SPEC Kits

Overview

SPEC surveys gather information from ARL member institutions on current research library practices and policies. SPEC Kits combine the survey results and documentation from ARL member institutions to guide libraries as they address the ever-changing challenges facing libraries. These guides help libraries learn about current practice in research libraries, implement new practices and technologies, manage change, and improve performance. SPEC Kits comprise four key elements:

• Executive Summary of the survey results
• Survey Questions and Responses
• Representative Documents from the responding institutions
• Selected Resources, including books, journal articles, and websites

Originally established as an information resource for ARL member libraries, the SPEC Kit series has grown to serve the needs of the library community worldwide.

SPEC Kits from 2006 to the present (SPEC Kit 292 --) are available in ARL Digital Publications. You may dowmload PDFs of the frontmatter, table of contents, and executive summary of any SPEC Kit for free. You may purchase perpetual online access to a single SPEC Kit or online access to the complete SPEC Kit Collection for one calendar year.

Online versions of SPEC Kits from 1973 through 2005 (SPEC Kit 1 - 291) are available through the HathiTrust.

• SPEC Kit 333: Art & Artifact Management (December 2012) Robb, Jenny; Boyd, Morag SPEC Kit 333: Art & Artifact Management (December 2012)
  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 332: Organization of Scholarly Communication Services (November 2012) Feltner-Reichert, Melanie; Radom, Rachel; stringer-stanback, kynita SPEC Kit 332: Organization of Scholarly Communication Services (November 2012)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores how research institutions are currently organizing staff to support scholarly communication services, and whether their organizational structures have changed since 2007, when member libraries were surveyed about their scholarly communication education initiatives. It covers who leads scholarly communication efforts inside and outside the library, the scholarly communication related services that are offered to researchers, and which staff support those services. It also looks at how the library measures the success of its scholarly communication services, including demonstrable outcomes of these services.

  It includes position descriptions for library leaders of scholarly communication efforts, charges for SC committees, organization charts, descriptions of SC services, assessment tools, open access policies, and SC resolutions

  Authors: Radom, Rachel; Feltner-Reichert, Melanie; stringer-stanback, kynita
• SPEC Kit 331: Changing Role of Senior Administrators (October 2012) DeLong, Kathleen; Ryan, Marianne; Garrison, Julie SPEC Kit 331: Changing Role of Senior Administrators (October 2012)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit focuses on the professional, administrative, and management positions that report directly to the library director (or in some ARL member libraries the position that serves as the representative to the association), positions that have not been examined by a SPEC survey since 1984. It explores the responsibilities of these positions, and the skills, qualifications, and competencies necessary for these administrators to successfully lead a transforming 21st century research library. It looks at whether and how position requirements have changed in the past five years, whether the number of direct reports has changed, whether these administrators have assumed new areas of organizational responsibility, and how they acquire the new skills to fulfill those responsibilities.

  The SPEC Kit includes documents that compare organization charts and position descriptions from 2007 and 2012.

  Authors: DeLong, Kathleen; Garrison, Julie; Ryan, Marianne
• SPEC Kit 330: Library Contribution to Accreditation (September 2012) Mercer, Holly: Maciel, Michael SPEC Kit 330: Library Contribution to Accreditation (September 2012)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the scope of accreditation standards,the data provided by research libraries to meet the requirements of accrediting bodies, and which library staff participate in preparing reports and site visits. The survey results may help libraries identify and understand what standards exist, and how their contributions lead to successful accreditation and reaccreditation for their parent institutions. Additionally, this survey sought to identify how deeply ARL libraries are involved in the accreditation process at the institutional level. As libraries strive to establish their impact and value in higher education, this measure is one way to gauge how institutional leaders perceive their libraries’ contributions.

  This SPEC Kit includes examples of programmatic and regional accrediting agency reports from respondents and descriptions of the accreditation process.

  Authors: Mercer, Holly: Maciel, Michael
• 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. SPEC Kit 329: Managing Born-Digital Special Collections and Archival Materials (August 2012)
  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 328: Collaborative Teaching and Learning Tools (July 2012) Caswell, Thomas; Ochoa, Marilyn N. SPEC Kit 328: Collaborative Teaching and Learning Tools (July 2012)
  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
• SPEC Kit 327: Reconfiguring Service Delivery (December 2011) Vyhnanek, Kay; Zlatos, Christy SPEC Kit 327: Reconfiguring Service Delivery (December 2011)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit investigates whether and how ARL member libraries have reconfigured staffed service delivery points in the main library and in any branches that report to the main library. It explores whether service points and/or branches have been added, closed, or consolidated; the drivers for those decisions; the impacts on staff; the changes in delivery methods; and whether there have been any collaborations with other institutions or consortia, or outsourcing of service delivery. It also explores user involvement in the planning for service changes and whether the effectiveness of new service configurations has been assessed.

  The survey used a case study approach to reveal developing patterns, unique applications, and anticipated changes in the physical or organizational arrangement of service delivery that may be widely adaptable in other libraries so that they can continue to be the primary information providers for their constituents.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes the service philosophy, services offered, planning process, and communications about service changes. Also included are floorplans and images of redesigned spaces.

  Authors: Vyhnanek, Kay; Zlatos, Christy
• SPEC Kit 326: Digital Humanities (November 2011) Posner, Mariam; Varner, Stewart; Bryson, Tim; St. Pierre, Alain SPEC Kit 326: Digital Humanities (November 2011)
  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
• SPEC Kit 325: Digital Preservation (October 2011) Schultz, Matt; McMillan, Gail; Skinner, Katherine SPEC Kit 325: Digital Preservation (October 2011)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the strategies that ARL member institutions use to protect evolving research collections and the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders. The survey asked ARL libraries about their digital content, their strategies for preserving that content, and the staff, time, and funding they currently devote to digital preservation. It also asked each responding library to compare its digital preservation activities of three years ago to current activities and project three years into the future. In addition, to better understand the roles of research libraries in the emergent field of digital curation, the survey sought to identify issues that are and are not being addressed through current practices and policies.

  This survey revealed, as the digital preservation field is maturing, that most ARL libraries are rising to the challenge of establishing policies, workflows, and infrastructures to systematically preserve their rapidly expanding bodies of digital content. The survey also revealed that most ARL libraries are actively engaging in in-house digital preservation rather than outsourcing it to external parties, thus maintaining their control and ownership over the digital content that they curate.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes policies, procedures, and guidelines for digital preservation, cooperative agreements, job descriptions, and data management services.

  Authors: McMillan, Gail; Schultz, Matt; Skinner, Katherine
• 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. SPEC Kit 324: Collecting Global Resources (September 2011)
  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
• SPEC Kit 323: Socializing New Hires (August 2011) Hyslop, Colleen; Ladenson, Sharon; Mayers, Diane SPEC Kit 323: Socializing New Hires (August 2011)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit investigates the progress made in ARL member organizations to establish or enhance socialization programs and activities (such as orientation programs, mentoring, residency appointments, and staff development sessions directed at organizational acculturation) for all newly hired, paid employees. It explores the availability and types of programs, activities, and resources currently offered in ARL institutions; staff involved in designing and coordinating socialization programs and activities; goals and budget for socialization programs; length of participation in programs and activities; evaluation and assessment of programs; and benefits of socialization programs, activities and resources.

  The survey results clearly demonstrate that socialization activities are widespread and growing in research libraries and archives. The volume of response and detailed sample documents provided are indicative of the prevalence of existing activities and institutional commitment to these programs. There is a perception of the critical importance and value of these activities to the enhancement of organizational success. The plethora of comments on the benefits of socialization programs indicates that ARL members highly value these efforts.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describes orientation, mentoring, and peer socialization programs, and provides examples of orientation websites, orientation/socialization checklists, program evaluation methods, and staff development resources.

  Authors: Ladenson, Sharon; Mayers, Diane; Hyslop, Colleen
• SPEC Kit 322: Library User Experience (July 2011) Fox, Robert; Doshi, Ameet SPEC Kit 322: Library User Experience (July 2011)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores recent and planned user experience activities at ARL member libraries and the impact these efforts have on helping the libraries transform to meet evolving user needs. The survey elicited examples of successful user experience activities to serve as benchmarks for libraries looking to create or expand efforts in this area. It also explored whether libraries have created positions or entire departments focused on user engagement and the user experience.

  The survey results revealed that nearly all of the responding ARL member institutions are employing a form of user engagement, whether or not they refer to it as user experience. While there appears to be a lack of common vocabulary or program standardization, there is a growing awareness of the need to assess libraries from the user perspective—with new positions and even departments created to accomplish this goal. Overall, respondents feel that efforts made in assessing the user experience are well spent. They articulated numerous projects that resulted in major program updates and facility revisions and that were well received by library administration, governing/funding boards, and most importantly, by library users.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describe user experience planning and organization, specific projects, how volunteers are recruited, the role of advisory boards, and job requirements for user experience coordinators, among others.

  Authors: Fox, Robert; Doshi, Ameet
• SPEC Kit 321: Services for Users with Disabilities (December 2010) Freund, LeiLani; Brown, M. Suzanne SPEC Kit 321: Services for Users with Disabilities (December 2010)
  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 320: Core Benefits (November 2010) Keith, Brian W. SPEC Kit 320: Core Benefits (November 2010)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the core employment benefits of retirement, and life, health, and other insurance —benefits that are typically decided by the parent institution and often have significant governmental regulation.

  The survey results help identify the range of retirement and insurance benefits offered to research library employees and the variety in plan designs for each benefit. They confirm that retirement, health insurance, and life insurance are universally available and access is generally gained by employees working a .50 FTE assignment. Insurance benefits are commonly available to their family members, too, often including both same-sex and opposite-sex domestic partners.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents that describe the benefits offered to library staff, provide details about retirement plans and life and health insurance options, and describe job requirements for staff who administer benefits programs.

  Authors: Keith, Brian W.
• SPEC Kit 319: Diversity Plans and Programs (October 2010) Maxey-Harris, Charlene; Anaya, Toni SPEC Kit 319: Diversity Plans and Programs (October 2010)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores what progress has been made in ARL member libraries to recruit and retain a diverse workforce; the strategies they use to increase the number of ethnically/culturally diverse librarians in the profession and in their libraries; the elements of programs that successfully support an inclusive workplace; the people, groups, and/or committees responsible for overseeing the programs; and how libraries are assessing the effectiveness and success of such programs.

  The survey results indicate there has been a significant increase in the number of groups and committees formed to address diversity or inclusive workplace goals in the past ten years. Human resource officers share the responsibility of leading these committees and implementing diversity plans with diversity officers, staff development officers, multicultural librarians, and other library staff. Approximately half of the responding libraries have ongoing presentations and/or workshops on issues relevant to promoting an inclusive workplace. Others have had at least one-time presentations or plan to develop programs.

  Recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce continues to be a challenge for libraries. It is evident that research libraries are committed to actively recruit librarians from underrepresented ethnic/racial groups and have employed a variety of strategies to increase the diversity of applicant pools. Measures to evaluate the success of their efforts to recruit and retain an ethnically/culturally diverse workforce are still in development, though.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of diversity statements, diversity plans, and descriptions of diversity and recruitment programs.

  Authors: Maxey-Harris, Charlene; Anaya, Toni
• SPEC Kit 318: Impact Measures in Research Libraries (September 2010) Koltay, Zsuzsa; Li, Xin SPEC Kit 318: Impact Measures in Research Libraries (September 2010)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the tools and methods libraries use to gauge the difference they make for their user community, the topics assessment practitioners probe and the results they obtain, the effects of impact assessment, and whether institutions that publicize positive impact evidence see a difference in the level of financial or political support from their parent institutions.

  The survey asked ARL member libraries whether they have investigated five major areas of possible library impact: correlations between measures of library use and student success pre- or post graduation; correlations between participation in library instruction and information literacy skills; correlations between measures of library use and research output; attempts to calculate how much financial value the library contributes to the parent institution or user community; and any other areas of library impact. Within each of these five areas, the survey asked which measures were correlated, which methods were used to collect data, what conclusions were drawn, who instigated the study, whether the study was one-time or ongoing, whether the results were shared outside the library, and whether the results were used to influence decisions at the library or parent institution.

  By the March deadline, responses had been submitted by 55 of the 124 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 44%. Nineteen respondents (34%) report having conducted a study in one or more of the five impact areas and 13 others (24%) are planning to conduct studies. Relatively speaking, library instruction is the area that has seen the most impact assessment activities; 15 respondents (27%) have studied this area and 12 others (22%) have plans to. Each of the other areas has been studied by between one and five libraries; between three and nine other libraries plan to conduct studies in the next 12 months. The remaining 23 respondents (42%) report their library has not and has no plans to study impact measures.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of impact assessment goals, user surveys, and calculations of library value.

  Authors: Koltay, Zsuzsa; Li, Xin
• 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 SPEC Kit 317: Special Collections Engagement (August 2010)
  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 316: Evaluating E-resources (July 2010) Livingston, Jill; Bleiler, Richard SPEC Kit 316: Evaluating E-resources (July 2010)
  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 315: Leave and Professional Development Benefits (December 2009) Martyniak, Cathleen; Keith, Brian SPEC Kit 315: Leave and Professional Development Benefits (December 2009)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit investigates two broad categories of benefit plans currently offered to professional library staff at ARL member libraries: leave time and support for professional development activities. Topics include benefits eligibility; holiday and intersession leave; plan designs and accrual rates for paid time off (PTO), vacation, and sick leave; and professional development leaves such as dedicated research time and sabbaticals. Other professional development topics include financial support and relief from duties for conference attendance; funding for professional association memberships; and financial and other support for college credit course work, internships, and certifications.

  By the August deadline, responses had been submitted by 73 of the 123 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 59%. The survey results indicated there is considerable variation in the leave programs at ARL member libraries. Relatively few use a Paid Time Off leave program or offer intersession leave. While there is a wide variation in leave balance and cash out policies, the total paid time off for librarians is considerable.

  There is also considerable support for research and professional development activities, though programs for supporting professional development show wide variation in design and procedures. While relatively few libraries provide a regularly scheduled percentage of assignment time off, most offer some options for time away for research and professional development activities.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of policies on travel support, professional development leave and funding, sabbaticals, education, and tuition assistance and an example of an individual development award program.

  Authors: Martyniak, Cathleen; Keith, Brian
• SPEC Kit 314: Processing Decisions for Manuscripts & Archives (November 2009) Slomba, Elizabeth; Hackbart-Dean, Pam SPEC Kit 314: Processing Decisions for Manuscripts & Archives (November 2009)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit examines the current policies and practices for processing manuscript and archival collections in Special Collections.   It is organized around four general areas: personnel, job responsibilities and training; processing policies, procedures, and priorities; impacts on processing decisions; and management tools.

  By the May deadline, responses had been submitted by 76 of the 123 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 62%. Half of the responding institutions have a combined special collections/archives department and all but a few of these process all types of rare books, rare serials, manuscripts, and archival materials. Twenty-seven respondents (36%) indicated that the cataloging of rare books and rare serials was done in another department or unit within the library, usually cataloging or technical services.   Only five respondents indicated that manuscripts and archival materials were processed outside of special collections/archives.

  The survey responses speak to the classic issues of the management of processing: how to process collections efficiently but yet adequately so that collections are usable with minimal meditation; how to balance demands for more description and item-level cataloging (digitization) with initiatives to make more collections available (“more product, less processing”); and how to manage staff effectively and to assess processing progress.   From the survey results it is clear that the respondents agree on core principles for processing (such as what is fully processed collection, what makes a good processor, and the challenges facing processors), but in practice the application of these principles are tempered by institutional practices, traditions, and resources.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of processing policies and procedures, processing worksheets, statistics, and job descriptions.

  Authors: Hackbart-Dean, Pam; Slomba, Elizabeth
• SPEC Kit 313: E-book Collections (October 2009) Anson, Catherine; Connell, Ruth R. SPEC Kit 313: E-book Collections (October 2009)
  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 312: Public Engagement (September 2009) Goetsch, Lori; Walter, Scott SPEC Kit 312: Public Engagement (September 2009)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the ways in which traditional “outreach” programs in academic libraries are evolving to address the emergent concept of “public engagement” at the institutional level and the degree to which the library is integrated into campus-level efforts to promote public engagement.

  By the March deadline, responses had been submitted by 56 of 123 ARL member libraries for a response rate of 46%. For the purposes of this survey, respondents were asked to report on “public engagement programs” that met the definition of those that demonstrate the library’s “commitment to community partnerships, service to professional communities outside [your] primary user groups . . . . [and that] go beyond the ‘provision of institutional resources for community use,’ and are aimed at bringing the professional expertise of the library to members of the public.” Of the 56 responding libraries, 49 (88%) reported providing such programs as part of their service profile.

  Respondents identified a wide variety of programs that they characterize as “public engagement.” The top four areas of library activity reported were programs in the areas of K-12 education (80%), cultural engagement (75%), government information/e-government (68%), and lifelong learning (66%).

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of mission statements, descriptions of library engagement programs, examples of awards program, scholarship of engagement information, and job descriptions.

  Authors: Walter, Scott; Goetsch, Lori
• SPEC Kit 311: Public Access Policies (August 2009) Sarli, Cathy; Lewis, Ruth; Dubinsky, Ellen; Engeszer, Bob SPEC Kit 311: Public Access Policies (August 2009)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the role ARL member libraries are playing in supporting public access policies in their institutions.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2009. Respondents were asked to provide information on staffing, partnerships, and resources and services developed for public access policy (PAP) compliance support, and the challenges related to providing such support. Seventy libraries (57%) from sixty-seven institutions responded to the survey. Of the respondents, sixty-three were at libraries located within the United States (90%) and seven were at libraries located in Canada (10%).

  The majority of the responding libraries provide, or plan to provide, resources and services that help authors affiliated with their institution (and/or the author’s support staff) to comply with public access policies. Thirty-seven respondents (53%) indicated that more than one library within their system provides PAP compliance support; eleven (16%) indicated that just one library within their institution is providing this support. Four other institutions (6%) are planning to support PAP compliance. Of the libraries that do not provide such support, eight (11%) indicated that another department or unit within their institution provides compliance support. Eight others (11%) responded that their institution offers no PAP compliance support.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of PAP Web sites, compliance FAQs and flowcharts, handouts and slides from presentations to faculty and library staff, and sample letters to publishers.

  ---

  Authors: Sarli, Cathy; Dubinsky, Ellen; Engeszer, Bob; Lewis, Ruth
• SPEC Kit 310: Author Addenda (July 2009) Fischer, Karen SPEC Kit 310: Author Addenda (July 2009)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores how ARL member libraries are promoting the use of author addenda by researchers at their institutions.

  Recent developments in scholarly communication have raised the issue of author rights on academic campuses with increasing frequency. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy, the expanding interest in and use of institutional repositories, the innovation of new models of publishing, and the growing number of universities mandating open access policies are changing the current environment of scholarly dissemination. Consequently, it is increasingly important to manage copyright in ways that serve author interests and those of the scholarly community.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2009. Respondents were asked to provide information on the use of author addenda at  their institutions, which rights authors were encouraged to retain, and the methods by which libraries were conducting promotion and outreach efforts on the topic of author rights and addenda. Seventy libraries (57%) responded to the survey. Of those respondents, 35 (50%) indicated that authors at their institutions were using author addenda, and 33 libraries (47%) indicated that they “did not know.” Only two libraries indicated that authors at their institutions were not using author addenda.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of sample addenda, brochures, handouts, and author rights Web sites and slides from presentations to faculty and library staff.

  ---

  Authors: Fischer, Karen
• SPEC Kit 309: Library Support for Study Abroad (December 2008) Lindell, Ann SPEC Kit 309: Library Support for Study Abroad (December 2008)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores how ARL member libraries are responding to the needs of faculty and student participants in various types of study abroad programs, which library services and resources are provided to participants, how library support is staffed and administered, whether collections are physical or online, and how services are delivered.

  For this survey, “study abroad program” was broadly defined as a short-term, formal, credit-bearing educational program taking place outside of the country of the home institution. Research universities have long supported study abroad programs of varying nature, including short-term study tours and service learning experiences, as well as semester- and year-long academic programs. As society becomes more globally focused, and industry requires workers who are prepared to work in a multinational environment, these programs are becoming more critical to America’s competitiveness.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in May 2008. Fifty-three libraries completed the survey by the deadline of June 27 for a 43% response rate. Forty-four of the respondents (83%) reported that their university sponsors study abroad programs. At 26 institutions, study abroad programs receive library support, at 12 they do not. Four respondents did not supply this data, though one explained, “The programs don’t receive library support but the individual students are supported.”

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of study abroad program Web pages and descriptions of library services for these programs.

  Authors: Lindell, Ann
• SPEC Kit 308: Graduate Student and Faculty Spaces and Services (November 2008) Moulder, Cathy; Lewis, Vivian SPEC Kit 308: Graduate Student and Faculty Spaces and Services (November 2008)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores the variety of resources and services being delivered to or envisioned for graduate students and faculty.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in March 2008. Sixty-five libraries (six Canadian and 59 American) completed the survey by the deadline of April 28 for a 53% response rate. Of these respondents, 48 institutions (74%) indicated that they provide or plan to provide services or spaces specifically designed for the designated populations. Most are providing or designing spaces/services to meet the needs of both groups, with only seven reporting services/spaces exclusively for graduate students and two locations committed to providing service/space exclusively to faculty. Thirteen of 47 respondents (28%) target discipline-specific graduate students; eight (17%) of these also target a specific group of faculty. In most cases, the targeted groups tend to be in humanities or social sciences.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of descriptions of services, descriptions of spaces, examples of marketing and outreach efforts, and partnership agreements.

  Authors: Lewis, Vivian; Moulder, Cathy
• SPEC Kit 307: Manuscript Collections on the Web (October 2008) Walton, Donnelly Lancaster SPEC Kit 307: Manuscript Collections on the Web (October 2008)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit investigates how many manuscript collections are held in ARL member libraries; what percentage of these collections are represented on the Web; what types of information about the collections are available in finding aids and on the Web; what formats are used for finding aids on the Web; how many library staff are working on manuscript collections, the challenges and benefits of migrating collection information to the Web, and whether and how usage of manuscript collection information is tracked.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2008. Seventy-two libraries completed the survey by the March 31 deadline for a response rate of 59%. The survey responses indicated that the respondents are all managing to get at least some information about their manuscript collections onto the Web. Most of the comments indicated that they want to get more there, but are unable to do so for a variety of reasons, primarily staff and time constraints. Almost all respondents are creating MARC records for their collections; fewer are creating EAD finding aids. A select few have all their manuscript collections represented on the Web in some way, either as a MARC record, a brief blurb in HTML, or an EAD finding aid.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of manuscript collection Web sites, finding aid Web sites, arrangement and description guidelines, and Web processing procedures.

  Authors: Walton, Donnelly Lancaster
• SPEC Kit 306: Promoting the Library (September 2008) Bodnar, Jon; Mathews, Brian SPEC Kit 306: Promoting the Library (September 2008)
  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 305: Records Management (August 2008) Center, Jr., Clark E. SPEC Kit 305: Records Management (August 2008)
  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 304: Social Software in Libraries (July 2008) Bejune, Matthew; Ronan, Jana SPEC Kit 304: Social Software in Libraries (July 2008)
  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 303: Library Assessment (December 2007) White, Lynda S.; Wright, Stephanie SPEC Kit 303: Library Assessment (December 2007)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit examines the current state of library assessment to provide a starting point for those seeking to develop a library assessment program at their own institutions.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in May 2007. Seventy-three libraries completed the survey for a response rate of 60%. Only one library indicated that it did not engage in any assessment activities beyond collecting annual data for the ARL statistics, though no reason was given as to why this was the case.

  Survey results indicate that while a modest number of libraries in the 1980s and earlier engaged in assessment activities beyond annual ARL statistics gathering, the biggest jump in activity occurred between 1990 and 2004. The overwhelming majority of responses indicate the impetus was service driven and user centered and came from within the library itself rather than from an outside source. Respondents’ top impetus for beginning assessment activities (63 respondents or 91%) was the desire to know more about their customers. Based on responses to a question about their first assessment activities, over half began with a survey, almost all of which were user surveys.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of job descriptions, assessment mission statements, plans, reports, Web sites, and organization charts.

  Authors: Wright, Stephanie; White, Lynda S.
• SPEC Kit 302: Managing Public Computing (November 2007) Shelton, Mark; Cook, Michael SPEC Kit 302: Managing Public Computing (November 2007)
  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
• SPEC Kit 301: Liaison Services (October 2007) Ballestro, John; Logue, Susan; Imre, Andrea; Arendt, Julie SPEC Kit 301: Liaison Services (October 2007)
  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
• SPEC Kit 300: Open Access Resources (September 2007) Hood, Anna K. SPEC Kit 300: Open Access Resources (September 2007)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit gathers information on whether and how ARL member libraries are selecting, providing access to, cataloging, hosting, tracking usage of, and promoting the use of open access research literature for their patrons by using established library resources such as the OPAC and link resolvers.

  The survey was sent to the 123 ARL member libraries in March 2007. Seventy-one responses were received by the deadline, a return rate of 58%. All but one of the survey respondents provide access to OA resources. These 70 libraries represent 57% of the ARL membership. The results indicate that although many of the ARL member libraries have embraced a wide range of OA literature and have fully integrated it into their selection, acquisition, cataloging, and promotion processes, others have been less active in this area.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of newsletter articles and blogs, open access and institutional repository Web pages, and collection development and cataloging policies.

  Authors: Hood, Anna K.
• SPEC Kit 299: Scholarly Communication Education Initiatives (August 2007) Newman, Kathleen A.; Blecic, Deborah D.; Armstrong, Kimberly L. SPEC Kit 299: Scholarly Communication Education Initiatives (August 2007)
  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.
• SPEC Kit 298: Metadata (July 2007) Ma, Jin SPEC Kit 298: Metadata (July 2007)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit investigates how metadata is implemented in ARL member libraries: which staff are creating metadata and for what kinds of digital objects, what schemas and tools they use to create and manage metadata, what skills metadata staff need and how they acquire them, and the organizational changes and challenges that metadata has brought to libraries.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2007. Sixty-eight libraries (55%) responded to the survey, of which 67 (99%) reported creating metadata for digital objects at their institutions. The primary factor driving the creation of metadata is the responding libraries’ involvement in digitization projects (66 of 67 responses or 99%). Metadata also plays an important role in institutional repositories (54%). Other initiatives and projects that have promoted the use of metadata are: Web content management, datasets, subject-based and educational repositories, metadata registries, digital media labs, EAD-finding aids, and online journal publishing. Metadata is being created to describe and provide access to a wide variety of digital resources, including images, text, collections, audio, maps, video, datasets, EAD finding aids, theses, and Web pages.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of mission statements, organization charts, job descriptions, and policies.

  Authors: Ma, Jin
• SPEC Kit 297: Library Development (December 2006) Wanschers, Jos; Jennings, Karlene Noel SPEC Kit 297: Library Development (December 2006)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit investigates the staffing, reporting relationships, and duties of library development programs in ARL member libraries to provide a baseline for institutions as they work to create, refine, or advocate for library development programs in their institutions.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in March 2006. Ninety libraries (73%) responded to the survey. Eighty-three (92%) reported that they have a formal library development program. Of those institutions, all have a fundraising professional assigned to the program, 76 (92%) use printed giving materials, 71 (86%) use direct mail, 50 (60%) conduct a phonathon, 50 (60%) have a friends organization, and 47 (57%) raise more than $500,000 a year in private support.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of mission statements, organization charts, job descriptions, budgets, and policies.

  Authors: Jennings, Karlene Noel; Wanschers, Jos
• SPEC Kit 296: Public Services in Special Collections (November 2006) Nemmers, John; Turcotte, Florence SPEC Kit 296: Public Services in Special Collections (November 2006)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit explores public service staffing, reference and public services offered, methods of patron access, types of intellectual access tools used, patron registration, the reference interview process, and public service evaluation and promotion methodsin Special Collections. In addition, respondents were asked to comment on significant changes in reference and public services in the last few years, particularly those related to outreach, instruction, and learning.

  The survey was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in March 2006. Seventy-nine libraries (64%) responded to the survey. Thirty-five of the responding libraries (44%) have a single Special Collections unit. Twenty-five of the libraries (32%) have one primary Special Collections unit and additional, smaller special collections in other libraries or branches. Eleven (14%) have multiple Special Collections units dispersed across a number of libraries or branches. Respondents who have dispersed units were asked to base all survey responses on services provided at one primary Special Collections unit.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of service policies, patron registration forms, job descriptions, and service prices.

  Authors: Turcotte, Florence; Nemmers, John
• SPEC Kit 295: Remote Shelving Services (October 2006) Deardorff, Thomas C.; Aamot, Gordon J. SPEC Kit 295: Remote Shelving Services (October 2006)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit focuses on user services and how they have changed since the last survey in 1998 that was published in SPEC Kit 242 Library Storage Facilities, Management, and Services (May 1999).

  Eighty-five of the 123 ARL member libraries (69%) responded to the survey. Of that group, 68 (80%) use at least one remote shelving facility or are currently planning for one. A sizeable number of libraries have relatively new facilities; 25 of the respondents reported that they send material to a facility that has been in operation fewer than six years. Of that group, eight reported an existing facility in the 1998 survey.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of facility descriptions, service policies, service request forms, and operating policies.

  Authors: Deardorff, Thomas C.; Aamot, Gordon J.
• SPEC Kit 294: Managing Digitization Activities (September 2006) Mugridge, Rebecca L. SPEC Kit 294: Managing Digitization Activities (September 2006)
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit investigates the purposes of ARL member libraries’ digitization efforts, the organizational structures these libraries use to manage digital initiatives, whether and how staff have been reassigned to support digitization activities, where funding to sustain digital activities originated and how that funding is allocated, how priorities are determined, whether libraries are outsourcing any digitization work, and how the success of libraries’ digital activities has been assessed.

  The survey, which focussed on the digitization of existing library materials, rather than the creation of born-digital objects, was distributed to the 123 ARL member libraries in February 2006. Sixty-eight libraries (55%) responded to the survey, of which all but two (97%) reported having engaged in digitization activities. Only one respondent reported having begun digitization activities prior to 1992; five other pioneers followed in 1992. From 1994 through 1998 there was a steady increase in the number of libraries beginning digital initiatives; 30 joined the pioneers at the rate of three to six a year. There was a spike of activity at the turn of the millennium that reached a high in 2000, when nine libraries began digital projects. Subsequently, new start-ups have slowed, with only an additional one to five libraries beginning digitization activities each year.

  This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of organization charts, mission statements, job descriptions, policies and procedures, and selection criteria.

  Authors: Mugridge, Rebecca L.
• SPEC Kit 293: External Review for Promotion and Tenure (August 2006) Bicknell-Holmes, Tracy; Logan-Peters, Kay SPEC Kit 293: External Review for Promotion and Tenure (August 2006)
  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
• SPEC Kit 292: Institutional Repositories (July 2006) Morris, Chris; Bailey, Jr., Charles W.; Wright, Robert; Emery, Jill; Mitchell, Anne; Simons, Spenser; Coombs, Karen SPEC Kit 292: Institutional Repositories (July 2006)
  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