OSUL Training Committee Meeting Minutes, May 24, 2012
Cheryl Lowry called the meeting to order at 1:05pm
Members Present
Cheryl Lowry (chair), Sherab Chen, Kevlin Haire, Matt Jewett, Tingting Lu, Lisa Patton-Glinski and Amy Pickenpaugh
Before discussions began, Cheryl announced that it would be Tingting’s last meeting since she and her family are moving to Houston.
Training Calendar Update
Matt reported that it is possible to use Microsoft Outlook to set up and use a Training calendar. He said the WIT group already is creating a pilot calendar for the Exhibits Committee; we can proceed after that project is completed.
Training Needs Assessment
Cheryl started the discussion by listing the up-front decisions (from the agenda) that should be made before an assessment can be done and asked members to add or change any of them. Lisa said that it is important to establish a framework for what the needs are and how they relate to the strategic mission, so as many can be met as possible. Members then discussed what kind of needs might fall under the plan, what would be the committee’s various responsibilities in meeting those needs, and how the committee might deal with gaps that are identified through an assessment. Other questions were raised, such as how the committee would distinguish between training and professional development, how to handle presentation and what kind of rollout there should be in beginning the process of assessment. Members agreed that the committee should set realistic expectations for staff members of the what the results of such an assessment would be.
Members then discussed various ways to conduct the assessment – interviews with department heads, discussions with other committees, surveying supervisors, etc. TingTing Lu advocated for interviewing department heads since this strategy would likely produce a wealth of data. Members agreed that this should be at least the first step in the process.
Lisa asked if any members knew of a library or other academic unit at another University had completed such a project so we could see what peers are doing. Matt said he would pose the question to a CIC list-serve he’s on, and Cheryl said she would reach out to a list-serve for information literacy she uses.
Cheryl and Amy volunteered to come up with an overall game plan for conducting the interviews. Once the logistics are worked out and interview questions are created, each committee member will be expected to do three or four interviews, which will then be reviewed to help determine the next step in the process.
The meeting adjourned at 2:20pm