Author Index by Authors : C

• SPEC Kit 313: E-book Collections (October 2009) Anson, Catherine; Connell, Ruth R. Anson, Catherine; Connell, Ruth R.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit examines the current use of e-books in ARL member libraries; their plans for implementing, increasing, or decreasing access to e-books; purchasing, cataloging, and collection management issues; and issues in marketing to and in usage by library clientele.

  By the May deadline, responses had been submitted by 75 of the 123 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 61%. Of the responding libraries, 73 (97%) reported including e-books in their collections. According to survey responses, most institutions entered the e-book arena as part of a consortium which purchased an e-book package. The earliest forays occurred in the 1990s but the majority of libraries started e-book collections between 1999 and 2004. Purchasing at the collection level allowed libraries to acquire a mass of titles with a common interface, reducing some of the transition pains to the new format. The downside of collections is that libraries find they are often saddled with titles they would not have selected in print; also, each collection might have a different interface, adding to user frustration.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of collection development policies, e-book collection Web pages, e-book promotional materials, training materials for staff and users, and e-book reader loan policies.

  Title: SPEC Kit 313: E-book Collections (October 2009)
• SPEC Kit 313: E-book Collections (October 2009) Anson, Catherine; Connell, Ruth R.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit examines the current use of e-books in ARL member libraries; their plans for implementing, increasing, or decreasing access to e-books; purchasing, cataloging, and collection management issues; and issues in marketing to and in usage by library clientele.

  By the May deadline, responses had been submitted by 75 of the 123 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 61%. Of the responding libraries, 73 (97%) reported including e-books in their collections. According to survey responses, most institutions entered the e-book arena as part of a consortium which purchased an e-book package. The earliest forays occurred in the 1990s but the majority of libraries started e-book collections between 1999 and 2004. Purchasing at the collection level allowed libraries to acquire a mass of titles with a common interface, reducing some of the transition pains to the new format. The downside of collections is that libraries find they are often saddled with titles they would not have selected in print; also, each collection might have a different interface, adding to user frustration.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of collection development policies, e-book collection Web pages, e-book promotional materials, training materials for staff and users, and e-book reader loan policies.

  Authors: Anson, Catherine; Connell, Ruth R.
• 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
• White Paper: International Interlibrary Loan (June 2011) (8-15) Lehane, Mary; Larsen, David K.; Christensen, Marlayna; Kuehn, Jennifer; Beaubien, Anne K. Beaubien, Anne K.; Christensen, Marlayna; Kuehn, Jennifer; Larsen, David K.; Lehane, Mary (8-15)
  Title: White Paper: International Interlibrary Loan (June 2011)
• White Paper: International Interlibrary Loan (June 2011) Lehane, Mary; Larsen, David K.; Christensen, Marlayna; Kuehn, Jennifer; Beaubien, Anne K.
• 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
• White Paper: US Law and International Interlibrary Loan (June 2011) (16-19) Smith, Kevin L.; Butler, Brandon; Ferullo, Donna; Crews, Kenneth D. Butler, Brandon; Crews, Kenneth D.; Ferullo, Donna; Smith, Kevin L. (16-19)
  Title: White Paper: US Law and International Interlibrary Loan (June 2011)
• White Paper: US Law and International Interlibrary Loan (June 2011) Smith, Kevin L.; Butler, Brandon; Ferullo, Donna; Crews, Kenneth D.
• Executive Summary (Dec. 2012) (2-5) Case, Mary, et al. Case, Mary, et al. (2-5)
  Title: Executive Summary (Dec. 2012)
• Executive Summary (Dec. 2012) Case, Mary, et al.
• Print Disabilities, Libraries, and Higher Education (Dec. 2012) (6-9) Case, Mary, et al. Case, Mary, et al. (6-9)
  Title: Print Disabilities, Libraries, and Higher Education (Dec. 2012)
• Print Disabilities, Libraries, and Higher Education (Dec. 2012) Case, Mary, et al.
• US and Canadian Disability Policies, Recent Challenges, and US and Canadian Copyright Law (Dec. 2012) (10-18) Case, Mary, et al. Case, Mary, et al. (10-18)
  Title: US and Canadian Disability Policies, Recent Challenges, and US and Canadian Copyright Law (Dec. 2012)
• US and Canadian Disability Policies, Recent Challenges, and US and Canadian Copyright Law (Dec. 2012) Case, Mary, et al.
• Research Libraries and Individuals with Print Disabilities (Dec. 2012) (19-24) Case, Mary, et al. Case, Mary, et al. (19-24)
  Title: Research Libraries and Individuals with Print Disabilities (Dec. 2012)
• Research Libraries and Individuals with Print Disabilities (Dec. 2012) Case, Mary, et al.
• Universal Design, Inclusive Design, Accessibility, and Usability (Dec. 2012) (25-27) Case, Mary, et al. Case, Mary, et al. (25-27)
  Title: Universal Design, Inclusive Design, Accessibility, and Usability (Dec. 2012)
• Universal Design, Inclusive Design, Accessibility, and Usability (Dec. 2012) Case, Mary, et al.
• Conclusion (Dec. 2012) (28) Case, Mary, et al. Case, Mary, et al. (28)
  Title: Conclusion (Dec. 2012)
• Conclusion (Dec. 2012) Case, Mary, et al.
• SPEC Kit 305: Records Management (August 2008) Center, Jr., Clark E. Center, Jr., Clark E.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the state of records management in ARL member institutions.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Sixty-two libraries completed the survey for a response rate of 50%. Of those 62, 41 (66%) have records management programs. Three have had programs, but no longer have them. One of these began at an unknown time and ended in 1993; one existed for only five years, between 1991 and 1996; a third ended in 2003 after thirty-eight years of operation.

  At the majority of responding institutions (25 or 61%) records management duties are located in a library unit. They are the responsibility of special collections in twelve institutions (29%); archives units that are part of the library system but not part of the special collections library or department in five cases (12%); and another library unit or department in 10 cases (24%). Records management is the responsibility of an archives unit that is not part of the library system in five cases (12%) and of some other non-library unit or department in 11 cases (27%).

  The survey results also show which staff manage records and how much time they spend on this activity; how staff are trained; who pays for records management; who makes policy decisions; what types of materials are included; where these materials are stored; procedures for adding and discarding materials; who may retrieve records from storage; and more.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of records management unit Web pages, policies, retention schedules, job descriptions, transfer, retrieval, and destruction forms, and management of electronic records.

  Title: SPEC Kit 305: Records Management (August 2008)
• SPEC Kit 305: Records Management (August 2008) Center, Jr., Clark E.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the state of records management in ARL member institutions.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Sixty-two libraries completed the survey for a response rate of 50%. Of those 62, 41 (66%) have records management programs. Three have had programs, but no longer have them. One of these began at an unknown time and ended in 1993; one existed for only five years, between 1991 and 1996; a third ended in 2003 after thirty-eight years of operation.

  At the majority of responding institutions (25 or 61%) records management duties are located in a library unit. They are the responsibility of special collections in twelve institutions (29%); archives units that are part of the library system but not part of the special collections library or department in five cases (12%); and another library unit or department in 10 cases (24%). Records management is the responsibility of an archives unit that is not part of the library system in five cases (12%) and of some other non-library unit or department in 11 cases (27%).

  The survey results also show which staff manage records and how much time they spend on this activity; how staff are trained; who pays for records management; who makes policy decisions; what types of materials are included; where these materials are stored; procedures for adding and discarding materials; who may retrieve records from storage; and more.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of records management unit Web pages, policies, retention schedules, job descriptions, transfer, retrieval, and destruction forms, and management of electronic records.

  Authors: Center, Jr., Clark E.
• SPEC Kit 324: Collecting Global Resources (September 2011) Khabibullaev, Akram; Singer, Andrea; Wahrman, Noa; Frank-Wilson, Marion; Cheun, Wookjin; Liu, Wen-Ling; González, Luis A. Cheun, Wookjin; Frank-Wilson, Marion; González, Luis A.; Khabibullaev, Akram; Liu, Wen-Ling; Singer, Andrea; Wahrman, Noa
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the trends, practices, and challenges in collecting global resources in North American research libraries at a time of political and economic change, on the one hand, and of significant change in scholarly communication and collection management strategies, on the other. It covers global resources collections (including an overview of expenditures, collecting trends, sources of funding, and acquisition strategies), staff and organizational structure, preservation strategies, and discovery, public service, and outreach.

  The survey results clearly demonstrate that support for global resources in North American research libraries is strong and predicted to remain so in the foreseeable future. Budget and space challenges, as well as increasing electronic access to resources with resulting changes in research habits of students and faculty, will create new and different patterns in collection growth. In response, many ARL libraries either already have or are in the process of creating organizational structures that facilitate intense outreach activities, in-depth reference, and collaborative collection development.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes print and digital global collections, collection development policies, examples of research guides, and organization charts.

  Title: SPEC Kit 324: Collecting Global Resources (September 2011)
• SPEC Kit 324: Collecting Global Resources (September 2011) Khabibullaev, Akram; Singer, Andrea; Wahrman, Noa; Frank-Wilson, Marion; Cheun, Wookjin; Liu, Wen-Ling; González, Luis A.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the trends, practices, and challenges in collecting global resources in North American research libraries at a time of political and economic change, on the one hand, and of significant change in scholarly communication and collection management strategies, on the other. It covers global resources collections (including an overview of expenditures, collecting trends, sources of funding, and acquisition strategies), staff and organizational structure, preservation strategies, and discovery, public service, and outreach.

  The survey results clearly demonstrate that support for global resources in North American research libraries is strong and predicted to remain so in the foreseeable future. Budget and space challenges, as well as increasing electronic access to resources with resulting changes in research habits of students and faculty, will create new and different patterns in collection growth. In response, many ARL libraries either already have or are in the process of creating organizational structures that facilitate intense outreach activities, in-depth reference, and collaborative collection development.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes print and digital global collections, collection development policies, examples of research guides, and organization charts.

  Authors: Cheun, Wookjin; Frank-Wilson, Marion; González, Luis A.; Khabibullaev, Akram; Liu, Wen-Ling; Singer, Andrea; Wahrman, Noa
• Bringing Scenario Planning Home to KU (March 2012) (12-16) Ludwig, Deborah; Church-Duran, Jennifer Church-Duran, Jennifer; Ludwig, Deborah (12-16)
  Title: Bringing Scenario Planning Home to KU (March 2012)
• Bringing Scenario Planning Home to KU (March 2012) Ludwig, Deborah; Church-Duran, Jennifer
• SPEC Kit 302: Managing Public Computing (November 2007) Shelton, Mark; Cook, Michael Cook, Michael; Shelton, Mark
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the management of library public computing, i.e., those computers that are located in public spaces for use by patrons, as distinct from staff computers and servers. By jointly looking at the scale of the public computing operations, the staffing and organizational structure, budgets, upgrades, maintenance, security, polices, and assessment, the survey pulls together and expands on issues covered in several previous SPEC Kits.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in July 2007. Sixty-nine libraries (56%) responded to the survey. The survey respondents were primarily library deans, directors, and heads of library information technology or library systems departments. All 69 respondents indicated that their library contains public computers that need support. Responsibility for the support, service, repair, and replacement of computers in public library spaces falls solely on library staff in 44 of the responding libraries (64%). Support is shared with non-library staff in 21 of the libraries (30%); in four libraries (6%), the institution’s central IT staff provides sole support. In none of the libraries is computer support contracted out or provided by a consortium’s IT staff.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of job descriptions, public computing policies and procedures, and organization charts.

  Title: SPEC Kit 302: Managing Public Computing (November 2007)
• SPEC Kit 302: Managing Public Computing (November 2007) Shelton, Mark; Cook, Michael
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the management of library public computing, i.e., those computers that are located in public spaces for use by patrons, as distinct from staff computers and servers. By jointly looking at the scale of the public computing operations, the staffing and organizational structure, budgets, upgrades, maintenance, security, polices, and assessment, the survey pulls together and expands on issues covered in several previous SPEC Kits.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in July 2007. Sixty-nine libraries (56%) responded to the survey. The survey respondents were primarily library deans, directors, and heads of library information technology or library systems departments. All 69 respondents indicated that their library contains public computers that need support. Responsibility for the support, service, repair, and replacement of computers in public library spaces falls solely on library staff in 44 of the responding libraries (64%). Support is shared with non-library staff in 21 of the libraries (30%); in four libraries (6%), the institution’s central IT staff provides sole support. In none of the libraries is computer support contracted out or provided by a consortium’s IT staff.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of job descriptions, public computing policies and procedures, and organization charts.

  Authors: Cook, Michael; Shelton, Mark
• Scenario Planning: Developing a Strategic Agenda for Organizational Alignment (March 2012) (8-11) Church-Duran, Jennifer; Ludwig, Deborah Ludwig, Deborah; Church-Duran, Jennifer (8-11)
  Title: Scenario Planning: Developing a Strategic Agenda for Organizational Alignment (March 2012)
• Scenario Planning: Developing a Strategic Agenda for Organizational Alignment (March 2012) Church-Duran, Jennifer; Ludwig, Deborah
• SPEC Kit 328: Collaborative Teaching and Learning Tools (July 2012) Caswell, Thomas; Ochoa, Marilyn N. Ochoa, Marilyn N.; Caswell, Thomas
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit gathers information about what collaborative teaching and learning tools are currently being offered to users in ARL member libraries. It covers questions on which kinds of tools are offered, how many, and why, where they are located, who may use them, the sources of funding, who provides training and support, and what techniques are used to promote and evaluate the tools. For the purpose of this survey, “collaborative teaching and learning tools” are limited to the equipment, devices, or systems being offered to research library users in a self-service environment including, but not limited to, the following: interactive whiteboards (IWBs, e.g., SMART Board), touchscreen tablet computers (e.g., iPads), classroom/audience response system (e.g., clickers), interactive learning centers (e.g., TouchTables), and Wii gaming systems.

  Results and documentation from this survey demonstrate that a variety of collaborative equipment, devices, or systems are available or soon will be available to research library users. Respondents report that offering these tools enhances the users’ learning experiences in and out of the library and also provides improved patron services.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describe available equipment and services, loan policies, instructions for using equipment, and materials promoting the services.

  Title: SPEC Kit 328: Collaborative Teaching and Learning Tools (July 2012)
• SPEC Kit 328: Collaborative Teaching and Learning Tools (July 2012) Caswell, Thomas; Ochoa, Marilyn N.
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit gathers information about what collaborative teaching and learning tools are currently being offered to users in ARL member libraries. It covers questions on which kinds of tools are offered, how many, and why, where they are located, who may use them, the sources of funding, who provides training and support, and what techniques are used to promote and evaluate the tools. For the purpose of this survey, “collaborative teaching and learning tools” are limited to the equipment, devices, or systems being offered to research library users in a self-service environment including, but not limited to, the following: interactive whiteboards (IWBs, e.g., SMART Board), touchscreen tablet computers (e.g., iPads), classroom/audience response system (e.g., clickers), interactive learning centers (e.g., TouchTables), and Wii gaming systems.

  Results and documentation from this survey demonstrate that a variety of collaborative equipment, devices, or systems are available or soon will be available to research library users. Respondents report that offering these tools enhances the users’ learning experiences in and out of the library and also provides improved patron services.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describe available equipment and services, loan policies, instructions for using equipment, and materials promoting the services.

  Authors: Ochoa, Marilyn N.; Caswell, Thomas