Arts & Humanities Council discussed New Directions at its meeting on January 17. From the minutes:

• Since Google and other large-scale digitization projects are excluding much of the complex, multi-format early research materials scholars need, we should seek ways of collaborating with other major research collections to select, digitize, and make jointly accessible this type of material. This would entail sharing funds, technical, and subject expertise. A possible host for the overall project collection might be something like the Schoenberg Center for Electronic Text and Image at Penn.
• We need more information on what the Google digital project is doing. How good is the quality? How well are they doing color images? How can we supplement this project to include materials they are excluding? How do we let our users know what is available?
• CRL subject specialists are exploring digitizing some of their microform collections. Could this serve as an example of a collaborative structure for a similar project?
• How do we move from a mostly print collection to a mostly electronic one? We need the infrastructure to tackle the data issues and retrain staff.
• We need to explore restructuring selection and liaison work to more effectively deal with the increasing interdisciplinarity of programs, departments, resources and research. We need to be more nimble in all our functions and services so we can provide our services and collections much more quickly than present. Can our subject councils be used more effectively as one means of dealing with interdisciplinary concerns? Are there existing models already on campus, e.g., the new Stanley Hall, the New Media Center, Metropolitan Studies Program, the GIS Center? How do they get funding? Make decisions? Evaluate their success? What problems and structures have faculty in these programs encountered? Will 2.0 technologies encourage more of this kind of discussion and help us work around the rigidity of our systems? We need more funding for interdisciplinary purchases.
• The process and pace of change is taking place at different rates in different countries. Could we be a motivator or leader in helping especially underdeveloped countries adapt to the new digital age? We need visionary people to lead the process.
• Can we give up some control, e.g., let faculty provide "tags" for resources' metadata, rather than using obsolete LC subject headings and cataloging that takes too long?
• We should be cautious in using the Google project as a model, since their mission is to make money.
• We should create a taskforce to implement easy changes or quick fixes that come out of the New Directions initiative, and “just do it!” An example would be to provide staff more laptops to take to meetings, to use when working in the stacks, etc. Create a list of immediate action items.
• How can we improve our current infrastructure to be less rigid, speedier and more effective, so we can actually take on new directions?
• Are we being realistic to consider all these new directions in the face of forthcoming budget deficits and cuts to staff and resources? Will shifting resources and establishing priorities be sufficient, or do we need more funding to effect change?

Submitted by Arts & Humanities Council