Title Index by IndexTitle : L

• Last Mile: Liaison Roles in Curating Science and Engineering Research Data (RLI 265, Aug. 2009)
  Title: The Last Mile: Liaison Roles in Curating Science and Engineering Research Data
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2009-08-31
• Leadership Rosters (RLI 268, Feb. 2010)
  Title: Leadership Rosters
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2010-02-28
• Leading a Full Life: Reflections on Several Decades of Work, Family, and Accomplishment (RLI 278, March 2012)
  Title: Leading a Full Life: Reflections on Several Decades of Work, Family, and Accomplishment
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2012-08-06
• Learning Analytics, SPEC Kit 360
  Title: SPEC Kit 360: Learning Analytics (September 2018)
  Keyword(s): research library; assessment; student data; library value; learning outcomes
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit examines current practices, policies, and ethical issues around libraries and learning analytics. It explore how ARL member institutions are navigating the balance between gathering and managing data in support of learning analytics initiatives and attending to the profession’s ethics commitments. To these ends, it seeks to answer these broad questions: how are academic libraries planning for, adopting, and participating in learning analytics initiatives?; what mechanisms do they use to maintain data security and privacy?; what ethical issues do they encounter when participating in learning analytics?; and how do they negotiate and resolve those issues? It includes examples of library privacy statements and policies, institutional privacy polices, and data security policies.

  Perry, Michael R., Kristin A. Briney, Abigail Goben, Andrew Asher, Kyle M. L. Jones, M. Brooke Robertshaw, and Dorothea Salo. Learning Analytics. SPEC Kit 360. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, September 2018.

• Learning and Research Spaces in ARL Libraries: Snapshots of Installations and Experiments (RLI 264, June 2009)
  Title: Learning and Research Spaces in ARL Libraries: Snapshots of Installations and Experiments
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2009-06-30
• Leave and Professional Development Benefits, SPEC Kit 315 (December 2009)
  Title: 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.

  Martyniak, Cathleen, and Brian Keith. Leave and Professional Development Benefits. SPEC Kit 315. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, December 2009.

• Leaving Liaison Behind: Reflections on the Last Decade (RLI 294, 2018)
  Title: Leaving Liaison Behind: Reflections on the Last Decade
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2018-06-21
• Legal Landscape of Consumer/User Data Privacy and Current Policy Discussions (RLI 297, 2019)
  Title: Legal Landscape of Consumer/User Data Privacy and Current Policy Discussions
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2019-05-06
• Liaison Services, SPEC Kit 301 (October 2007)
  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.

  Logue, Susan, John Ballestro, Andrea Imre, and Julie Arendt. Liaison Services. SPEC Kit 301. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, October 2007.

• Lib-Value: Measuring Value and Return on Investment of Academic Libraries (RLI 271, Aug. 2010)
  Title: Lib-Value: Measuring Value and Return on Investment of Academic Libraries
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2010-08-31
• LibQUAL+® and the “Library as Place” at the University of Glasgow (RLI 271, Aug. 2010)
  Title: LibQUAL+® and the “Library as Place” at the University of Glasgow
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2010-08-31
• Libraries, Presses, and Publishing, SPEC Kit 357
  Title: SPEC Kit 357: Libraries, Presses, and Publishing (November 2017)
  Keyword(s): research library; university press; library services; workforce; publishing
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit gathers information on the breadth of practice taking place at the intersection of research libraries, presses, and publishing, and on the blurring of boundaries as libraries engage in publishing and press activities in new ways. It explores which activities are associated with library publishing, the level of library/publishing/press integration and collaboration with or creation of formal publishing/press operations, and the organizational structuring of these activities and programs. It includes examples of publishing service options, press staffing, publishing information for authors and editors, and publication lists.

  Taylor, Laurie N., Brian W. Keith, Chelsea Dinsmore, and Meredith Morris-Babb. Libraries, Presses, and Publishing. SPEC Kit 357. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, November 2017.

• Library as Place (RLI 303, 2022)
  Title: Library as Place
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2022-07-06
• Library Assessment, SPEC Kit 303 (December 2007)
  Title: 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.

  Wright, Stephanie, and Lynda S. White. Library Assessment. SPEC Kit 303. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, December 2007.

• Library Contribution to Accreditation, SPEC Kit 330 (September 2012)
  Title: 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.

  Mercer, Holly, and Michael Maciel. Library Contribution to Accreditation. SPEC Kit 330. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, September 2012.

• Library Development, SPEC Kit 297 (December 2006)
  Title: 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.

  Jennings, Karlene Noel, and Jos Wanschers. Library Development. SPEC Kit 297. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, December 2006.

• Library Development, SPEC Kit 359
  Title: SPEC Kit 359: Library Development (July 2018)
  Keyword(s): research library; development; fundraising; friendraising
  Abstract:

  This SPEC Kit gathered information to better understand the supporting structures and resources (personnel, financial, and material) and the activities and expectations associated with library development efforts at ARL member libraries. The survey retained some elements of the 2006 study for longitudinal comparison of the pre-recession environment and the current, post-recession environment, and included new elements to more broadly depict the current role of library development, including friendraising (efforts intended to generate committed and supportive relationships with outside parties and entities), communication to stakeholders of library value added, and stories and/or descriptive measures provided in these communication efforts. The survey also examined the role of advisory boards in the fundraising process. Since many academic libraries are either currently or soon will be engaged in a capital campaign or the renovation of an old or construction of a new library, the survey also examined the complexities of these common endeavors. It includes examples of organization charts, position descriptions, documents on fundraising goal setting and development board and friends governance, gift policies, capital campaign literature, and statements on intellectual freedom, inclusion, and diversity.

  Keith, Brian W., Joseph A. Salem, Jr., and Kurt Cumiskey. Library Development. SPEC Kit 359. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, July 2018.

   

• Library Management of Disciplinary Repositories, SPEC Kit 338 (November 2013)
  Title: SPEC Kit 338: Library Management of Disciplinary Repositories (November 2013)
  Keyword(s): disciplinary repository%3B repository policies%3B repository management
  Abstract:

  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.

  Adamick, Jessica, Rachel Lewellen, and Rebecca Reznik-Zellen. Library Management of Disciplinary Repositories. SPEC Kit 338. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, November 2013.

• Library Space Assessment: Focusing on Learning (RLI 284, 2013)
  Title: Library Space Assessment: Focusing on Learning
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2013-12-18
• Library Support for Faculty/Researcher Publishing, SPEC Kit 343 (October 2014)
  Title: SPEC Kit 343: Library Support for Faculty/Researcher Publishing (October 2014)
  Keyword(s): research library%3B scholarly publishing%3B library services%3B scholarly communication
  Abstract:

  By actively participating in the research and writing process, librarians can use their subject expertise to develop new roles for themselves and devise new modes of contributing to the scholarly communication cycle. This SPEC Kit explores ARL member libraries’ activities related to support of faculty and researcher publishing of scholarly works. It investigates the level and variety of services ARL libraries are providing to support, facilitate, and participate in the publishing activities of the faculty and researchers they serve, whether through the re-framing of existing traditional library services or the development of new services.

  This SPEC Kit includes examples of publishing services offered by libraries, events that showcase faculty research and promote authors, author’s rights information, library support for repository deposits and public access policy compliance, author addenda, open access policies, and job descriptions.

  Bruxvoort, Diane, and Christine Fruin. Library Support for Faculty/Researcher Publishing. SPEC Kit 343. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, October 2014.

• Library Support for Study Abroad, SPEC Kit 309 (December 2008)
  Title: 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.

  Lindell, Ann. Library Support for Study Abroad. SPEC Kit 309. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, December 2008.

• Library User Experience, SPEC Kit 322 (July 2011)
  Title: 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.

  Fox, Robert, and Ameet Doshi. Library User Experience. SPEC Kit 322. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, July 2011.

• Library Value May Be Proven, If Not Self-Evident (RLI 271, Aug. 2010)
  Title: Library Value May Be Proven, If Not Self-Evident
  Content Type: RLI Article
  Publication Date: 2010-08-31