete implementation of LibKey digital linking software inside Primo that makes it easier for our students to link to digital content that we subscribe to. We are currently working through the massive details of implementing OCLC Cataloging and Metadata for all LSP libraries, which will take some time, but we intend to begin paying the bill from the allotment by July 1, 2023. We have also sent out a questionnaire to all libraries asking those who did not previously have a hosted EZ Proxy account to respond in order to move all our libraries to hosted (and paid) EZ Proxy authentication an linking software by July 1, 2023. Please respond to those surveys. With these three pieces of software, we have made great headway toward our vision of state funded library automation for all community college libraries. We are not done. We will continue to survey all of you once or twice a year to ask what else should we be working toward as a community. Another area of work that is still incomplete is the acceptance of the bylaws of the LSP Governance committee by the Chancellor’s Office to acknowledge our role as the advisory group that shares oversight and responsibilities to recommend software and other services that the libraries would benefit from. We are waiting to hear back from the Chancellor’s Office on this issue. We also have not yet signed a contract for July 1, 2022 through June 30,2023 for the CCL to work as the vendor of LSP Services to the community. As a non-profit corporation the CCL manages the oversight of the LSP by subcontracting the project management and network administration to the CCLC who hire and pay the employees. We have verbal confirmation from the Chancellor’s Office that both of those issues are virtually resolved and the paperwork should follow.

We are excited to welcome Sonya Christian as the new Chancellor for California Community Colleges. She currently is the president of Bakersfield College. We invited her to speak at D&D, but she had conflicts in her schedule that prevented her attendance. We will invite her again next year. So looking back, we have accomplished much, and looking forward we have much more to do and expect that as a community we will be able to accomplish all that we need.

Smiles,

John Taylor
CCL, President
Dean, Orange Coast College

  By Nancy Golz, CCL-EAR Committee Chair

New DEI Databases Comparison Review

The CCL-EAR committee is continuing our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion with a comparative review of diversity focused databases. This new DEI database review which is available on the CCL-EAR website examines four databases that focus on the experiences and voices of diverse groups of individuals who have historically been dismissed or ignored because of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or other social identities. Access to this type of information will be especially important as California Community College libraries seek to offer balanced and diverse collections that support the curriculum and the information needs of students as they take classes for the new Ethnic Studies graduation requirement. The new review addresses the content and coverage of each database, and includes information about affordability, usability, vendor support, interoperability, usage tracking, privacy, and accessibility. 

This following databases by well know library vendors are included in the review:

• Gale OneFile Diversity Studies
• EBSCO Diversity Source
• ProQuest Diversity Collection
• ABC-CLIO / Bloomsbury The American Mosaic (Academic) series. 

Some of the main differences among the databases are the breadth and depth of topics, overlap with general databases, and pricing. We hope that this carefully researched review by the CCL-EAR committee will help you to make thoughtful and informed decisions when selecting the best DEI databases for your students.

CCL-EAR Wants to Hear from You!

One way that CCL-EAR engages with accessibility, privacy, and DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) is by vetting products in reviews, flagging problems, and advocating on behalf of community college libraries with vendors. CCL-EAR will be sending out a brief survey to hear about your experience with databases regarding accessibility, privacy, and DEI. We are also interested in which databases that you would like the CCL-EAR committee to review, and any suggestions that you might have for upcoming electronic resources related webinars, like the panel that CCL-EAR recently hosted regarding e-book purchasing. We hope that you will take a few minutes to respond to the brief survey to let us know how CCL-EAR can support you in the important work that you do.

Dr. Nancy Golz
CCL-EAR, Chair
Faculty Librarian
Merced College
nancy.golz@mccd.edu

Amy Beadle, Director

Systemwide Purchase Recommendations/Announcement

The LSP Governance Committee made a recommendation to the CCCCO to purchase OCLC Cataloging & Metadata, EZProxy and LibKey for the 110 colleges in the LSP Program. We have recently heard back from the Chancellor’s Office that those recommendations were approved (!!) and are working with them to finalize details.

• LibKey: Most of you are already mid-implementation with LibKey, so that will continue to move forward. Please take advantage of the LibKey sessions happening in the coming weeks. More information and recordings from the first events can be found on the CCLC LibGuide. 
   
• OCLC Cataloging and Metadata: The statewide OCLC contract should become effective on July 1, 2023; with the exception of those nine colleges not currently licensed for Cataloging & Metadata. Those colleges will be contacted by the vendor with access instructions effective March 1st. Watch for a welcome letter from OCLC.
   
• EZProxy: We are working out details with OCLC on timing/plan for migrating colleges to hosted instances of EZProxy. Again, that contract should be enacted as of July 1, 2023. There are a handful of you who are on a April 1 renewal cycle for EZProxy. You should be receiving a prorated invoice for April - June that should be paid by your college/District when received.

FY 2023 Renewals/New Purchase Deadlines
 

We will not be hosting a Wednesday Webinar to go over Consortia Manager and ordering processes this spring - we ran out of available time slots before I could hold one. We will send out instructions when the renewals are available (March 15). If you need additional support or training on CM or ordering in general, please send me an email and we’ll set up a quick Zoom.

JSTOR Update
 

JSTOR is changing how their resources are grouped and priced.  As of July 2023, the entire Arts & Sciences Collection will be one large collection - no longer in smaller collections (I, II, III, etc.). All journals will be included. Artstor and eBooks will remain separate. JSTOR presented at the February 22 Webinar. Please find the recording and other materials on the CCLC LibGuide. 

Pricing for the (new) Full Collection and Artstor will be as follows:
 

There are still some Covid Relief Fees that will be applied to individual colleges who have not previously used them. They will all be applied as Publisher Discounts on your July 2023 JSTOR selections. Additionally, for colleges that purchased JSTOR collections in the past, you will be credited for those purchases. In a few instances, that means you will not have to pay anything further for ongoing access to the (new) Full Collection). For others, it means a discounted subscription cost. Discounted pricing is now available in Consortia Manager, but feel free to contact me if you have questions.

Call for Participation
 

The Library Services Platform (LSP) program Governance Committee invites faculty and classified professional staff to participate in the statewide LSP Work Groups for Fall 2023 - Spring 2024. Applications are due March 3, 2023. Submit your interest via our webform.

Katrina Rahn joined the Santa Rosa Junior College library team as Electronic Resources Librarian in August 2022.

By Cynthia Ainsworth, Hartnell College

Like all CA community colleges, faculty at Hartnell College have been exploring ways to embed equity in their pedagogical practices. In 2019, with the OEI Course Design Rubric and the Peralta Online Equity Rubric in hand, the Student Success and Equity Committee began developing its own rubric for both online and f2f classroom instruction. It was not a quick process…it took us two full semesters just to agree upon a definition of equity!! By that point we were in the midst of the pandemic and found continued inspiration for our rubric in the work of Dr. Luke Wood and Dr. Frank Harris III with CORA. Their webinar Employing Equity-Minded & Culturally Affirming Teaching Practices in Virtual Learning Communities was the catalyst for our own work and out of this inspiration came the Equity Rubric for Student Success. The support from faculty has been positive as instructors have implemented the dimensions outlined by Drs. Wood and Harris. 

Soon another idea began to percolate: how can we practice these same equitable dimensions in our service areas outside the classroom? As the Student Services Librarian at Hartnell, this had particular meaning to me. So our focus expanded and we created the Equity-Minded Rubric for Service Areas. Again, turning to the work of Dr. Wood and Dr. Harris, we found inspiration from their webinar Equity Minded Student Services in the Online Environment (April 2020). While this webinar was developed for online services, we felt these attitudes or dimensions seamlessly supported f2f services as well. 

As a companion to the classroom rubric, the student services rubric begins with the same equity definition. From there, the seven dimensions of equitable student services, developed by Drs. Wood and Harris are defined:

For each dimension, the rubric identifies a “what” and a “why” this equity practice is of value. A fuller description of the dimension is listed giving examples of how the practice can be made visible. Service areas are then given an opportunity to identify how they currently align with the dimension and then space to identify how they could implement practices for their area. (While there are many universalities for classroom faculty (syllabus, grading and attendance policies, exams/papers) there seemed to be a wide range of ways each area (ie Tutorial Services, Financial Aid or the Library) could implement these practices. Freedom was given for each area to develop how they best could demonstrate the dimensions.)

1. Be Intrusive
2. Be Responsive
3. Be Race Conscious
4. Be Informed
5. Be Community Focused
6. Be Clear and Validating
7. Be Flexible and Compassionate

For each dimension, the rubric identifies a “what” and a “why” this equity practice is of value. A fuller description of the dimension is listed giving examples of how the practice can be made visible. Service areas are then given an opportunity to identify how they currently align with the dimension and then space to identify how they could implement practices for their area. (While there are many universalities for classroom faculty (syllabus, grading and attendance policies, exams/papers) there seemed to be a wide range of ways each area (ie Tutorial Services, Financial Aid or the Library) could implement these practices. Freedom was given for each area to develop how they best could demonstrate the dimensions.)

Our excitement grew as the rubric continued to develop and we invited the Outcomes & Assessment committee chairs to one of our meetings. We asked if perhaps this rubric could be used to help service areas with their SAO (Service Area Outcomes)? The O&A committee saw the rubric as a way to energize the entire assessment process for those non-instructional areas (like the library) as they developed more meaningful outcomes and fresh ways of assessing. And so this spring, all service areas who complete the planning and assessment cycle will choose two of the dimensions to embed in their activities and outcomes for the following academic year. 

What will this look like for the library? We have just begun to explore how this might look. These are the questions we are asking ourselves:

• Be Intrusive: Are we approaching students as they navigate through the library or waiting for them to come to a desk before we offer help? Do we introduce ourselves to students, welcoming them so that they know they belong in the space? Do we anticipate their needs before they ask? 
• Be Responsive: Do we have resources prepared in advance? Have we made these resources easy to find (online and in the library)? Have we let students know it's ok to seek help?
• Be Race Conscious: Do our displays reflect the diversity of the student body? Do students of color see themselves represented when they navigate the library? Do our collections include many voices and experiences outside of the Eurocentric canon? Have staff been given training and opportunities to practice self-reflection and uncover hidden biases? 
• Be Informed: What data are we using to make decisions? Are we asking students who don’t use the library about their perceptions? Are we conscious of students’ lived experiences as we collect data? Are we only asking questions of traditional students or have we expanded non-traditional ways to assess our outcomes?
• Be Community Focused: Are our spaces welcoming and inviting? Can our students see themselves reflected in the spaces? Have we asked students how they want to interact with our spaces, collections, or services? Have we included spaces for both in-person and online communities? Have we invited learning communities (Umoja/Puente) to use our space?
• Be Clear and Validating: Are our policies and guidelines clear and affirming written in non-punitive language? Do we share with other services areas on campus in an effort to build consistency in communication across campus? Do we use language that let’s students know they can succeed? 
• Be Flexible and Compassionate: Do our policies around fines and fees support student success? Do we provide services outside of our open hours? Do our resources allow for students with family and work demands to find what they need outside of traditional methods? 

Answering these questions will compel us to shine a light on our current practices and be open to the self reflection required to make changes. We believe this will truly make our school a more equitable place.