Author Index by Authors : A
ARL (2-3) Title: ARL Encourages Members to Refrain from Signing Nondisclosure or Confidentiality Clauses (June 2009)
ARL (4-7) Title: The Case for Regulating Google and the Proposed Book Rights Registry (June 2009)
ARL (10) Title: An Overview of ARL Diversity Programs (April 2009)
ARL (8-13) Title: Evolving Preservation Roles and Responsibilities of Research Libraries (Oct. 2009)
ARL (11-19) Title: ARL Strategic Plan 2010–2012 (Feb. 2010)
ARL (20-21) Title: Leadership Rosters (Feb. 2010)
ARL (23-24) Title: ARL Selects Research Library Leadership Fellows for 2009-10 (June 2009)
ARL (2-3) Title: Introduction: A Special Issue on Distinctive Collections (Dec. 2009)
ARL (7-9) Title: Model Deed of Gift, including Mixed IP Rights (June 2012)
ARL (10-16) Title: Model Digitization Agreement (June 2012)
ARL (5-6) Title: Model Deed of Gift (June 2012)
ARL, CNI, SPARC (14-24) Title: International Copyright Developments: From the Marrakesh Treaty to Trade Agreements (RLI 285, 2015)
ARL, CNI, SPARC (3-6) Title: Fair Use Rising: Full-Text Access and Repurposing in Recent Case Law (RLI 285, 2015)
ARL, CNI, SPARC (7-13) Title: What Does the HathiTrust Decision Mean for Libraries? (RLI 285, 2015)
ARL, CNI, SPARC (1-2) Title: Introduction (RLI 285, 2015)
Title: SPEC Kit 338: Library Management of Disciplinary Repositories (November 2013)Keyword(s): disciplinary repository%3B repository policies%3B repository managementAbstract:
This SPEC Kit examines the ways in which research libraries are involved in the administration of disciplinary repositories. It explores the disciplinary scope of the repository, collection policies, funding models, assessment practices, and staffing, among other information. It presents case studies of 12 disciplinary repositories that are managed entirely or in part by a library and includes examples of web pages for each one that describe the repository content, features, policies, organizational structure, and how to submit resources.
Adler, Prudence S. (3-9) Title: Three Key Public Policies for Research Libraries: Net Neutrality, Fair Use, Open and Public Access (Dec. 2010)
Title: SPEC Kit 348: Rapid Fabrication/Makerspace Services (September 2015)Keyword(s): research library; 3-D printing; rapid fabrication; makerspace; library servicesAbstract:
This SPEC Kit explores current ARL member library engagement with 3-D printing, rapid fabrication and digitization technologies, and makerspaces. This study covers the types of service offerings libraries provide, the location of these services, the hardware and software that is available for users, service hours and staffing, user outreach and training, budget and funding, and evaluation of the service.
This SPEC Kit includes descriptions of makerspaces, examples of 3-D printing guides and other user training material, policies and procedures, equipment, software, and models, and job descriptions of staff who provide these services.
Anderson, Ivy (12-14) Title: Model Language for Author Rights in Library Content Licenses (April 2010)
Connell, Ruth R.
Title: 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.
Association of American Universities;
Association of Research Libraries;
Coalition for Networked Information;
National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (2-6) Title: The University's Role in the Dissemination of Research and Scholarship (Feb. 2009)
Association of Research Libraries;
Center for Social Media at American University School of Communication;
Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property at American University Washington College of Law
Title: Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research LibrariesKeyword(s): copyright; fair use; libraries; best practicesAbstract:
To view a section of the Code in the online reader, click the section title below.
To view a PDF of a section, click the PDF icon to the right of the title.
For more information about the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use and links to related resources such as FAQs and briefings, visit the ARL webpage about the Code.
Deardorff, Thomas C.;
Aamot, Gordon J.
Title: 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.
Anderson, Ivy (34-38) Title: Author-Rights Language in Library Content Licenses (April 2009)
Title: 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.
Title: 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.
Neal, James G.;
Adler, Prudence S. (2-7) Title: Report of the Task Force on International Interlibrary Loan and Document Delivery Practices (June 2011)
Newman, Kathleen A.;
Blecic, Deborah D.;
Armstrong, Kimberly L.
Title: 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.