Attendees

• Lingling Jiang, Sheridan College - lingling.jiang@sheridancollege.ca

• Amanda Van Mierlo, Humber College - amanda.vanmierlo@humber.ca

• Tony Onorato, Fanshawe College - aonorato@fanshawec.ca

• Robert Soulliere, Mohawk College - robert.soulliere@mohawkcollege.ca

• Jennifer Mo, OCLS - jmo@ocls.ca

• Thomas Guignard, OCLS - tguignard@ocls.ca

• Liana Giovando, OCLS - lgiovando@ocls.ca

• Aura Hill, OCLS - ahill@ocls.ca

• Lauren Rupert, Consultant

Regrets

• Gordana Vitez (Chair), Niagara College - gvitez@niagaracollege.ca

• Rebecca Pearson, Lambton College - rebecca.pearson@lambtoncollege.ca

• Dana Schwarz, Niagara College - dschwarz@niagaracollege.ca

Action Items

Discussion Items

Welcome, Robert!

Welcome to the Systems, Analytics, and Data subcommittee! We are thrilled to have you here!

Update from the ISC

Most subcommittees are meeting with less frequency leading to there being less to update overall

Metadata and Cataloguing - The Metadata and Cataloguing subcommittee continue to meet weekly and are working on several projects.
The subcommittee is working on moving the information they established for the CLO Metadata Standards into an easily consumable format of a LibGuide. The subcommittee is hoping to make the first several sections of this LibGuide public very soon. The LibGuide is for the intended use of individuals with a novice or beginner level of cataloging understanding who are contributing records to ensure uniform record creation and quality
The Metadata and Cataloguing subcommittee is also working on creating workflows for common situations that individuals may encounter while cataloging. These workflows would provide a standardized set of processes for people to follow in different instances allowing for consistency. They are also working on workflow templates (eg. importing records) within the Alma Network Zone which could be easily accessed.
This subcommittee is also investigating the benefit of subscribing to an external cataloging tool (eg. Bookwhere, Connextion) that would allow cataloguers to import high-quality MARC records.

E-Resources - The e-Resources subcommittee has primarily been working with OCLS to test, check and fix any problems that have been found in electronic resources. The subcommittee has been working through each material type in an effort to ensure all material types are working for colleges.
The subcommittee has also been discussing its future as a subcommittee and has come to the conclusion that they have fulfilled its directive and could be absorbed into the E-Resources Steering Committee moving forward.

User Experience - The User Experience subcommittee has passed its briefing note. The briefing note encourages institutions to use the Primo VE equity, diversity, and inclusion software included in the program's functionality to suppress offensive Library of Congress subject headings. The briefing note recommends that institutions follow the MAIN suppressed terms linked in the document - the terms on this list are by no means comprehensive, nor do the chosen terms hold more importance than others, this is just a starting place.
The User Experience subcommittee is also looking to strike a working group that would focus on resource sharing in colleges. Right now resource sharing is enabled at the Network Zone level but is suppressed at the Institution Zone level. This working group would research the topic and propose a set of best practices for resource sharing.

Training, Communications, and PR - The TCPR subcommittee has not met is a considerable amount of time. They are planning on discussing an article for InsideOCULA during their next meeting and governance.

Implementation Steering Committee - The Implementation Steering Committee’s main focus has been on the governance proposal for Page 1+. This includes examining the roles and responsibilities for each of the subcommittees and deciding if they can remain as is, be evolved into new committees, or if they can be combined with other existing committees.

Testing Alma & Primo releases - If OCLS takes on the responsibility for testing new releases, what are colleges’ expectations for the new release testing? Beyond testing, are there other things OCLS can do to help colleges with new releases? (Jennifer)

• What are the expectations - the college's expectations of OCLS may differ depending on each college's internal expectations or standards.

• Timeline: there are monthly bug updates and repairs, and quarterly functionality updates

  • Last month's bug update included 72 repaired and identified bugs

  • All functionality updates (quarterly) will be released in the sandbox first and then will be put into production 2 weeks later. During this time OCLS will test the new functionality updates.

  • This testing would allow OCLS to test ‘universal integrations, and updates that would affect everyone and warn colleges if any issues are identified in advance of the update going to the colleges. It would be encouraged that colleges test in the sandbox with OCLS so that they can share college view results

  • OCLS will create integration templates in the sandbox for the colleges to test for themselves

• The frequency of the bug updates might make it so that it is too difficult for OCLS to test all bugs for colleges, there also may be access and testing issues where third-party integration is concerned. However, OCLS would be able to test functionality as it is less frequently updated

• Suggestion: One sandbox for testing issues and bugs/new releases (track bugs that affect colleges, notify the colleges of updates, test new releases before they are released into the college environment) and one sandbox for testing general testing

• All information pertaining to the Sandboxes will be placed into the existing best practices document

• All colleges are encouraged to reach out to OCLS when they have any questions, comments, or suggestions.

Analytics

• When will the NZ shared analytics reports be available?

  • The Network Zone shared reports are not anticipated to be completed in the immediate future. It is recognized that some institutions have a need for running reports and they are encouraged to run their own reports if they need to.

  • This subcommittee encourages institutions to share any custom reports that they have created if they feel the contents would be beneficial to other institutions. Jennifer Mo is in the process of creating guidelines to facilitate this sharing.

• Both the shared analytics related to the CLO survey data and the other data points the Colleges indicated in the shared reports table.

• Jennifer has transferred the reports provided by Rebecca and Lingling into a consolidated OCLS folder for CLO Related Reports and materials, a secondary file has also been created for ‘other’ helpful documents that have been created.

• Jennifer has asked Ec Libris about saving reports directly to the folder, how to share reports directly to the Network Zone, and how reports can be shared between colleges. Apparently, there would have to be a community folder in use for those shared reports.

• In the case of there being a community folder available to share and save reports, there would need to be guidelines in place for the colleges to follow. These guidelines would include naming conventions, how to best use the folders, what information should be saved where, how often the folders are updated, and so forth.

• ACTION ITEM: @Jennifer Mo (Unlicensed) to create a draft of guidelines pertaining to a shared Network Zone folder that could house the shared reports for colleges (this document would be similar to the sandbox management guidelines)

Any other items

Parking Lot Discussion Items

• Be aware that eResources activated in NZ or IZ should not affect colleges' ability to pull eResources data in Alma Analytics. Tests may be needed to make sure eResources-related reports work as expected.

• Discussion of role of the SAD subcommittee post Go Live. See Orbis Cascade Alliance Systems Committee for an example: Systems Documentation