Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

LS 451 ACADEMIC LIBRARIES Laura Saunders Spring 2010.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "LS 451 ACADEMIC LIBRARIES Laura Saunders Spring 2010."— Presentation transcript:

1 LS 451 ACADEMIC LIBRARIES Laura Saunders Spring 2010

2 Introduction  Not all academic libraries are the same  What does it mean to work in an academic library?  Framework, organization, structure & infrastructure  What is the “place” of the academic library in the current higher education climate?

3 Parent Institutions  Colleges and Universities  How do we “define” our parent institutions  Carnegie classifications  Types of accreditations  Comparative rankings

4 Parent Institutions  Carnegie Classification  Developed in 1970 by Carnegie Commission on Higher Education  Based on “empirical” data  A way to organize institutions and “control for institutional differences”  Reorganized in 2005  Update due in 2010

5 Carnegie Classification  Based on 6 “all-inclusive” classifications  Undergraduate Instructional Program Classification  Graduate Instructional Program Classification  Enrollment Profile Classification  Undergraduate Profile Classification  Size and Setting Classification  Basic Classification  Represents a “range of ways” to think about instituions

6 Carnegie Classification  Undergraduate Instructional Program Classification  Identifies undergraduate programs on three criteria  Level of degree (associate or bachelor)  Percentage of degrees in arts and sciences and professional fields  Extent to which institution awards graduate degrees in same field as undergraduate i.e., Assoc-Dom (Associate’s Dominant); Bal/NGC (Balanced arts & sciences/ professional, no graduate coexistence); Prof-F/HGC (Professions focus, high graduate coexistence)

7 Carnegie Classification  Graduate Professional Program Classification  Examines nature of graduate education with a focus on the mix of graduate programs  Based on:  Level of degree (master/ professional or doctoral)  Number of fields represented  Mix or concentration of degrees by broad disciplinary program  Distinguishes between master’s only and doctoral programs i.e., S-Postbac/Ed (offers master’s in Education but not other fields); Postbac A&S/Other (award master’s degrees in some arts and sciences fields as well as degrees in professional fields, and the plurality of graduate degrees are in a professional field other than business or education); Doc/HSS (awards doctoral degrees, mostly in humanities and social sciences)

8 Carnegie Classification  Enrollment Profile Classification  Mix of students enrolled at undergraduate and graduate/professional levels  i.e., Ex/U4 (exclusively undergraduate, bachelor granting institution); VHU (very high undergraduate population); MGP (majority graduate/ professional)

9 Carnegie Classification  Undergraduate Profile Classification  Undergraduate population on three characteristics:  Proportion of full-time vs. part-time  Achievement characteristics of first-year students (i.e. entrance exam scores)  Proportion of entering students transferring from another institution i.e., PT2 (higher part-time, two year); MFT4/I (Fall enrollment data show 60–79 percent of undergraduates enrolled full-time at these bachelor’s degree granting institutions. These institutions either did not report test score data or the scores indicate that they extend educational opportunity to a wide range of students with respect to academic preparation and achievement).

10 Carnegie Classification  Size & Setting Classification  Institutional size and residential characteristics (undergrad only)  i.e., VS2 (associate-granting, very small- under 500 students); VS4/HR (bachelor-granting, fewer than 1,000 students, at least half live on campus)

11 Carnegie Classification  Basic Classification  Update of traditional framework- offers “nuanced” descriptions of institutions  First by broad category- Associate, Baccalaureate, Master, Doctoral, Special focus, Tribal  Further subdivided by size (i.e. Master’s Larger) Associate’s also indicate public or private urban, suburban or rural

12 Simmons College

13 Specialized Institutions  Offer degrees ranging from the bachelor’s to the doctorate, and typically award a majority of degrees in a single field. Such institutions include  Theological seminaries, Bible colleges, and other institutions offering degrees in religion  Medical schools and medical centers  Other separate health professional schools (e.g., pharmacy)

14 Specialized Institutions  Schools of engineering and technology  Schools of business and management  Schools of art, music, and design  Schools of law  Teachers colleges  Other (e.g., military institutes, maritime academics)  Tribal colleges and universities (generally are tribally controlled and located on reservations. They are all members of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium)

15 Other Characteristics  Land grant universities  ARL  ACRL  Oberlin group

16 Governance  Control (Public and Private)  How central is the library to the educational programs— “degree programs”?  Library organization and reporting relationships  To whom does the library director report  Is the director A director Dean Chief information officer Other  Faculty status for librarians?  Do these things matter?

17 Library Structure

18 Accountability  Academic libraries are “complex sociotechnical systems that serve multiple stakeholders”  All stakeholders have their own needs, perspectives, concerns  Not all stakeholders are direct users  CLIR Report, (2008), Pub142 Abstract, No Brief Candle. Retrieved from

19 Accountability  Administrators  Board of Trustees  Government (Fed & State)  Accreditation orgs. (regional, professional, other)  Students (Undergrad & Grad)  Faculty  Staff  Adminsitrators  Broader Community Indirect UsersDirect Users

20 Key Issues and Drivers Accountability & Relevance

21 Financial Pressures  Budget  Credit Ratings  Personnel costs  Collection costs  Institutional priorities (not necessarily library’s priorities)

22 Technology and Service Models  Remote access vs. “library as place”  Digitization  Information repositories  Blurring boundaries between  Separate institutions/collections- libraries, museums, art galleries, etc.  Different medias/formats  “Managing such information spaces will place emphases on interaction, organization, and curation” CLIR, No Brief Candle.

23 Other Issues  Changing user (faculty & student) expectations  24/7/365 service  Access (not ownership) of information  Turmoil in publishing and scholarly communication  Limitations on academic and intellectual freedom  Recruitment, education, and retention of librarians  Increased workloads  Perception of information as “free”

24 Where and How for academic libraries in the future? Responding to Issues

25 Responses  What is the library’s role in these issues?  How do we hold ourselves accountable?  How do we prioritize among competing demands?  More than one type of library= more than one answer.  Mission is key

Download ppt "LS 451 ACADEMIC LIBRARIES Laura Saunders Spring 2010."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google