Annual Report (2001)
Gerd Muehsam Award Committee, ARLIS/NA
Submitted by: Paula Gabbard
phone/FAX: (212) 854-6745 / (212) 854-8904
2001 GMA Committee members: Leslie Abrams (Board Liaison), Beth Dodd , Paula Gabbard (chair), Jennifer Moldwin, Tom McNulty, Suzanna Simor, Lorelei Tanji, Liv Valmestad.
Members remained unchanged throughout the year.
Activities of the year:
Having received no submissions that met the qualifications as laid out by the Gerd Muehsam Award in 2000, at the March 2001 Conference we discussed how we could assure a reasonable number of submissions this year. We realized that fewer library students are actually writing traditional term papers, so we agreed to expand the required format to include internet projects. This requires different evaluative skills on the part of our members, but I believe we are capable. By opening it up to internet projects, we had to give up our past practice of submitting the papers/projects to our members anonymously. Again, I am confident that our members can overcome prejudices for or against known applicants.
Another suggestion we made in the March 2001 meeting was to urge ARLIS/NA to increase the award, and we were all very pleased that our request was met. The cash award was increased from $200.00 to $500.00. The travel reimbursement size remained the same ($300.00), but we also now offer the award winner free registration and a one year free membership to the organization.
At our March meeting, we chose to take a proactive approach to soliciting papers and projects. Here is what we did:
1. Paula Gabbard revised the announcement to be put up on the web, and the ballots to reflect our new parameters of allowing both papers and web based projects (attached below).
2. Paula Gabbard divided the ALA list of library schools among the membership. We each were responsible for eight institutions per person.
3. Deadline: May 18: We e-mailed, wrote or called our list of schools to get the names, addresses, e-mail addresses of all faculty members who might receive papers or projects that could be submitted to us for the GMA. We then contacted these faculty (most simply by e-mail) to tell them about the award and to encourage them to seek out good students to submit papers or projects to us. The Gerd Muehsam Award announcement and links to the ARLIS/NA web site and the St. Louis conference web site were included in this message to the faculty.
4. Deadline: July 20: Committee members sent a copy to me of all the names, addresses, e-mails of the contacts found. I compiled a list.
5. Deadline: September 14: I sent out individual announcements to these faculty asking them to post a copy of the announcement, and to approach individual students whose papers or projects would qualify.
6. Deadline November 16: was the official deadline on the GMA announcement. I received an adequate number (we decided three was adequate), but had I not received an adequate number, I was going to let our committee know, and we would each have nudged the faculty on our lists.
We received 14 submissions, 13 of which met the qualifications.
7. Deadline: November 22: I copied and send to committee members all qualified papers and projects with ballots attached to each.
8. Deadline: February 4: Our committee must send completed evaluations back to me.
9. Deadline: February 15: Paula must notify all of the applicants who submitted papers or projects to the award.
In 2000, I prepared as best I could, the last ten years of committee material for archiving, but was discouraged from submitting it to any national ARLIS/NA archive. Terry Keenan (Special Collections, Syracuse University) believed that the board was soon going to revise submission procedures, and he felt it best if I waited until this was completed. I have not heard any news about this. Since then, I submitted a list of all the winners in years past, and this now resides on the ARLIS/NA Web site. I have also tried to compile a list of committee members based upon the files described above. Although it is not complete it could help future Committee Chair determine who should be added and should be asked to step down from the committee.
Regarding the ARLIS/NA Strategic Plan (based on Kathryn Wayne’s ARLIS/NA Strategic Plan 2000-2005), our committee by definition attempts to further Goal I. A-C, E.
Issues for the Executive Board:
1. Would headquarters want a list that our committee compiled of the names, addresses and e-mail addresses of library school contacts and faculty within library schools who teach courses which might have something to do with art librarianship? I have a copy in MS-Word, and I have mail-merge documents for this list.
2. Would you folks discuss and notify me if, when, and how to send the last 10 years of the Gerd Muehsam Award’s materials on to ARLIS/NA archives, and pass on to me the current name and address of where to send this material? If a revision of submission procedures is in the works, could you please let me know the expected timetable?
Gerd Muehsam Award Ballot
Title of Paper/Project:_____________________________________________
Evaluate this paper according to the criteria listed below. Score each category with the lowest number as the weakest score and the highest number as the strongest score. Please add specific detailed comments justifying your ranking. Please take time to write positive comments on the ballots that receive your highest total score, as they may be incorporated into the awards presentation. After reviewing the history of the Gerd Muehsam Awards I discovered that there have been several years when none was given, usually because the papers submitted did not meet minimum standards. This is a tradition we should continue to honor, and to help with this decision, I ask that after scoring all of the papers, you assign a letter grade (A to F with pluses and minuses) to each. If no paper merits a grade higher than B+ from anyone, then we will communicate by e-mail to decide whether we wish to grant any award. If there is too wide a disparity between our scores, I will want to communicate with you as well. You may choose to forego using this ballot, as long as you offer comments with your general grades or scores for each candidate.
1. Relevance to art librarianship or visual resources curatorship:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2. Research and scholarship:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
4. Clarity and organization (including style, readability, design, grammar, punctuation, and spelling):
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
5. Terminology and vocabulary:
0 1 2 3 4
Total score (please note this on top of front page as well):____________
Submitted: February 2002