Joe Deodato & AM Panel

The challenges faced by younger librarians were examined at the 2009 LACUNY Institute.  Library Leadership: The Next Generation was the theme of the October 23 event at the Graduate Center.  Joseph Deodato (Staten Island) and Brian Lym (Hunter) were co-chairs of the Institute.

LACUNY President Jane Fitzpatrick introduced keynote speaker Stanley Wilder, University Librarian at the University of North Carolina Charlotte.  Wilder, a controversial figures since his 2005 Chronicle of Higher Education essay about the false assumptions of information literacy, discussed “Demographic Change in a Turbulent Era: Librarians in the 21st Century.”

Stanley Wilder, Keynote

The library workforce is old and getting older, according to Wilder, who displayed an American Research Libraries (ARL) chart of the age shift.  The average age of academic librarians was in the thirties in 1986 but had jumped to the fifties by 2005.  This change has resulted in part from delayed retirements, resulting in fewer opportunities for new librarians.  Ironically, at the same time, library-school enrollments have increased.

Wilder described the rise of what he called feral professionals: those with backgrounds in publishing, information technology, and human resources.  These workers are younger, more ethnically diverse, more likely to be male, and less likely to have MLS degrees than traditional librarians.  According to Wilder, feral professionals are getting more money with their non-traditional backgrounds.

Wilder is not comfortable with the emerging importance of what he calls technologists because they lack “deep immersion into the academic process and community, as libraries do.”  People with information technology backgrounds also cannot provide the liaison approach practiced by traditional librarians.  He worries that when senior librarians, especially catalogers, retire, they will take irreplaceable skills with them.  He thinks that 2010 may be a watershed year for the profession.

Wilder also briefly discussed his essay “The Geometry of the Academic Library,” which argues that libraries should take more active roles on their campuses.

Curtis Kendrick

Wilder was followed by the first of two panel discussions moderated by Marie L. Radford, Associate Professor at the Rutgers University School of Communication and Information.  “The Graying of the Profession: Intergenerational Collaboration and Succession Planning” was considered by Erik Sean Estep of East Carolina University, Jenna Freedman of Barnard College, and Shelly Warwick of the Harlem-Touro Medical Library.

Marie L. Radford

Radford noted that intergenerational tension in the profession is highly noticeable.  Warrick’s objection to the way younger librarians dress helped spur comments about appearances throughout the panels.  Freedman feels that younger librarians are too often condescended to.  Estep pointed out that he is a co-editor of the forthcoming collection Gen-X Perspectives on Librarianship.  Radford said that younger librarians do not want to be managers and want flexible work schedules.  All the panelists noted the importance of developing interpersonal skills.

Joe Deodato & AM Panel

“Issues in Next Generation Librarianship” was the topic for Erin Dorney of Millersville University, Emily Drabinski of Long Island University Brooklyn, and Jason Kucsma of Metro.  Dorney emphasized the importance of new librarians being mentored by both younger and veteran colleagues.  She also explained that the new generation of librarians is used to dealing with change and can help their libraries remain relevant.  Kucsma discussed the importance of realizing how libraries are affected by social media such as Facebook.  He also said communication theory needs to be stressed more in library school, while Drabinski pointed out that library schools have neglected to emphasize how important instruction is in academic libraries.

Marie Radford, Jason Kucsma, Erin Dorney, Emily Drabinski

The Institute also featured three poster sessions: “Librarians in Metamorphosis: From Shushing to Shining, from Isolation to Integration” by Jeanne Galvin and Devin McKay; “The Times They Are A-Changin’” by Kathleen Dreyer, Cristina Ergunay, and Colleen Major; “ Beyond Geeks and Grannies” by Scott Rummler.

In his remarks which closed the event, University Librarian Curtis Kendrick said he was glad to hear from those who will succeed Baby Boomer librarians.  He warned that libraries should not “silo” librarians in certain areas or opportunities.  Kendrick worried that slowness to change may push new librarians out of the profession.

Scott Rummler

He emphasized the importance of mentoring to help those new to the field to realize their potential.  The one value shared by both new and veteran librarians, he said, is the devotion to service, a core value that will sustain librarians for years to come.

Michael Adams (Graduate Center), with help from reports by Mike Handis (Graduate Center) and Sarah Laleman Ward (Hunter).

While most academic libraries have Friends groups and some encourage students to join, a student-initiated, independent club is quite rare.  This exceptional and dedicated group works closely with me.  They make librarians aware of student needs, such as longer weekend hours for non-traditional and weekend students.  They are committed to helping us provide superior service and enriched collections to Queens College students.

Most of all, SFOL has brought a wonderful spirit of enthusiasm to the library.  It is exhilarating to see young students sitting with retiree members of Friends of the Library at book sales, magically increasing revenues for new acquisitions. We are looking forward to working together and help the SFOL carry out its plans.

Shoshana Kaufmann (Queens)

On Friday, October 30, the LACUNY Collection Development Roundtable hosted a panel discussion entitled “A Shoestring and a Dream: Collaborative Fundraising across CUNY Libraries” in the Graduate Center’s lovely Skylight Room. There were between fifteen and twenty CUNY librarians in attendance, as well as the three speakers: Susan Shiroma, Senior Librarian at the Foundation Center; Tracy L. Thompson-Przylucki, Executive Director, New England Law Library Consortium (NELLCO); and Curtis Kendrick, CUNY University Librarian.

I introduced the event, thanking both the LACUNY Budget Committee and LACUNY President Jane Fitzpatrick for their help with food, equipment, and room reservations. I also gave some background on the event, which grew out of early efforts to reach out to other subject librarians in one of my areas to discuss the possibility of collaborative collection development. Although some people were enthusiastic and receptive, some said that people had broached the topic before but it never panned out or they did not see it as a possibility. Others did not respond at all. I have a few theories about why more people did not consider this an option, but the one underlying reason that we probably all face is funding.

Susan Shiroma, Tracy L. Thompson-Przylucki, Curtis Kendrick, Daisy Domínguez

Then, last year, when Rob Laurich was Chair of the Collection Development Roundtable, he called a meeting to discuss the ways that our schools were dealing with the economic situation. One of the points made at that meeting was that we need to be more proactive in our collection development efforts. One of the ways this can be interpreted is not just reacting to budget cuts but being proactive in our efforts to seek funding so that our resources are not cut during troubled times but also so that we supplement our funding and acquiring resources during the good times as well.

In thinking about a program that could build on collaborative collection development, I thought we could use member comments about having a proactive approach and explore one way in which we could put that approach into practice. To have a practical discussion with real-life experiences, we sought speakers with knowledge about finding, writing, and evaluating grant applications. We also sought someone with in-depth knowledge of the CUNY culture, its challenges and its possibilities, someone who could help us envision how we could put the lessons learned by our first speakers into play. That’s how “A Shoestring and a Dream” materialized.

Our first speaker, Susan Shiroma, presented “Building Your Fundraising Skills as a Collection Development Librarian.” She discussed the many resources available at the Foundation Center and provided us with a printout of grants recently awarded to CUNY. The Foundation Center website includes online reference service and some free web presentations. If your school does not have a site license to the Foundation Directory Online database, try your school’s grants office; it might have single-user access.

Tracy L. Thompson-Przylucki, presented “Mission Accomplished! Grants as a Means to your Ends Despite the Economy.”  As director and grant writer for NELLCO, Tracy had many words of wisdom for librarians starting out in collaborative grant writing. She noted that her consortium had taken baby steps, earning a grant for fax machines in the early 1990s, to reach their recently awarded National Leadership Grant by the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) to develop the Universal Search Solution as an open-source discovery platform. Tracy highlighted the importance of a sense of trust and demonstrated commitment among consortium members.

In terms of our specific interest in collection development, she asked us to consider what collaborative collection development means to us.  Do we want a buy-in from our organization, or do we want to cut down on redundancies? Do we have any projects in mind? She counseled us to share our ideas amongst ourselves; to talk to our grants departments to find out what others are working on and whether we might be able to work as sub-grantees; to learn at places like the Foundation Center; and to build a relationship with funders. Tracy’s PowerPoint may be found on the LACUNY Collection Development Roundtable webpage.

Curtis Kendrick then presented “Collaboration at CUNY:  Challenges and Opportunities.” Among the advantages Curtis cited were our compelling mission, our geographic location, and the possibility of working with several partners including LACUNY as well as CUNY Central. In terms of challenges, he noted different cultures on different campuses where not all collaborative collection grant writing project partners would have the same latitude. He also suggested opportunities in collaborating with partners from outside CUNY as well as within.

Our question-and-answer period lasted until the end of our allotted time. Some of the questions included one by Beth Evans (Brooklyn) who asked about the difficulty of finding outright purchase grants. One way to work around this is to think about resources as administrative overhead since some grants allow for this. Kenneth Schlessinger (Lehman) noted that 1.5% of grants come to his library and encouraged us to establish relationships with other departments towards this end. I hope that the discussion and ideas exchanged during this event continue on campuses and lead to collaborative fundraising across CUNY Libraries.

Daisy Domínguez (City)

Monica Berger, Technical Services and Electronic Resources Librarian, introduced the group to the concept of Open Access (OA) and outlined a brief history. According to Peter Suber, author of  the Open Access News blog, open access is “scholarly content online that is free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” Open Access began in the mid-1980s with the rise of the open-source-software movement and gained momentum as networked information proliferated throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Recently, some large research universities have decreed that their faculty’s research be accessible in OA journals or institutional repositories, and some federal agencies require that publications stemming from federally-funded research be published in OA publications.

Many Open Access articles are available as preprints, drafts that have not yet been peer-reviewed. In some disciplines, preprints take on great importance; ArXiv.org, a preprint repository for physics, mathematics, computer science, and related disciplines, is one such example. Similarly, postprints, or digital copies of post-peer-reviewed articles, are often freely accessible via institutional repositories.

The question “what’s in it for us faculty?” was addressed by Maura Smale, the library’s coordinator of Information Literacy. Authors who publish in OA journals retain copyright, including the right to share, distribute, and self-archive. Open Access provides financial advantages for institutions: for non-OA journals, universities pay twice: once to fund the research and again to purchase their libraries’ subscriptions to journals.

Patricia Cholewka, Professor of Nursing, described her own experience as an author of an article in an OA journal. She praised the relatively quick turnaround in OA publications; just three months after submission, her peer-reviewed article was published online. Her publication in the International Journal of Economic Development led to opportunities to publish in conference proceedings, which led to opportunities to edit proceedings. Because she retained copyright of her published research, she later published her articles as book chapters. She suggested that faculty scholars resist the stranglehold that for-profit publishers have on the literature of certain disciplines by seeking high-quality OA journals as venues for their publications.

Monica Berger gave all participants a tour of some places to search or browse for Open Access articles. Using Professor Neil Katz’s OA article from the Osaka Journal of Mathematics as an example, she searched DOAJ.org, the Directory of Open Access Journals, and demonstrated SFX, the library’s OpenURL link resolver that locates electronic full text from the library’s collection. The library’s list of full-text electronic journals is regularly updated to include Open Access titles.

Download the handout here.

Anne Leonard (City Tech)

I came to the library profession after earning a Ph.D. in anthropology.  I was drawn into the field in part because of my interest in systems of classifying knowledge.  The anthropological approach to knowledge organization is to explain abstract cultural concepts from an interior viewpoint, in terms of its own inner logic, and linking it to other concepts.  The anthropologist studies knowledge domains as aspects of culture by eliciting answers to questions.  Anthropological studies often elicit concepts, meanings, and connections between cultural domains that are hidden beneath the cultural surface.

The anthropological approach to conceptual domains is very different from that of library and information science, which focuses on bibliographic records.  These different approaches to knowledge are complementary and hold intriguing possibilities for designing research and aiding theory formation, particularly with the rapid development of folksonomies through innovations such as Web 2.0 and social networking sites such as Facebook.  The emerging information environment requires new ways of thinking about the creation, transmission, and categorization of information.

Anthropological approaches to cognition and classification have benefited from research in linguistics, psychology, sociology, education, and artificial intelligence, but pertinent contributions in information organization from the library world, such as authority control and faceted versus enumerative classification, have gone unnoticed.  This is most likely because these concepts are based not in empirical science but in the application of scientific principles to designing practical systems and solutions.
Library and information science is at heart a practical and applied field.  Research and theorization are secondary to the practical issues of providing service.  Service comes naturally to the librarian, and research requires an imaginative stretch.  Social sciences such as anthropology, by contrast, are essentially research disciplines.  Only by extension are they applied fields.

Professional training in the social sciences stresses awareness of concepts of data, units of analysis, and hypothesis testing.  Such concepts are not native to library science and are not ingrained in the thinking of students, trainees, or practitioners of librarianship.  They can, however, readily be applied to problems in libraries and information centers.  Since becoming a librarian, I have used my background in anthropology as a way of thinking about data and questions in the library and information world rather than to conduct anthropological studies of the library.

Libraries as institutions provide a site for the application of social science principles of measurement, data analysis, and hypothesis testing.  A highly qualitative field like social anthropology provides theoretical and methodological frameworks for studying the attitudes, preferences, thought-processes, behaviors, and other characteristics of users through ethnographic techniques of observation, interaction, and unstructured interviewing.  Ethnographic research can bring to light subtle distinctions enabling us to separate categories of users and better understand them so as to serve their interests and needs.

Graduate training in an academic discipline such as anthropology enables one to perceive problems not apparent to those without such a background and to find ways to solve or at least better understand these problems.  The field of librarianship holds great possibilities for innovation for those who want to apply the theoretical and methodological approaches of other disciplines to questions arising in the library or information environment.

Jay Bernstein (Kingsborough)

The session began with a presentation by Janet Munch regarding preparing grant proposals for best chances at receiving funding.  She presented two sites that are recommended viewing for anyone preparing a grant: the Research Foundation, which has all you need to know about grants, including the PSC-CUNY Grant site with a users’ manual and sample applications along with a list of past awards funded since 1999 that includes the name of the recipient(s) and the title of the application, and the LACUNY site, which has the PDC page with a list of grant titles, names of recipient(s), and abstracts where provided, along with tips on grant writing.  Janet emphasized the importance of attending local workshops on one’s campus in addition to the PDC workshop.

Some history of funding was shared.  In 2008, fourteen of twenty-one applications were funded.  In 2007, eleven of the thirteen submitted were funded.  In 2006, eight of the fifteen submitted were funded, and in 2005, all nine submissions were funded.  Janet noted that you can pick your panel, although the Research Foundation can reallocate your application to another panel.  Ching-Jung mentioned that she was advised to apply to the library panel because that is where her experience lies.

Next, a timeline was shared by Janet.  She emphasized that if you were hired after June 2009 you have extra time to submit your grant proposal (out-of-cycle).  Regardless of whether you apply in-cycle or out-of-cycle, however, be sure to check with your local grants office because each campus has its deadline for applications, which is sooner than the deadline for the grants posted on the RFCUNY site.  Notification is sent via e-mail by the Research Foundation on April 15 to the e-mail you used to submit your application; this is sent whether you receive funding or not.  If you do not hear from the Research Foundation by April 16, be sure to call your local grants office.  Funding begins July 1, 2010.  If you are using human subjects, you can submit your proposal without IRB approval, but it is strongly recommended you start on the IRB approval process before July because the process takes time and you can’t start working before the IRB approval is received.  Maura also emphasized that IRB approval can take longer than you might think and starting even before knowing if you have received the finding is the way to go.

In terms of the application itself, it was suggested by Janet and emphasized by both Ching-Jung and Maura that you get at least one person to read your grant proposal and that you be careful in your writing.  Janet emphasized including a clear, concise statement of the problem and the significance (why it is important you get funded, what is the significance to the area / topic, what are you doing that’s different).  Janet also emphasized the importance of the literature review because it helps put your project in context of what has been done and what is missing.  You should also be sure, where asked, to list relevant publications since these show that you have an interest and experience in the topic/area and also list other activities that might help show your experience in the area.  When you are asked to suggest reviewers, it is good if you can do so, but it is not mandatory.

The maximum funding for a grant is $6,000, though generally a grant is funded for between $3,000 and $5,000.  Librarians do not qualify for summer salary, although they are eligible for release time.  Talk to your chief librarian before asking for release time as a permission form needs to be filled out.  It is preferred that you hire CUNY students as research assistants as opposed to outsiders.  Equipment is for items over $1,000 and these items become CUNY property.  Supplies are items under $1,000 and are usually expendable.  The grant cannot fund journal subscriptions, internet service, membership or other ongoing needs, training courses, presentations, PDAs, travel costs to attend or present papers at conferences (only registration fees are funded).  If you are interviewing someone at a conference, the travel might be funded.  It is important to justify every item on your budget, particularly any single item over $2,500.  Janet noted that the budget can be changed later to reallocate categories, but you must put items into categories at the time of application.  Janet also mentioned that you should prioritize the items on your budget.

Anyone on the University payroll is eligible other than substitutes or adjuncts, although faculty on sabbatical can apply for a grant.  The project must involve original research and cannot be for collection development, personal or professional education, curriculum development, or textbook writing.  The project can be solo or with a co-investigator.  If you are working with someone else, be sure to include in the application how the other person contributes to the project.

You receive evaluations with your grant, whether funded or not.  These are in the system where you can see them when you log in, and you can put the reviews in your personnel file on campus if you desire.

Sara Rofofsky Marcus (Queensborough) and Anne Leonard (City Tech)

First up was Janey Chao (Baruch), in full costume, performing two belly dances.  I think this was a first for LACUNY!

Janey was followed by Nancy Foasberg (Queens) talking about her involvement with board games, four of which she displayed.  Who knew there was a community of board gamers, players, and collectors alike?  One game, The Presidential Election of 1960, looked old but was in fact created in 2008.

Nancy Foasberg

aFinally, Helen Georgas (Brooklyn) showed us the creative arts project Underwater New York, an online collection of stories, music, and art.  It’s a community list of items found near and under the various waterways of the city, meant to inspire works of prose, poetry and more.   The Coast Guard found a dead giraffe!  Denture, dinette sets, ice cream trucks and more are listed on the site. The mind boggles at the multitude of possibilities this project opens up.

Questions for the presenters were lively and showed the fascination with the other side of our LACUNY community.  Good food and conversation afterwards was enjoyed by all.  Looking forward to many more of these events in the future.

Jane Fitzpatrick (Graduate Center)

At the suggestion of her mentor, Beth Evans (Brooklyn), Angell contacted Jill Cirasella (Brooklyn) and Maura Smale (City Tech), co-chairs of the Junior Faculty Research Roundtable, and Anne Leonard (City Tech), co-chair of the Professional Development Committee, to inquire if they would be interested in co-hosting a forum on this contentious issue. Together, they planned the July 21 event. The forum began with Angell offering a brief description of the article and its implications and developed into a fascinating debate that lasted well over an hour. The presence and insight of seasoned CUNY librarians resulted in an engaging event. Although at times there were differences in opinion, everyone was thoroughly gracious and eloquent, and all who participated appeared satisfied with the conversation.

Katelyn Angell

Philip Barnett and Claudia Lascar (City) published “Journals Not Included in BIOSIS Previews Have a Notable Impact in Biology” in Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship no. 58 (summer 2009).

Jay Bernstein (Kingsborough) published “Nonknowledge: The Bibliographical Organization of Ignorance, Stupidity, Error, and Unreason: Part Two” in Knowledge Organization 36.1 (2009): 249-260.

Ching-Jung Chen and Sydney C. Van Nort (City) published “Image Collections at The City College of New York: Collaborative Efforts at a Public Urban College Campus” in VRA Bulletin 35. 2 (2008): 19-22.  Ching-Jung also published “The Tea Garden in Early Georgian Conversation Pieces” in British Art Journal 10 (spring 2009): 30-39; “Analog to Digital: Conversion of the Image Libraries at the City College of New York” in Art Documentation 28 (spring 2009): 36-39; and “Art History: A Guide to Basic Research Resources” in Collection Building 28 (summer 2009): 122-125.  In addition, Sydney’s 2007 book The City College of New York is being included in Alexander Street Press’s Local and Regional History Online.

Jill Cirasella (Brooklyn) published “Quantum Computing: Selected Internet Resources for Librarians, Researchers, and the Casually Curious” in Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship no. 57 (spring 2009).

Kathleen Collins (John Jay) discussed her book Watching What We Eat: The Evolution of Television Talk Shows on WNYC’s The Leonard Lopate Show on June 30.

Daisy Dominquez (City) published “Manufacturing Kleptomania: The Social and Scientific Underpinnings of a Pathology” in Madison Historical Review 6 (2009): 1-23.

Jane Fitzpatrick (Graduate Center) contributed entries on Josh Beckett, Paul Pierce, and Elizabeth (Betty) Robinson to Great Athletes (Salem Press).

Helen Georgas (Brooklyn) has edited Underwater New York, an online collection of stories, music, and art inspired by objects found in and around the city.  Helen also contributed the multimedia “Dead Horse Bay: Land of the Misfit Toys. And Horse Bones.”

Miriam Laskin and Jose Diaz (Hostos) contributed “Literary Research in a Bilingual Environment: Information Literacy as a Language-learning Tool” to Teaching Literary Research: Challenges in a Changing Environment (Association of College and Research Libraries).

Janet Butler Munch (Lehman) published “The Academic Librarian: Thinking and Working as a Writer” and “Writing Biographical Sketches as a Vehicle for Professional Development” in Writing and Publishing: The Librarian’s Handbook (ALA).  Janet also researched local buildings and contributed essays to Lehman College Art Gallery’s Web site Bronx Architecture.

Jeffrey Kroessler (John Jay) published The Greater New York Sports Chronology (Columbia University Press).

Kanu Nagra (Borough of Manhattan) published “The Evaluation of the Use of Electronic Resources and Services in Academic Libraries: A Study of E-metrics and Related Methods for Measurement and Assessment” in Journal of Library Administration and Management Section 5.3 (2009): 28-41.

Suzanna Simor (Queens) published “Word of Faith Made Visible: Imaging the Creed in Medieval Bohemia” in Selected Papers from the 24^th World Congress of the Czechoslovak Society of Arts and Sciences, September 8-13, 2008.  Suzanna also contributed introductions to two catalogues of Queens College Art Center exhibitions: Franca Marini: Universal Language and The Poetics of Transculture and Writing the Body, Naomi Grossman.

Susan Thomas (Borough of Manhattan) published “Value and Validity of Art Zines as an Art Form” in Art Documentation 28.2 (2009): 27-38.

Michael Adams (Graduate Center) was named Library Journal’s audio reviewer of the year.

Seamus Scanlon (Center for Worker Education) was one of the winners of the 2009 Carnegie Corporation of New York/New York Times I Love My Librarian Award.

Suzanna Simor (Queens) received a PSC-CUNY Research Award and an ARLIS/NA (Art Libraries Society of North America) Wilson Research Award in support of image license fees for her monograph Imaging the Creed: Visualizations of the Christian Creeds from Charlemagne to Luther (Brepols/Harvey Miller, forthcoming).

Exhibitions

Janet Butler Munch (Lehman), in consultation with Ira Bloom of Lehman’s political science department, organized Women and the Supreme Court, an exhibit of images, text, and publications, September 17-December 17.

Suzanna Simor, Alexandra de Luise, and Tara Mathison (Queens) curated several fall exhibitions at the Queens College Art Center.  The Poetics of Transculture (September 9-October 30) presented a cultural dialogue of two site-specific installations inspired by language and place: Universal Language by contemporary Italian artist Franca Marini and A?TORIA in Poetry and Images: Exile-People-Places by contemporary Greek American poet Nicos Alexiou and six Astoria artists. The Queens College Center for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies co-sponsored the exhibition. Writing the Body: New Work by Naomi Grossman (November 5-December 23), focusing on elements of drawing and on the human form in wire sculptures, installations, and works on paper and mixed media, opened with the artist’s gallery talk on November 5.

Professional Involvement

Kacheun Gee (Lehman) attended the Fourth International Conference of Institutes and Libraries for Chinese Overseas Studies, at Jinan University, Guangzhou, China, May 9-11. While in China, she visited both Shanghai University and Shanghai Normal University and presented the CUNY Library Faculty Exchange Initiative Proposal to the two institutions. In October, she escorted and guided Deputy Director Wu Zhirong of Shanghai Normal University during his visit to New York. She also acted as an interpreter for Wu Zhirong when he attended the 2009 LACUNY Institute and during his visits to CUNY libraries.

Rajeev Jayadeva (Lehman) constructed the free scholarly science and technology database SciTechScholar.  The database includes multi-lingual language translations and the latest science and technology news headlines, with Web 2.0 features.

Jennifer King (Lehman) participated in a book review panel at LACUNY’s Junior Faculty Research Roundtable at Baruch College on June 4.  Jennifer has been a reviewer for CHOICE.

Jeffrey Kroessler (John Jay) participated in a panel discussion of issues of historic preservation in suburbs during “The Diverse Suburb” conference at Hofstra in October.

Sandra Marcus (Queensborough) served as one of the judges for the 2009 Carnegie Corporation of New York/New York Times I Love My Librarian Award.

Kenneth Schlesinger (Lehman) is program coordinator of the CUNY-Shanghai Library Faculty Exchange.  He also helped organize New York library and archival tours for Cuba’s National Librarian Eduardo Torres Cuevas, as well as his Open Forum at Hunter College.  Ken also serves on Lehman’s Committee on Honorary Degrees.

Louise Sherby (Hunter) has been appointed to the Regents Advisory Council on Libraries for a five-year term ending in 2014.