Author Index by Authors : B

• SPEC Kit 292: Institutional Repositories (July 2006) Morris, Chris; Bailey, Jr., Charles W.; Wright, Robert; Emery, Jill; Mitchell, Anne; Simons, Spenser; Coombs, Karen Bailey, Jr., Charles W.; Coombs, Karen; Emery, Jill; Mitchell, Anne; Morris, Chris; Simons, Spenser; Wright, Robert
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit collects baseline data about ARL member institutions’ institutional repository activities.

  For the purposes of this survey, an IR was simply defined as a permanent, institution-wide repository of diverse locally produced digital works (e.g., article preprints and postprints, data sets, electronic theses and dissertations, learning objects, and technical reports) that is available for public use and supports metadata harvesting. If an institution shares an IR with other institutions, it was within the scope of this survey. Not included in this definition were scholars’ personal Web sites; academic department, school, or other unit digital archives that are primarily intended to store digital materials created by members of that unit; or disciplinary archives that include digital materials about one or multiple subjects that have been created by authors from many different institutions (e.g., arXiv.org).

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in January 2006. Eighty-seven libraries (71%) responded to the survey. Of those, 37 (43%) have an operational IR, 31 (35%) are planning for one by 2007 at the latest, and 19 (22%) have no immediate plans to develop an IR. The survey found that most IRs had been established in the last two years (or had just been established). By far, the library was likely to have been the most active institutional advocate of the IR. It was also likely to have been the primary unit leading and supporting the IR effort, sometimes in partnership with the institutional information technology unit. The main reasons for establishing an IR were to increase the global visibility of, preserve, provide free access to, and collect and organize the institution’s scholarship.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of IR home pages, IR usage statistics, deposit policies, metadata policies, preservation policies, and IR proposals

  Title: SPEC Kit 292: Institutional Repositories (July 2006)
• SPEC Kit 292: Institutional Repositories (July 2006) Morris, Chris; Bailey, Jr., Charles W.; Wright, Robert; Emery, Jill; Mitchell, Anne; Simons, Spenser; Coombs, Karen
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit collects baseline data about ARL member institutions’ institutional repository activities.

  For the purposes of this survey, an IR was simply defined as a permanent, institution-wide repository of diverse locally produced digital works (e.g., article preprints and postprints, data sets, electronic theses and dissertations, learning objects, and technical reports) that is available for public use and supports metadata harvesting. If an institution shares an IR with other institutions, it was within the scope of this survey. Not included in this definition were scholars’ personal Web sites; academic department, school, or other unit digital archives that are primarily intended to store digital materials created by members of that unit; or disciplinary archives that include digital materials about one or multiple subjects that have been created by authors from many different institutions (e.g., arXiv.org).

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in January 2006. Eighty-seven libraries (71%) responded to the survey. Of those, 37 (43%) have an operational IR, 31 (35%) are planning for one by 2007 at the latest, and 19 (22%) have no immediate plans to develop an IR. The survey found that most IRs had been established in the last two years (or had just been established). By far, the library was likely to have been the most active institutional advocate of the IR. It was also likely to have been the primary unit leading and supporting the IR effort, sometimes in partnership with the institutional information technology unit. The main reasons for establishing an IR were to increase the global visibility of, preserve, provide free access to, and collect and organize the institution’s scholarship.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of IR home pages, IR usage statistics, deposit policies, metadata policies, preservation policies, and IR proposals

  Authors: Bailey, Jr., Charles W.; Coombs, Karen; Emery, Jill; Mitchell, Anne; Morris, Chris; Simons, Spenser; Wright, Robert
• Editor’s Note (Sept. 2012) (1-2) Baughman, Sue Baughman, Sue (1-2)
  Title: Editor’s Note (Sept. 2012)
• Editor’s Note (Sept. 2012) Baughman, Sue
• SPEC Kit 304: Social Software in Libraries (July 2008) Bejune, Matthew; Ronan, Jana Bejune, Matthew; Ronan, Jana
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores how many libraries are using social software and for what purposes, how those activities are organized and managed, and the benefits and challenges of using social software, among other questions.

  For this study social software was broadly defined as software that enables people to connect with one another online. The survey asked about ten types of applications: 1) social networking sites; 2) media sharing sites; 3) social bookmarking or tagging sites; 4) Wikis; 5) blogs; 6) sites that use RSS (Really Simple Syndication) to syndicate and broadcast content; 7) chat or instant messaging (IM) services; 8) VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) services; 9) virtual worlds; and 10) widgets.

  This survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Sixty-four libraries completed the survey by the March 14 deadline for a response rate of 52%. All but three of the responding libraries report that their library staff uses social software (95%) and one of those three plans to begin using social software in the future.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents of examples of Web sites that show how each of the ten types of social software is used.

  Title: SPEC Kit 304: Social Software in Libraries (July 2008)
• SPEC Kit 304: Social Software in Libraries (July 2008) Bejune, Matthew; Ronan, Jana
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores how many libraries are using social software and for what purposes, how those activities are organized and managed, and the benefits and challenges of using social software, among other questions.

  For this study social software was broadly defined as software that enables people to connect with one another online. The survey asked about ten types of applications: 1) social networking sites; 2) media sharing sites; 3) social bookmarking or tagging sites; 4) Wikis; 5) blogs; 6) sites that use RSS (Really Simple Syndication) to syndicate and broadcast content; 7) chat or instant messaging (IM) services; 8) VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) services; 9) virtual worlds; and 10) widgets.

  This survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Sixty-four libraries completed the survey by the March 14 deadline for a response rate of 52%. All but three of the responding libraries report that their library staff uses social software (95%) and one of those three plans to begin using social software in the future.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents of examples of Web sites that show how each of the ten types of social software is used.

  Authors: Bejune, Matthew; Ronan, Jana
• SPEC Kit 317: Special Collections Engagement (August 2010) Walters, Emily; Brown, Kathy; Dodson, Judy Allen; Putirskis, Cate; Cullinan, Danica; O'Gara, Genya; Berenbak, Adam; Ruswick, Claire Berenbak, Adam; Putirskis, Cate; O'Gara, Genya; Ruswick, Claire; Cullinan, Danica; Dodson, Judy Allen; Walters, Emily; Brown, Kathy
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit examines exhibits, events, instruction, and other activities that are targeted to engage students, faculty, and other scholars/researchers with special collections for research and education. It investigates who coordinates these activities, where they are held, how they are promoted, and how they are evaluated.

  By the March deadline, responses had been submitted by 79 of the 124 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 64%. A genuine commitment to outreach activities in special collections is evident throughout the responses to this survey. Over 95% of respondents are staging exhibits, holding events, and engaging students and faculty in the use of collections; most institutions are participating in all of these activities, as well as in many others not specifically addressed in the survey. At the heart of all outreach activities are the collections. Libraries are going to great lengths to promote their unique and specialized collection strengths, employing many creative outreach and engagement approaches. While the traditional methods of exhibits, events, and curricular instruction continue to be the emphasis of special collections’ outreach programs, institutions are also embracing opportunities to be active physically beyond the borders of their campuses and virtually through blogs, social networking sites, and other Web 2.0 technologies.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of policies and procedures, class request procedures, descriptions of class assignments and resources, job descriptions, and exhibit and event promotional methods.

  Title: SPEC Kit 317: Special Collections Engagement (August 2010)
• SPEC Kit 317: Special Collections Engagement (August 2010) Walters, Emily; Brown, Kathy; Dodson, Judy Allen; Putirskis, Cate; Cullinan, Danica; O'Gara, Genya; Berenbak, Adam; Ruswick, Claire
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit examines exhibits, events, instruction, and other activities that are targeted to engage students, faculty, and other scholars/researchers with special collections for research and education. It investigates who coordinates these activities, where they are held, how they are promoted, and how they are evaluated.

  By the March deadline, responses had been submitted by 79 of the 124 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 64%. A genuine commitment to outreach activities in special collections is evident throughout the responses to this survey. Over 95% of respondents are staging exhibits, holding events, and engaging students and faculty in the use of collections; most institutions are participating in all of these activities, as well as in many others not specifically addressed in the survey. At the heart of all outreach activities are the collections. Libraries are going to great lengths to promote their unique and specialized collection strengths, employing many creative outreach and engagement approaches. While the traditional methods of exhibits, events, and curricular instruction continue to be the emphasis of special collections’ outreach programs, institutions are also embracing opportunities to be active physically beyond the borders of their campuses and virtually through blogs, social networking sites, and other Web 2.0 technologies.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of policies and procedures, class request procedures, descriptions of class assignments and resources, job descriptions, and exhibit and event promotional methods.

  Authors: Berenbak, Adam; Putirskis, Cate; O'Gara, Genya; Ruswick, Claire; Cullinan, Danica; Dodson, Judy Allen; Walters, Emily; Brown, Kathy
• SPEC Kit 293: External Review for Promotion and Tenure (August 2006) Bicknell-Holmes, Tracy; Logan-Peters, Kay Bicknell-Holmes, Tracy; Logan-Peters, Kay
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the policies and procedures that ARL member libraries use in the external review process for candidates who are eligible for promotion, tenure, or continuing appointment. It examines how external reviewers are identified and asked to participate in the review process, what instructions are given to reviewers, what materials are included in candidates’ portfolios, and the criteria for evaluating candidates’ portfolios, among other questions.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2006. Seventy-seven libraries (63%) responded to the survey. Librarians at 35 of the responding institutions have faculty status. Forty-four institutions offer tenure or other permanent appointments (32 with faculty status and 12 without). Slightly more than half of the respondents (39 or 51%) do not require external reviews for librarians who are candidates for promotion, tenure, or continuing appointment. While the majority of these have neither faculty status nor permanent appointments (27 or 69%), they also include six whose librarians have faculty status and 11 that offer tenure or other permanent appointments (five with faculty status and six without).

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents for external review procedures and innstructions to external reviewers.

  Title: SPEC Kit 293: External Review for Promotion and Tenure (August 2006)
• SPEC Kit 293: External Review for Promotion and Tenure (August 2006) Bicknell-Holmes, Tracy; Logan-Peters, Kay
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the policies and procedures that ARL member libraries use in the external review process for candidates who are eligible for promotion, tenure, or continuing appointment. It examines how external reviewers are identified and asked to participate in the review process, what instructions are given to reviewers, what materials are included in candidates’ portfolios, and the criteria for evaluating candidates’ portfolios, among other questions.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2006. Seventy-seven libraries (63%) responded to the survey. Librarians at 35 of the responding institutions have faculty status. Forty-four institutions offer tenure or other permanent appointments (32 with faculty status and 12 without). Slightly more than half of the respondents (39 or 51%) do not require external reviews for librarians who are candidates for promotion, tenure, or continuing appointment. While the majority of these have neither faculty status nor permanent appointments (27 or 69%), they also include six whose librarians have faculty status and 11 that offer tenure or other permanent appointments (five with faculty status and six without).

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents for external review procedures and innstructions to external reviewers.

  Authors: Bicknell-Holmes, Tracy; Logan-Peters, Kay
• Open Educational Resources as Learning Materials: Prospects and Strategies for University Libraries (Sept. 2012) Schweik, Charles M.; Sheridan, Matt; Schafer, Jay; Billings, Marilyn S.; Hutton, Sarah C.
• Open Educational Resources as Learning Materials: Prospects and Strategies for University Libraries (Sept. 2012) (2-11) Schweik, Charles M.; Sheridan, Matt; Schafer, Jay; Billings, Marilyn S.; Hutton, Sarah C. Billings, Marilyn S.; Hutton, Sarah C.; Schafer, Jay; Schweik, Charles M.; Sheridan, Matt (2-11)
  Title: Open Educational Resources as Learning Materials: Prospects and Strategies for University Libraries (Sept. 2012)
• Open Educational Resources as Learning Materials: Prospects and Strategies for University Libraries (Sept. 2012) Schweik, Charles M.; Sheridan, Matt; Schafer, Jay; Billings, Marilyn S.; Hutton, Sarah C.
• SPEC Kit 316: Evaluating E-resources (July 2010) Livingston, Jill; Bleiler, Richard Bleiler, Richard; Livingston, Jill
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit re-examines the ways in which ARL member libraries have (re)structured themselves to identify the availability of new e-resources in the market; evaluate them as candidates for acquisition; decide to acquire/purchase the e-resources; evaluate them prior to their renewal to determine their continued utility; and publicize or market the new e-resources. Nearly identical questions were posed regarding purchases/licensing by consortia and by individual libraries, enabling comparisons in process to be made.

  By the March deadline, responses had been submitted by 73 of the 124 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 59%. The survey results indicated that both consortia and libraries deploy large amounts of staff resources to build e-resource collections and that identification and assessment activities are conducted as communal activities among consortia staff and librarians from across the organization..

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of e-resource selection policies, e-resource request and evaluation procedures, descriptions of library and consortia e-resource selectors, job descriptions, and promotional methods.

  Title: SPEC Kit 316: Evaluating E-resources (July 2010)
• SPEC Kit 316: Evaluating E-resources (July 2010) Livingston, Jill; Bleiler, Richard
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit re-examines the ways in which ARL member libraries have (re)structured themselves to identify the availability of new e-resources in the market; evaluate them as candidates for acquisition; decide to acquire/purchase the e-resources; evaluate them prior to their renewal to determine their continued utility; and publicize or market the new e-resources. Nearly identical questions were posed regarding purchases/licensing by consortia and by individual libraries, enabling comparisons in process to be made.

  By the March deadline, responses had been submitted by 73 of the 124 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 59%. The survey results indicated that both consortia and libraries deploy large amounts of staff resources to build e-resource collections and that identification and assessment activities are conducted as communal activities among consortia staff and librarians from across the organization..

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of e-resource selection policies, e-resource request and evaluation procedures, descriptions of library and consortia e-resource selectors, job descriptions, and promotional methods.

  Authors: Bleiler, Richard; Livingston, Jill
• SPEC Kit 333: Art & Artifact Management (December 2012) Robb, Jenny; Boyd, Morag Boyd, Morag; Robb, Jenny
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the scale and scope of art and artifact materials held by ARL member libraries, which tools and techniques they currently use to manage these collections, including those used by library staff only and those used to make information about these collections available to the public, and if there is evidence of a convergence of library, archive, and museum practices in the management of these collections.

  It includes collection development policies, guidelines for arranging materials, and examples of how art and artifact collections are described.

  Title: SPEC Kit 333: Art & Artifact Management (December 2012)
• SPEC Kit 333: Art & Artifact Management (December 2012) Robb, Jenny; Boyd, Morag
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the scale and scope of art and artifact materials held by ARL member libraries, which tools and techniques they currently use to manage these collections, including those used by library staff only and those used to make information about these collections available to the public, and if there is evidence of a convergence of library, archive, and museum practices in the management of these collections.

  It includes collection development policies, guidelines for arranging materials, and examples of how art and artifact collections are described.

  Authors: Boyd, Morag; Robb, Jenny
• SPEC Kit 321: Services for Users with Disabilities (December 2010) Freund, LeiLani; Brown, M. Suzanne Brown, M. Suzanne; Freund, LeiLani
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores what services are being provided and how users are made aware of them; what assistive technologies are being offered today and who maintains them; which library staff have responsibility for providing services and how are they trained; and what service policies and procedures are in place for users with disabilities.

  The survey results indicate that all staff who work on a public services desk are responsible for assisting users with disabilities, or at least making a proper referral. Services range from retrieving library materials from the stacks, to assistance searching online resources, to assistance with adaptive technology. Workstations with adaptive technology are common, either in public spaces or special rooms. The most commonly available special software is for text magnification. Scanners are the most commonly available hardware.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describe the services offered, the assistive technology that is available, service policies, user needs assessment, staff training materials, and job requirements for service coordinators.

  Title: SPEC Kit 321: Services for Users with Disabilities (December 2010)
• SPEC Kit 321: Services for Users with Disabilities (December 2010) Freund, LeiLani; Brown, M. Suzanne
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores what services are being provided and how users are made aware of them; what assistive technologies are being offered today and who maintains them; which library staff have responsibility for providing services and how are they trained; and what service policies and procedures are in place for users with disabilities.

  The survey results indicate that all staff who work on a public services desk are responsible for assisting users with disabilities, or at least making a proper referral. Services range from retrieving library materials from the stacks, to assistance searching online resources, to assistance with adaptive technology. Workstations with adaptive technology are common, either in public spaces or special rooms. The most commonly available special software is for text magnification. Scanners are the most commonly available hardware.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describe the services offered, the assistive technology that is available, service policies, user needs assessment, staff training materials, and job requirements for service coordinators.

  Authors: Brown, M. Suzanne; Freund, LeiLani
• SPEC Kit 326: Digital Humanities (November 2011) Posner, Mariam; Varner, Stewart; Bryson, Tim; St. Pierre, Alain Bryson, Tim; Posner, Mariam; St. Pierre, Alain; Varner, Stewart
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit provides a snapshot of research library experiences with digital scholarship centers or services that support the humanities (e.g., history, art, music, film, literature, philosophy, religion, etc.) and the benefits and challenges of hosting them. The survey asked ARL libraries about the organization of these services, how they are staffed and funded, what services they offer and to whom, what technical infrastructure is provided, whether the library manages or archives the digital resources produced, and how services are assessed, among other questions.

  This survey revealed that library-based support for the digital humanities is offered predominantly on an ad hoc basis. However, as demand for services supporting the digital humanities has grown, libraries have begun to re-evaluate their provisional service and staffing models. Many respondents expressed a desire to implement practices, policies, and procedures that would allow them to cope with increases in demand for services.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes the mission or purpose of digital humanities centers, the services offered, policies and procedures, examples of digital projects, fellowship and grant opportunities, promotional materials, and repositories for digital projects.

  Title: SPEC Kit 326: Digital Humanities (November 2011)
• SPEC Kit 326: Digital Humanities (November 2011) Posner, Mariam; Varner, Stewart; Bryson, Tim; St. Pierre, Alain
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit provides a snapshot of research library experiences with digital scholarship centers or services that support the humanities (e.g., history, art, music, film, literature, philosophy, religion, etc.) and the benefits and challenges of hosting them. The survey asked ARL libraries about the organization of these services, how they are staffed and funded, what services they offer and to whom, what technical infrastructure is provided, whether the library manages or archives the digital resources produced, and how services are assessed, among other questions.

  This survey revealed that library-based support for the digital humanities is offered predominantly on an ad hoc basis. However, as demand for services supporting the digital humanities has grown, libraries have begun to re-evaluate their provisional service and staffing models. Many respondents expressed a desire to implement practices, policies, and procedures that would allow them to cope with increases in demand for services.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes the mission or purpose of digital humanities centers, the services offered, policies and procedures, examples of digital projects, fellowship and grant opportunities, promotional materials, and repositories for digital projects.

  Authors: Bryson, Tim; Posner, Mariam; St. Pierre, Alain; Varner, Stewart
• ARL Annual Salary Survey 2008–2009 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 123 ARL member libraries during 2008-2009. Data are reported for 10,148 professional staff in the 113 university ARL libraries and for 3,748 professional staff in the 10 non-university ARL libraries.

  Title: ARL Annual Salary Survey 2008–2009
• ARL Annual Salary Survey 2008–2009 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 123 ARL member libraries during 2008-2009. Data are reported for 10,148 professional staff in the 113 university ARL libraries and for 3,748 professional staff in the 10 non-university ARL libraries.

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
• ARL Annual Salary Survey 2009–2010 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 124 ARL member libraries during 2009–2010. Data are reported for 10,207 professional staff in the 114 university ARL libraries and for 3,811 professional staff in the 10 non-university ARL libraries.

  Title: ARL Annual Salary Survey 2009–2010
• ARL Annual Salary Survey 2009–2010 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 124 ARL member libraries during 2009–2010. Data are reported for 10,207 professional staff in the 114 university ARL libraries and for 3,811 professional staff in the 10 non-university ARL libraries.

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
• ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2007–2008 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2007–2008 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 64 medical libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.

  Title: ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2007–2008
• ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2007–2008 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2007–2008 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 64 medical libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
• ARL Statistics 2006-2007 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 123 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2006–2007.

   

  Title: ARL Statistics 2006-2007
• ARL Statistics 2006-2007 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 123 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2006–2007.

   

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
• ARL Statistics 2007-2008 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 123 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2007–2008.

   

  Title: ARL Statistics 2007-2008
• ARL Statistics 2007-2008 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  This edition of the ARL Statistics describes the collections, staffing, expenditures, and service activities for the 123 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) in fiscal year 2007–2008.

   

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
• ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2006-2007 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2006–2007 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 74 law libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.

  Title: ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2006-2007
• ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2006-2007 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2006–2007 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 74 law libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
• ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2006–2007 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2006–2007 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 65 medical libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.

  Title: ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2006–2007
• ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2006–2007 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  ARL Academic Health Sciences Library Statistics 2006–2007 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 65 medical libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
• ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2007-2008 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2007–2008 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 74 law libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.

  Title: ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2007-2008
• ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2007-2008 Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
  Abstract:

  ARL Academic Law Library Statistics 2007–2008 presents data that describe collections, expenditures, personnel, and services in 74 law libraries at ARL member institutions in the US and Canada.

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Bland, Les
• ARL Annual Salary Survey 2007–2008 Kyrillidou, Martha; Barber, Jason; Young, Mark Kyrillidou, Martha; Young, Mark; Barber, Jason
  Abstract:

  This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 123 ARL member libraries during 2007-08. Data are reported for 9,983 professional staff in the 113 university ARL libraries and for 3,797 professional staff in the 10 non-university ARL libraries.

  Title: ARL Annual Salary Survey 2007–2008
• ARL Annual Salary Survey 2007–2008 Kyrillidou, Martha; Barber, Jason; Young, Mark
  Abstract:

  This report analyzes salary data for all professional staff working in the 123 ARL member libraries during 2007-08. Data are reported for 9,983 professional staff in the 113 university ARL libraries and for 3,797 professional staff in the 10 non-university ARL libraries.

  Authors: Kyrillidou, Martha; Young, Mark; Barber, Jason
• SPEC Kit 301: Liaison Services (October 2007) Ballestro, John; Logue, Susan; Imre, Andrea; Arendt, Julie Logue, Susan; Ballestro, John; Imre, Andrea; Arendt, Julie
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the current roles of liaisons in ARL libraries, any changes in focus in their interactions with academic departments, whether liaisons are being reactive to faculty and student needs, partners in providing teaching/library instruction, and pioneers in the new electronic world or have limited involvement with the academic departments. It documents how libraries mix the activities of traditional liaison responsibilities with the new trends that are fostered by the evolving needs of today’s library patrons.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in May 2007. Sixty-six libraries—63 academic and 3 non-academic—responded by the deadline for a 54% response rate. Only one of the academic libraries does not provide liaison services to academic departments in their university; these services are not applicable to the non-academic libraries. Twenty-nine of the responding libraries (49%) began offering liaison services before 1980.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of descriptions of liaison roles, responsibilities, and services offered, job descriptions, and training materials for liaisons.

  Title: SPEC Kit 301: Liaison Services (October 2007)
• SPEC Kit 301: Liaison Services (October 2007) Ballestro, John; Logue, Susan; Imre, Andrea; Arendt, Julie
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the current roles of liaisons in ARL libraries, any changes in focus in their interactions with academic departments, whether liaisons are being reactive to faculty and student needs, partners in providing teaching/library instruction, and pioneers in the new electronic world or have limited involvement with the academic departments. It documents how libraries mix the activities of traditional liaison responsibilities with the new trends that are fostered by the evolving needs of today’s library patrons.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in May 2007. Sixty-six libraries—63 academic and 3 non-academic—responded by the deadline for a 54% response rate. Only one of the academic libraries does not provide liaison services to academic departments in their university; these services are not applicable to the non-academic libraries. Twenty-nine of the responding libraries (49%) began offering liaison services before 1980.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of descriptions of liaison roles, responsibilities, and services offered, job descriptions, and training materials for liaisons.

  Authors: Logue, Susan; Ballestro, John; Imre, Andrea; Arendt, Julie
• E-Book Licensing and Research Libraries—Negotiating Principles and Price in an Emerging Market (Sept. 2012) (11-20) Blixrud, Julia C.; Lowry, Charles B. Lowry, Charles B.; Blixrud, Julia C. (11-20)
  Title: E-Book Licensing and Research Libraries—Negotiating Principles and Price in an Emerging Market (Sept. 2012)
• E-Book Licensing and Research Libraries—Negotiating Principles and Price in an Emerging Market (Sept. 2012) Blixrud, Julia C.; Lowry, Charles B.
• SPEC Kit 306: Promoting the Library (September 2008) Bodnar, Jon; Mathews, Brian Mathews, Brian; Bodnar, Jon
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores what promotional activities and objectives research libraries are pursuing, who organizes them, how are they evaluated, and what challenges they face.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Eighty-seven libraries completed the survey for a response rate of 71%. All of the responding libraries indicated that they currently engage in some form of promotional activities. Sixty-four percent of the responding libraries indicated that they have at least one library staff member with “promotion” as part of his/her position description. These positions typically report to library administration and are charged with strategic planning, media relations, and guiding the communications vision. However, they are usually not involved in the day-to-day promotional activities of their libraries.

  The survey responses indicated that day-to-day promotional activities are handled by a wide array of committees, task forces, and ad hoc groups. These teams tend to be interdepartmental and focus on hosting events, developing print and Web materials, fundraising, and other outreach-related duties. Similarly, respondents indicated that individual departments and branch libraries typically produce their own material to increase awareness and explain particular services.

  The survey results also show which skills these staff need; how they decide which promotional activities to pursue; what their objectives are; how the activities are funded; and more. Descriptions of a wide variety of activities are included, as well.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of marketing plans, job descriptions, and promotional materials.

  Title: SPEC Kit 306: Promoting the Library (September 2008)
• SPEC Kit 306: Promoting the Library (September 2008) Bodnar, Jon; Mathews, Brian
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores what promotional activities and objectives research libraries are pursuing, who organizes them, how are they evaluated, and what challenges they face.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Eighty-seven libraries completed the survey for a response rate of 71%. All of the responding libraries indicated that they currently engage in some form of promotional activities. Sixty-four percent of the responding libraries indicated that they have at least one library staff member with “promotion” as part of his/her position description. These positions typically report to library administration and are charged with strategic planning, media relations, and guiding the communications vision. However, they are usually not involved in the day-to-day promotional activities of their libraries.

  The survey responses indicated that day-to-day promotional activities are handled by a wide array of committees, task forces, and ad hoc groups. These teams tend to be interdepartmental and focus on hosting events, developing print and Web materials, fundraising, and other outreach-related duties. Similarly, respondents indicated that individual departments and branch libraries typically produce their own material to increase awareness and explain particular services.

  The survey results also show which skills these staff need; how they decide which promotional activities to pursue; what their objectives are; how the activities are funded; and more. Descriptions of a wide variety of activities are included, as well.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of marketing plans, job descriptions, and promotional materials.

  Authors: Mathews, Brian; Bodnar, Jon
• SPEC Kit 329: Managing Born-Digital Special Collections and Archival Materials (August 2012) Shaw, Seth; Deromedi, Nancy; Belden, Michelle; Shallcross, Michael; Pyatt, Tim; Schmidt, Lisa; Esposito, Jackie R.; Goldman, Ben; Ghering, Cynthia; Nelson, Naomi L. Nelson, Naomi L.; Shaw, Seth; Deromedi, Nancy; Shallcross, Michael; Ghering, Cynthia; Schmidt, Lisa; Belden, Michelle; Esposito, Jackie R.; Goldman, Ben; Pyatt, Tim
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the tools, workflow, and policies special collections and archives staff use to process, manage, and provide access to born-digital materials they collect. It also looks at which staff process and manage born-digital materials and how they acquire the skills they need for these activities, and how libraries have responded to the challenges that managing born-digital materials present.

  The management of born-digital materials is still relatively new for ARL libraries, and the survey results show that good practices and workflows are still evolving. New tools are emerging rapidly, and the once solid line between digitized content and born-digital content is beginning to blur. Survey responses indicated that the library and archives profession lacks a common definition of what born-digital content is and a common understanding of who within the organization should manage this content.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describe digital specialists’ job responsibilities, collection policies, gift/purchase agreements, format policies, and workflows.

  Title: SPEC Kit 329: Managing Born-Digital Special Collections and Archival Materials (August 2012)
• SPEC Kit 329: Managing Born-Digital Special Collections and Archival Materials (August 2012) Shaw, Seth; Deromedi, Nancy; Belden, Michelle; Shallcross, Michael; Pyatt, Tim; Schmidt, Lisa; Esposito, Jackie R.; Goldman, Ben; Ghering, Cynthia; Nelson, Naomi L.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the tools, workflow, and policies special collections and archives staff use to process, manage, and provide access to born-digital materials they collect. It also looks at which staff process and manage born-digital materials and how they acquire the skills they need for these activities, and how libraries have responded to the challenges that managing born-digital materials present.

  The management of born-digital materials is still relatively new for ARL libraries, and the survey results show that good practices and workflows are still evolving. New tools are emerging rapidly, and the once solid line between digitized content and born-digital content is beginning to blur. Survey responses indicated that the library and archives profession lacks a common definition of what born-digital content is and a common understanding of who within the organization should manage this content.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describe digital specialists’ job responsibilities, collection policies, gift/purchase agreements, format policies, and workflows.

  Authors: Nelson, Naomi L.; Shaw, Seth; Deromedi, Nancy; Shallcross, Michael; Ghering, Cynthia; Schmidt, Lisa; Belden, Michelle; Esposito, Jackie R.; Goldman, Ben; Pyatt, Tim
• SPEC Kit 299: Scholarly Communication Education Initiatives (August 2007) Newman, Kathleen A.; Blecic, Deborah D.; Armstrong, Kimberly L. Newman, Kathleen A.; Blecic, Deborah D.; Armstrong, Kimberly L.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores what kind of initiatives ARL member libraries have used or plan to use to educate faculty, researchers, administrators, students, and library staff at their institutions about scholarly communication issues.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in May 2007. Respondents were asked to provide information about the nature of library-initiated education activities about scholarly communication (SC) issues that had taken place in their institutions in the past three years or that were expected to take place soon. Seventy-three libraries (59%) responded to the survey. Of those, 55 (75%) indicated that the library has engaged in educational activities on scholarly communication (SC) issues; 13 (18%) have not but indicated that planning is underway. Only three libraries indicated that they had not engaged in this activity; another two responded that this is the responsibility of another, non-library unit of the institution.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of proposals for education initiatives, scholarly communication and copyright Web pages, job descriptions, and education materials.

  Title: SPEC Kit 299: Scholarly Communication Education Initiatives (August 2007)
• SPEC Kit 299: Scholarly Communication Education Initiatives (August 2007) Newman, Kathleen A.; Blecic, Deborah D.; Armstrong, Kimberly L.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores what kind of initiatives ARL member libraries have used or plan to use to educate faculty, researchers, administrators, students, and library staff at their institutions about scholarly communication issues.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in May 2007. Respondents were asked to provide information about the nature of library-initiated education activities about scholarly communication (SC) issues that had taken place in their institutions in the past three years or that were expected to take place soon. Seventy-three libraries (59%) responded to the survey. Of those, 55 (75%) indicated that the library has engaged in educational activities on scholarly communication (SC) issues; 13 (18%) have not but indicated that planning is underway. Only three libraries indicated that they had not engaged in this activity; another two responded that this is the responsibility of another, non-library unit of the institution.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of proposals for education initiatives, scholarly communication and copyright Web pages, job descriptions, and education materials.

  Authors: Newman, Kathleen A.; Blecic, Deborah D.; Armstrong, Kimberly L.
• The State of Large-Publisher Bundles in 2012 (pre-pub from Spring 2013) (1-9) Strieb, Karla L.; Blixrud, Julia C. Strieb, Karla L.; Blixrud, Julia C. (1-9)
  Title: The State of Large-Publisher Bundles in 2012 (pre-pub from Spring 2013)
• The State of Large-Publisher Bundles in 2012 (pre-pub from Spring 2013) Strieb, Karla L.; Blixrud, Julia C.